Coalition for Responsible Data Center Development
v City of Farmington
A Case Study by Matt Shaw
Data Centers are Comin’ to Town
nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation - Fifth Amendment (1)
The legal battle unfolding in Dakota County, Minnesota, involving the Coalition for Responsible Data Center Development (CRDCD) and the City of Farmington, may appear to be a simple dispute between citizens and their local representatives, but it has deep implications for all Americans’ fundamental rights and the future of local democracy. From the perspective of the U.S. Constitution and the principles articulated in the Declaration of Independence—the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—the plaintiffs’ petition is not merely a zoning dispute; it is an attempt to assert citizens’ rights against what they perceive as an arbitrary and capricious exercise of government and corporate power. (2)
Rights, Economic, and Environmental Tensions
The CRDCD’s basic argument is that the City of Farmington has engaged in actions "arbitrary and capricious... [and] by no means legal", by disregarding procedural agreements, metaphorically shredding an inter-governmental contract (the 2017 OAA with Castle Rock Township), and failing to account for the environmental, public health, and property rights impacts of building a massive data center complex on what is now a golf course. This challenge resonates with the fundamental notion of due process guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.
The City’s alleged denial of the full 60-day response period (only providing 30 days), per the 2017 OAA, to adjacent jurisdictions and its decision to push forward despite the explicit denial of rezoning by the Castle Rock Township, suggest a flagrant failure to procedural fairness and the rule of law. Furthermore, the City has been allegedly "spot zoning", i.e., modifying zoning for the "exclusive benefit" of a private developer, directly undermining the requirement that local land-use legislation serve the broader “public health, safety, and general welfare”.
The developers’ proposed data center would consume 700 megawatts of power to run, and as the lawsuit points out, there are only three power plants in Minnesota that produce this much power. Two of those are coal power plants, which are currently planned for closure by 2030. The additional power necessary will arguably increase residents’ electricity bills while harming the environment and public health.
The new data center will also more than double the area’s water consumption from 2.14 million gallons per day to 4.49 million. Adding insult to injury (and also potentially breaking MN Statute § 103G.287 Subd. 5), the City is alleged to not have completed an analysis on groundwater impacts, private wells, and a local stream which hosts a protected trout species.
The Three Freedoms: “Freedom to,” “Freedom from,” and “Freedom with”
The conflict can be further illuminated by applying a liberty-based framework that differentiates between three dimensions of freedom:
Freedom to (Positive Liberty): This refers to the power or capacity to act. The City's actions are evidently aimed at enabling the ‘freedom’ to attract economic investment at all costs and expand the local tax base, disregarding the consequences on the community. The developer, Tract, seeks the ‘freedom to’ build a colossal 2.5 million square foot complex to pursue profit. Contrarily, members of the CDRDC are fighting for the positive liberty to democratically control if they are “forced to endure years of construction of twelve 80-foot tall buildings with drones, surveillance cameras, intrusive lighting of an enormous compound, heat-sensing security fences with barbed wire, tucked right in their backyards, mere feet away from their homes.” which leads us directly to our next freedom.
Freedom from (Negative Liberty): This is the right to be free from unwarranted, capricious, and tyrannical governmental and corporate interference or harm. The community is asserting its right to ‘freedom’ from the detrimental impacts of the project: "years and years of construction, noise pollution, and heavy consumption of natural resources"; environmental and health impacts from air, water, and sound pollution; and the dramatic reduction in property values. The community members argue that the City’s actions constitute a violation of the homeowners’ right to the continued enjoyment of their property free from the detrimental effects of data centers in their back (and front) yard.
Freedom with (Collective Agency): This concept defines liberty not as a purely individual right, but as the power and abilities gained through collective action and freedom of association. As Thomas Jefferson has been attributed to saying, “We must all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately.” (3) In this context, the individual plaintiffs—all of whom have homes neighboring the proposed site—are acting through the Coalition for Responsible Data Center Development (CRDCD). They are exercising their ‘freedom with’ by organizing as a unified political force to counter the power of the municipal government and the developer. Their joint petition demonstrates that they have gained the freedom to access legal channels, mobilize expert testimony, and exert significant political pressure—a capacity that would be unavailable to any of them acting alone (unless they were incredibly independently wealthy). The CRDCD’s formation is a practical exercise of citizens’ constitutional right to "peaceably to assemble," transforming individual grievances into collective, actionable demands for accountability and due process under the law. This is a unifying message that I believe those on the ‘right’, ‘left, and ‘center’ can all agree upon.
The Imperative of Unified Resistance
The plaintiffs in this case are composed of allied groups: residents of Farmington and residents of the neighboring Castle Rock Township. This coalition, however, should be a model for a broader-based data center responsibility movement.
The controversies raised by data center development—water consumption, power demands, noise pollution, and the industrialization of residential areas—are not unique to Dakota County. They are common hazards facing communities across the United States as the technological infrastructure necessary for the “AI revolution” expands. As a political scientist, I would argue that disparate local groups currently facing data centers in their local communities are conflicts that share the same root cause: the prioritization of uncontrolled corporate bottom lines over local democratic consent. (4)
To effectively reassert citizen control and the principles of the three freedoms described above, disparate groups have enormous incentives to combine forces and organize together. By pooling resources, sharing strategies, and presenting a unified front to legislatures and developers, local activists can:
Enhance Local Control: A non-partisan movement can compel local, state, and the federal government to enact clear regulations on data center size, scale, setbacks, and necessary infrastructure. You can lobby for legislative mandates that compel governments to adhere to existing zoning laws and intergovernmental agreements, preventing politicians from becoming agents for private land deals.
Amplify Political Voice: Organizing at a national level can counter the disproportionate power of billion-dollar corporations, protecting the constitutional rights and welfare of residents above the promise of an expanding tax base.
Protect the Environment: Everyone deserves clean air and water, which are being held hostage by data center developers. Whether you hunt, fish, breathe air, or drink water, we all will be impacted when data centers pollute our environment.
Limit the Rise in Energy Bills: Unless you are not connected to the energy grid, data center development will directly impact your family’s pocketbook. Besides the immediate effect on your energy bill, it will also affect the bill for your local butcher, brewer, and baker. Alone, we are unmatched by hyperscalers’ (seemingly) unlimited access to capital. Together, we can organize to protect our hard-earned income from the hands of multinational corporations.
Ultimately, the lawsuit is an act of last resort in defense of a rights-based constitutional order. Its success—and the success of similar movements—will depend on whether citizens can unite to ensure that local self-governance, due process, and the protection of their homes are held as the paramount concerns, rather than being discarded for the temporary promise of corporate tax revenue.
If you are interested in joining this movement, please reach out to The Coalition for Responsible Data Center Development to share your experience and help other communities ensure their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are not trampled upon.
https://publicaccess.courts.state.mn.us/DocumentSearch case # 19HA-CV-24-5838
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-22-02-0284
