Rowan Mailer Audit, Part 10: Who Produced Rowan’s “Independent” Economic Analysis?

Rowan’s Frederick County mailer promotes jobs, economic activity and tax revenue using an analysis it calls independent. The Maryland Tech Council commissioned that study from Sage Policy Group. Rowan supplied important assumptions used to calculate the projected benefits.

The study estimates what could happen if the projects are built and operate as expected. It does not establish what they have delivered or compare the projected benefits with the full public cost. To judge Rowan’s claims, residents need to know where the starting numbers came from, what the study left out and what happens if the projects fall short.

Who Hired Sage, And What Went Into The Study?

The Maryland Tech Council’s December 2024 announcement says the Council commissioned the study and Sage Policy Group conducted it.

The Tech Council is a technology and life-sciences trade association. It works to promote its industries and influence public policy. It did not approach Rowan’s projects as a government auditor.

Sage used IMPLAN, software that estimates how project spending could support jobs and business activity, along with its own tax calculations. Its report identifies Rowan’s expected workforce among the numbers used in the analysis.

The Tech Council commissioned the study. Who paid the bill, what instructions Sage received and whether anyone independently checked Rowan’s starting numbers remain unanswered in the public material.

Sage estimates the benefits of building the projects and putting them into operation. It does not show what happens to those benefits if construction takes longer, some buildings never open, operators hire fewer people or the property is worth less than expected. It also does not subtract the costs borne by government, residents or the environment. The report estimates economic activity and tax revenue. It does not calculate what Frederick would gain after paying its share of the costs.

Sage does explain why some benefits could be larger than its estimates. Its construction estimate leaves out the equipment installed inside the buildings, and its tax totals leave permitting and impact fees unquantified. Those exclusions support its description of parts of the estimate as conservative. They do not show how the forecast holds up when something goes wrong.

Who Was Connected To Whom?

Kelly Schulz, whom the Tech Council named CEO in 2022, previously represented Frederick County in the Maryland House of Delegates and served as Maryland’s labor and commerce secretary.

She also helped Frederick County examine data-center policy. The county’s March 2024 Data Centers Workgroup report lists Schulz on the workgroup and its Community Benefits subgroup. That subgroup considered taxes, workforce development, economic opportunities and other possible benefits.

Schulz advised the county through that workgroup. She did not have authority to approve Rowan’s permits.

Sage founder Anirban Basu also has government-advisory experience. His firm biography records his service as chair of the Maryland Economic Development Commission from 2014 through 2021. The study does not name the person responsible for each calculation, so Basu’s position at Sage does not establish that he personally produced every number.

Rowan appears in the Tech Council’s member directory. The Council’s 2025 Maryland Data Center Summit program names Rowan as title sponsor.

That sponsorship came after the December 2024 study. It shows a later business relationship, not who paid for the earlier report or whether anyone changed its findings.

What The Numbers Actually Count

Sage’s model estimates spending at the projects, purchases from suppliers and spending by workers’ households. Its totals reach beyond the construction sites and beyond Frederick County.

The report gives several different kinds of numbers:

• 15,526 statewide construction job-years: One full- or part-time position lasting a year counts as one job-year. This is work added up over time, not 15,526 different people or permanent jobs.
• About $1.4 billion in construction cost: This is the expected cost of the powered core and shell, the building before the equipment inside. It is a starting number for the model, not a record of payments to Frederick County small businesses.
• $2.2268 billion in statewide economic activity: This estimate includes construction and the additional activity it supports. It cannot be added to the construction cost as another separate investment.
• 275 direct operating jobs: This is the original estimate for the workforce once the facilities reach steady operations.
• $19.1 million in annual county taxes: This is the estimate after full buildout, combining property and income taxes. It is not money the county has already collected.

The benefit-claims guide explains how project spending, forecasts and actual results differ.

Rowan’s Larger Claims Need New Calculations

Rowan’s September 2026 community-investment article cites approximately $2.5 billion in construction-related economic activity and more than 330 full-time permanent jobs, attributing its economic claims to independent analysis.

The December 2024 study estimated $2.2268 billion in statewide construction activity and 275 direct operating jobs. The newer figures are larger.

Larger projects or changed plans could explain an increase. But no updated study explaining these totals has been located in the public material examined for this article.

Without that calculation, readers cannot tell which buildings are included, whether the construction timetable changed or why the expected operating workforce grew. They also cannot tell whether the newer figures were produced by Sage using the same method.

An updated report should identify the projects, dates and starting numbers behind each total. It should say how much activity is expected in Frederick County and how much elsewhere.

What Would Show Whether The Benefits Arrived?

An industry group can hire a capable outside firm, and that firm can produce useful estimates. The Tech Council’s role alone does not establish that Sage’s calculations are wrong.

But a forecast answers a different question from records of what happened. Employment records would show jobs held. Purchasing records would show which businesses received payments. Tax records would show what government collected. Public-cost records would help show what residents paid to support the development.

The unanswered questions are concrete: who paid for the study, how Sage checked Rowan’s starting numbers and where the calculations supporting Rowan’s newer claims can be found.

Previous: Part 9: What Kind Of Jobs Is Rowan Counting?

Corrections: FredCo Paper Trail welcomes corrections supported by source records. Read the corrections policy. Material changes will be dated and described on this article.