Americans Fighting Data Centers Face Lawsuits From Local Communities
Newsweek · C · trust 47/100
0 Share Newsweek is a Trust Project member See more of our trusted coverage when you search. Prefer Newsweek on Google to see more of our trusted coverage when you search. Three Kansas cities have taken residents to court over citizen petitions seeking to restrict or ban large-scale data centers, turning a fight over new technology infrastructure into a legal battle over how much power voters have to shape local policy.
Edgerton, El Dorado and Emporia have each filed lawsuits challenging petitions that would restrict or prohibit certain large data centers in their communities.
The petitions were organized by residents concerned about the facilities’ potential demands on local electricity and water supplies. Under Kansas law, qualifying citizens can use a statutory petition process to propose local ordinances and, if they collect enough signatures, require local officials to either adopt the measure or put it before voters.
The cities argue the petitions are legally invalid. Residents and their attorneys argue that the initiative process gives voters a direct role in deciding local policy.
The cases have produced different results.
Edgerton filed its lawsuit on August 4, naming residents Carrie Schmidt and Kimberly Twente, along with the Public Trust Collective, as opposing parties in its challenge to a petition seeking to restrict data centers.
The petition was submitted after residents organized opposition to a proposed data center at Edgerton's Logistics Park. The Johnson County Election Office determined that enough valid signatures had been collected, meaning the city was required under Kansas law to either adopt the proposed ordinance or submit it to voters.
Instead, the City Council voted in July to challenge the petition in court, arguing that the proposed ordinance was “legally and factually deficient.”
Among the city's objections are statements in the petition that officials say incorrectly describe the city's actions, including claims concerning water service, electricity and agreements with utilities.
Edgerton says it does not provide water to the Logistics Park, where the proposed data center would be located, and has no authority over water decisions made by Rural Water District No. 7. The city also does not operate its own electric utility; Evergy provides electricity to the area.
The city further argues that the petition's proposed 100,000-gallon-per-day water threshold would apply selectively to data centers. It points to another industrial project previously considered for the Logistics Park that would have used more than 100,000 gallons of water per day but would not have been prohibited by the proposed ordinance.
Edgerton City Attorney Todd Luckman said the residents were named as defendants because Kansas law requires parties whose interests could be affected by the court's decision to be included.
“The City filed for a declaratory judgement in district court and, as part of that process, named two individuals and The Public Trust Collective as the opposing parties,” Luckman said in a statement published on the city's website. He said the city wanted to ensure the people behind the petition were notified and able to participate in the case.
The city is asking the court to declare the petition invalid and prevent the proposed ordinance from being placed before voters.
Baker, who represents Schmidt and Twente, told Newsweek that the case is different from the other Kansas disputes because Edgerton sued the people who circulated the petition.
“Edgerton stands out for a different reason: the City did not simply ask a court to resolve a legal question about the proposed ordinance. It sued the citizens who circulated and submitted the petition,” Baker said.
Baker said Schmidt was engaged in protected petitioning activity and argued that Kansas' Public Speech Protection Act could apply to the case.
“The City’s own filing acknowledges that Carrie’s status as a petition circulator was the reason she was named as a defendant,” Baker said.
He said the city's position that Schmidt's role is now irrelevant is inconsistent with the reason she was initially named.
“The City is entitled to litigate any genuinely meritorious legal objection it may have to the proposed ordinance,” Baker said. “But the Legislature also created protections for citizens who are sued because they exercised rights of speech and petition.”
The case has become a flashpoint for residents who say they should have the opportunity to vote on the proposed restrictions.
“This fight isn’t just about Carrie and I. This fight is much bigger,” Twente previously told the Topeka Capital-Journa l. “This fight is about every other city or township that has to go through something like this.”
Attempts to reach Twente and Schmidt were unsuccessful Monday afternoon.
Newsweek has reached out to Edgerton City via email for comment.
El Dorado filed its lawsuit on July 14, challenging a citizen petition seeking to prohibit “high-impact” data centers and certain battery energy-storage systems.
The petition was backed by local residents who had organized against proposed data-center development in the Butler County city. Residents delivered about 700 signatures to the city, according to local reporting.
The city's legal challenge focused on whether the proposed ordinance was legislative or administrative.
That distinction is important under Kansas law. Citizen initiatives can be used to propose legislative ordinances, but administrative actions generally cannot be placed before voters through the same process.
El Dorado argued that the petition was legally improper and should not proceed.
A district court rejected that argument on August 21, ruling that the proposed data-center prohibition was a legislative function of municipal government and therefore could proceed through the citizen-initiative process under K.S.A. 12-3013.
The proposed ordinance would prohibit “high impact” data centers, defined…
Read the original at Newsweek →
Open in TruthVane →