Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Center Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge accountability over proposed data center, allege misuse of personal information
Summary
At the March 2 Coweta City Council meeting, residents accused city officials and developers of mishandling personal records tied to a proposed data center, called for recusal or termination of officials, and raised concerns about the facility’s scale and transparency.
Residents at Coweta’s March 2 City Council meeting urged the council to demand accountability and transparency around a proposed data center, alleging that personal information had been shared with third parties without consent.
The public comment period opened with Allen Prather saying he submitted an open records request on Dec. 26, 2025, and ‘‘did not consent to giving my personal information to any third parties.’’ Prather also said his research led him to believe the proposed facility could use ‘‘somewhere between 130 and 200 industrial sized generators,’’ a figure he said he has not seen confirmed by the city.
Prather and other commenters accused the City Manager and city officials of withholding information and asked whether confidentiality agreements and non-disclosure practices were in place. Darren Blanchard later said the city did not have a fully executed non‑disclosure agreement for City Manager Julie Casteen and pressed for copies of internal records related to ‘‘Project Atlas.’’
Other speakers urged elected officials to recuse themselves from decisions about the project. Jimmy Rothrock and others called for immediate termination of staff they accused of misusing personal information and told councilmembers the matters had been referred to the district attorney.
Vice Mayor Jeremy Barnett responded to the criticisms, saying he wanted ‘‘mutual respect’’ and apologizing ‘‘if I ever came across as wanting to silence anyone; it was not my intention.’’ Jackie Prather, who moderates a Coweta Facebook page, defended anonymous commenters’ safety online and argued that ‘‘outing’’ people who post anonymously puts them at risk.
Why it matters: The comments put transparency and data‑handling practices at the center of local debate over the proposed data center. Speakers framed their concerns as both privacy and governance issues, and several requested recusal by Mayor Naomi Hogue and Vice Mayor Barnett on future votes connected to the project.
What the council did: Councilmembers did not vote or take action in response to the public comments during this meeting. Councilmembers acknowledged the remarks but proceeded with the posted agenda.
What’s next: Speakers requested additional records and recusal; the council did not set a date for further action on the data center during this session.
