The signed agreement

Short answer

There is a signed contract. On July 1, 2026 the Americus-Sumter Payroll Development Authority and Liberty GA USA LLC executed an Economic Development Agreement covering a four-phase data center campus on about 102 acres on Swett Avenue, tax parcel 64-17. The full scanned document is mirrored here: Economic Development Agreement, PDA and Liberty GA USA LLC (11 pages, PDF).

The analysis below cites paragraph numbers so each statement can be checked against the document. The Field Desk has not compared this scan with the Authority's file copy, which is available by request under the Open Records Act.

What the agreement settles

The agreement resolves several questions previously listed as unknown.

The survey behind Exhibit A was prepared by D. Scott Langford, Georgia Registered Surveyor No. 3172, surveyed May 27, 2026 and recorded in Plat Book F, Page 316. The tract is bounded by the former Seaboard Coastline Railroad right of way, the Swett Avenue Extension, and the centerline of Willets Branch, a running stream on the property line.

The land was conveyed on July 22, 2026

The transfer is complete and recorded. The limited warranty deed was executed July 22, 2026 and e-filed with the Sumter County Clerk of Superior Court the next day at 12:09 PM, Deed Book 1806, Pages 746-748. The grantor is the Payroll Development Authority; the grantee is Liberty GA USA LLC. Paul Hall signed as Chairman and Teresa O'Bryant as Secretary. Transfer tax paid: $0.00.

The sequence, from primary documents:

The deed contains three notable details.

It says the wrong county. The granting clause conveys land "lying, being and situated in the County of Gwinnett." The caption, the parcel ID, and the metes and bounds in Exhibit A all describe Sumter County, parcel 64-17. This is a drafting error. Under Georgia law a specific legal description ordinarily controls over a mistaken general recital, so the conveyance is not in doubt. But the error is now in the county's permanent land records, and correcting it takes a corrective deed.

A third price appears. The deed recites $10.00. The development agreement says $1.00 against an agreed fair market value of $469,000. Nominal consideration is ordinary practice in a deed and $10.00 is the most common figure used; the $469,000 is the number that describes what the public gave up.

A different secretary signs. The July 1 agreement was attested by John Shealy as Secretary. The July 22 deed, three weeks later, is signed by Teresa O'Bryant as Secretary.

The purchase agreement behind the deed

A purchase and sale agreement covers the same 103 acres for $1.00. The copy in hand is unsigned and undated: "the ___ day of July 2026," with blank signature blocks. It shows the terms that were drafted, not a contract proven to be in force.

Its buyer is not the company that took title. The buyer is Liberty Data Centers Corp., a corporation organized in Ontario, Canada, with notices to Tony Di Benedetto at a Kleinburg, Ontario address and Krevolin & Horst of Atlanta as counsel. Paragraph 16 lets the buyer assign the agreement to an affiliate on 30 days' written notice. The deed three weeks later runs to Liberty GA USA LLC, a Georgia company. See who is behind the proposal.

Four terms affect the parties' obligations:

• The Authority can take the land back for $1.00 if the City of Americus refuses a rezoning the project needs, or if Liberty cannot get its permits, water, sewer, wastewater or electrical service. ¶22
• Liberty can hand the land back for $1.00 at any time, in its sole discretion, and require the Authority to buy it. Exhibit B
• The penalty for failing to develop is blank. Exhibit B reads "Buyer shall pay Seller $___ each week/month until the default has been reasonably cured." No figure was filled in.
• The Authority's Executive Director is a licensed real estate broker. ¶11 discloses that Rusty Warner holds Georgia license 164935, states he has no interest in the transaction, and that no brokerage fee is charged.

Exhibit B also puts numbers to Phase 1 that the development agreement does not: 100 MW, about 24 months, roughly 500 construction jobs and 200 permanent positions, and $1-5 billion across all phases. It is a preliminary schedule attached to an unexecuted draft, so it carries less weight than the signed agreement. The September 8 community presentation identifies the full four-building plan as a 400 MW IT load.

The operating conditions

The following clauses impose operating requirements:

• No private wells, no private sewer. Liberty "shall not construct or utilize water wells" and shall not build its own sanitary sewer. It must apply to the City of Americus for water and sewer service. §5(C)
• No open-loop cooling under the PDA agreement. Closed-loop cooling or other technologies "designed to minimize water consumption" are required; open-loop and once-through systems are prohibited. The city ordinance contains no matching water-use standard, so the city cannot enforce this term through zoning. §11
• Generators for emergencies only. Routine testing is limited to 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and backup generators "shall be used only in emergency situations." §10
• Noise measured at the property line, using industry-standard meters, against federal, state, EPD and City of Americus limits. If a governmental entity finds an exceedance, the operator must take corrective measures. §9
• Lighting shielded and directed downward to limit glare and spillover onto adjacent property. §12
• Battery storage must meet fire and building codes including NFPA standards, be coordinated with the local fire department, and be identified on submitted site plans. §13
• The city keeps its enforcement powers. The agreement recites seventeen subject matters (sound, nuisance, vibration, buffers, outdoor lighting, zoning, environmental and natural resources among them) over which the City of Americus has non-exclusive jurisdiction to enforce its ordinances. §5(B)
• Infrastructure is Liberty's cost. Approval does not obligate the Authority or the city to build, extend, or upgrade infrastructure; road and utility improvements needed to serve the facility are Liberty's responsibility unless the city decides otherwise. §14

What the agreement still does not answer

A commitment to a standard is not a number. None of the following appears anywhere in the document:

• Total meter load above the planned 400 MW IT load
• Water demand, whether average day, peak day, or annual, or a water balance
• The specific cooling equipment. "Closed-loop" describes the circuit, not the water use; closed-circuit coolers can still be evaporative, so §11 does not by itself cap consumption
• Generator count, size, fuel, emission controls, or an annual hour limit. "Emergency situations" is not defined, and testing hours are limited without a cap on testing days
• A decibel figure. §9 points at the city ordinance rather than setting a number, so whatever the council adopts is the operative limit
• Utility will-serve letters for water, sewer, or power, or who pays for transmission upgrades
• The tenant or end user of the compute, and whether the "Innovation Center" has a budget, a staff, or a partner institution behind it

The Innovation Center and "Americus Tech Campus" are defined at length in §1(D) as a workforce, education, and innovation ecosystem, but that paragraph carries no square footage, no dollar figure, no staffing level, and no completion test separate from Phase One.

Enforcement if the promises are not kept

The clawback protects the land. §15 gives the Authority an absolute option to repurchase the property for $1.00 if the city declines a needed rezoning, if Liberty cannot or will not obtain its permits and utility connections, if Liberty decides the site is unsuitable, or if Liberty fails to begin actual construction within 18 months of closing. Closing on a repurchase happens within 30 days, by limited warranty deed, free of liens. §15(B) has Liberty waive and release any claim against the Authority arising from its own failure to perform.

The money remedy is capped at the value of the land. §16 gives Liberty 60 days to cure a default after written notice. An uncured first default lets the Authority demand reimbursement of one-half of the agreed $469,000 fair market value; an uncured second default lets it demand the other half. Read together, the maximum monetary exposure written into this agreement is $469,000, against a project described as a $1 billion to $5 billion investment. There is no separate penalty tied to the 150 jobs or the $80,000 average wage.

The verification window may close before the jobs obligation ripens. §4(C) makes the incentives contingent on annual verification "at the end of years 2 through 5," and §6 requires an annual compliance report each December 1 listing headcount, average wages and benefits, and capital invested to date. But §3(E) does not require the 150 jobs until two years after the final phase is complete, which is December 2035 on the schedule in §3(A). The agreement does not say what date year one runs from, so it is worth asking the Authority in writing whether any verification year reaches the year the jobs are actually due.

The counterparty can change without consent. §24 (Binding Agreement; Assignment) bars assignment to a third party without written consent, but expressly allows Liberty to assign to an affiliate on 30 days' written notice, with the affiliate assuming the obligations. An affiliate is anything under common control.

Outside assurances are not part of the agreement. The merger clause at §25 states that the document is the sole and entire agreement and that there are "no oral or written representations, understandings, promises, covenants, inducements, or agreements" outside it. Only terms in the contract are enforceable under that clause.

The term runs through closure. §20 keeps the agreement in effect until the data center "is completely closed and ceases operation." Georgia law governs, and any litigation is to be filed in the Superior Court of Sumter County. §18, §19

Two things to read carefully

The signature block. The notice addresses at §8 name Tony Di Benedetto for Liberty, at an e-mail address at boltdigitaltech.com, with Krevolin & Horst, LLC of Atlanta as counsel (Attn: Jacquelyn A. Caroe). The hand-printed name under the Liberty signature reads as Paul Di Benedetto. The scan does not settle who signed; the Authority's file copy would.

The drafting. The paragraph numbering runs 21, then 24, then 23, 24 again, then 25. There is no paragraph 22, and two paragraphs are numbered 24. §9(A) says "statues" for statutes and §1(A) says "service" where it means servers. None of this changes what the agreement requires, but a contract conveying public land for a dollar is worth proofreading, and the numbering should be corrected by amendment before anyone has to cite it in a dispute.

Records to obtain next

The agreement names documents that exist and are not yet public. Each has an identifiable custodian:

• The executed purchase and sale agreement, with its effective date and signatures, and the closing documents
• The assignment notice required by ¶16 of that agreement, showing how the Ontario corporation's rights passed to Liberty GA USA LLC before the deed
• The Phase I environmental study the Authority paid for under §4(B)
• The plat at Plat Book F, Page 316 as revised June 15, 2026, from the Clerk of Superior Court of Sumter County. The copy published here is the June 2 version
• Any corrective deed for the Gwinnett recital, or counsel's position on whether one is needed
• The minutes and the vote by which the Authority approved this agreement, and the notice for that meeting
• Any annual compliance report filed under §6, once one is due
• Any tax abatement, bond, or PILOT agreement. This document conveys land and sets conditions, but it is not by itself a tax agreement, and none is attached

See how to obtain the records and reach the officials for the request procedure and the three-business-day deadline.

Safe public statement

The signed development agreement fixes the site, phasing, buildout floor, 30-year operating covenant and several operating conditions. Other planning material identifies a 400 MW IT load, but the agreement states no megawatt, gallon or decibel limit. Its water terms bind the parties to the PDA agreement; the city ordinance contains no matching water-use standard. The agreement's only monetary remedy for default is the $469,000 value of the land, and its merger clause excludes promises made outside the contract.