In Pausing Data Centers, Minnesota Courts Did What Local Officials Wouldn’t

This story was originally published by MinnPost. We’re sharing it here as part of In the Shadow of the Server, a Next City series on the fight over urban technology infrastructure — who builds it, who benefits, and how local leaders can push back. If city leaders and a developer had their way, shovels would be breaking the soil in Pine Island by now. July was supposed to be the starting month of construction that would transform a sprawling farm field in this southeastern Minnesota town into Google’s next hyperscale data center. Local leaders were fine with the timeframe and ready to push ahead, despite vehement opposition by a citizen group. The project sits stuck in the mud, however, by order of another authority — a Goodhue County judge who has paused its construction, giving opponents time to plead their legal case against it. This summer, across Minnesota and the country, concern over data centers has grown into a full-blown movement, capturing the press, focusing alarm at emerging AI technology and becoming a litmus test for political candidates. But while opponents are channeling much of their energy into turning the court of public opinion against these projects, Pine Island’s case shows that rulings coming out of actual courtrooms can alter the trajectory of developments. Courts have long been arbiters for major issues in the United States, noted Sam Temple of Faribault. As a candidate for Rice County Board this year, he welcomed a recent ruling slowing down a data center development in the city. People place hope in the judiciary when they lose it in elected officials, he said. “(The court is) not the ideal tool, but it certainly is a tool, and it’s a tool that is a result of local organizing.” What are lawsuits alleging, and where have they been filed? Legal arguments against data center projects vary. Lawsuits allege that cities allowed lax environmental reviews, withheld information from public records requests, and that leaders discussed secret plans in defiance of open meeting laws. The specifics aren’t always the same, but common frustrations underlie the cases, said an attorney involved in suits against data center projects. “People are feeling like they don’t have information or a say in these massive projects that seem like they’re moving ahead at lightning speed,” said Luke Norquist of the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy. “As Meta fights Google fights Microsoft to try and become the next AI overlords, that sort of local resistance is happening across the nation.” The MCEA nonprofit is behind lawsuits challenging local data center regulatory processes. Those include cases in Pine Island, Faribault, Hermantown and Monticello. The first two sites had recent, favorable rulings for data center opponents. North Mankato was once on the list before MCEA dropped its lawsuit after no project materialized. The city will soon hear residents out on whether to pass a moratorium during an upcoming public hearing. Citizen groups also brought cases against projects. Stop the Hermantown Data Center has an active case, while the Coalition for Responsible Data Center Development filed a suit in Farmington. Paul Fish, who lives about a mile from Hermantown’s proposed data center site, is named in a lawsuit as a resident who questioned city leadership about the development. He didn’t realize he’d show up in court filings until friends told him, but said the exchange from a meeting in December shows how much of a head start the project had in local government. Non-disclosure agreements enabled plans to advance before residents could mobilize in the early stages. “This was planned way before we knew anything about it,” he said. “By the time the city of Hermantown stuff came forward that people knew about, we were already a year behind.” How are courts responding so far? In Pine Island, MCEA’s lawsuit alleged that the city performed an “insufficient and illegal” environmental review before ushering the development forward. The judge’s ruling was more a slow down for the project than a decisive blow. Allowing the project to move forward without resolving the lawsuit would cause irreparable harm, the judge stated in a court order. Any win, minor or major, felt good at that point, said Aubree Derksen, a local activist against the project. “Getting the injunction, finally, getting that victory, it’s like f— yeah, Derksen said. “We’re the smallest town in the state fighting this and it’s a small nonprofit that’s putting you in your place.” Asked about the next steps for the project, city administrator Elizabeth Howard said the city doesn’t comment on pending litigation. Faribault provides another example of a court ruling halting a data center development’s progress. An MCEA suit against the city and developer Archer Datacenters went to the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Judges sided with MCEA’s argument in a June opinion, stating that the city needed to conduct a more rigorous environmental review. That ruling kicked the process back to the city, and City Council members responded by extending a deadline for Archer to submit more information for review to 2027. For its part, the city plans to develop and consider new data center standards for water usage, electric usage, air emissions and more. Cities and counties could’ve already been doing this in anticipation of data centers, Temple said. He thinks elected officials should be more proactive in regulating data centers. “What the court ruling has shown, specifically at the city level, but I see it politically at the county level, as well, is not corruption, is not malicious intent, but it is simply passivity,” he said. “And I think people want a more proactive local government.” Why courts are an imperfect venue for recourse Courts weren’t the first place Minnesotans in these communities turned to in their quest to stop data centers. Before courtrooms, they went to city hall. Elected officials were more OK with data centers than they were. They went to the Capitol. Every bill to rein in data centers last session failed. They’re turning data centers into an election issue this fall, although any electoral shifts will take months to be reflected in policies. So courts are another lever to pull. As Cathy Johnson of the Coalition for Responsible Data Center Development sees it, lawsuits are for when “our local officials aren’t listening to us and the state Legislature is too tied up in gridlock.” But even more than time, lawsuits take money. Data center opponents don’t have either in abundance compared to projects backed by big tech companies. The financial toll came up at a Stop the Hermantown Data Center group gathering last week. In a township hall, speakers stressed the need for donations to help the cause. Johnson knows this struggle well, saying her group in Farmington “desperately needs funding” to continue its lawsuit. Fish is hopeful that courts will rule in the Hermantown group’s favor, but he knows cases don’t look like they do on Court TV. A dramatic resolution is no guarantee, and it may not land anytime soon. “And it’s costly, that’s the thing,” he said. “For a citizens group to have the resources to fight Google off? (Google) could walk away from this whole thing and write it off.” Brian Arola is MinnPost's Greater Minnesota reporter. .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) Add to the Discussion Next City sustaining members can comment on our stories. Keep the discussion going! Join our community of engaged members by donating today. Already a sustaining member? Login here.