Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge council to pause and disclose details of proposed data center; petition of 1,368 signatures presented
Summary
At a Feb. 3 Santaquin City Council public forum, residents delivered a 1,368-signature petition and raised pollution, safety and transparency concerns about a proposed data center and associated power generation. Council did not take formal action on the project during the meeting.
Dozens of residents used the council’s public forum on Feb. 3 to press elected officials for more information and review of a proposed data center and associated power-generation facility near residential areas.
Organizers said the petition gathered 1,368 signatures since Thursday, about 64% of which were from Santaquin residents, and asked the council to work with the community on alternatives or stronger safeguards. “I want to know if I need to move my kids, if they’re safe to be there,” Kelsey, the petition organizer, told the council.
Speakers cited multiple worries: a perceived lack of public notice about a change in the project’s scope, potential air-quality impacts from on-site generators, and the risk that permitting one center would open the door to clustering of additional facilities near neighborhoods. A commenter who identified himself as having studied emission data said proposed generator setups in a related Provo plan exceeded hazardous air particle (HAP) thresholds and requested that generator-emission data be published for public review.
Several speakers traced the project’s public history back to 2023, saying the proposal evolved (initially described as a tech or research center) and that residents first saw the “data center” label in a public notice in August or September. Dustin Holden told the council the public’s reaction reflected distrust and urged elected officials to consider community concerns: “This should be a wake-up call for each of you to reflect.” Calvin Davis and others urged civility even as they criticized the notice and outreach process.
Council members and staff responded in part by pointing to planning commission review and notification procedures. A council member explained that the planning commission considered the matter and that staff mailed about 120 notices to nearby property owners; another encouraged residents to review materials posted on the city’s website and suggested leaving written comments to be included in the minutes.
No motion to change or pause the project was recorded during the meeting. After the half-hour public forum concluded, the council moved on to other agenda items, including resolutions and code amendments. Mayor Olsen acknowledged the public comments and said the city would continue to consider input, while also noting potential economic and job benefits mentioned by the project developer.
The council did not vote on the data center itself during the Feb. 3 meeting. Residents and organizers said they will continue to press for more disclosure and documentation; the council’s next steps were not specified during the public forum.
