Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Data Center Opposition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge moratorium and allege exclusion after Joliet approves Hillwood data‑center project
Summary
During a lengthy public comment period at the March 19 meeting, Joliet residents demanded a 3–6 month moratorium, alleged that union members and nonresidents crowded out local speakers, and urged stronger community benefits, environmental protections and language access after council-approved annexation and zoning votes.
Hundreds of residents and community members took part in a robust public‑comment period at the Joliet City Council meeting on March 19, pressing the council for greater transparency, stronger protections and a temporary pause on data‑center approvals after the council voted to approve annexation and zoning for a roughly 795‑acre Hillwood project.
Speakers repeatedly asked the council to institute a 3–6 month moratorium on preliminary and final PUD approvals for data centers so the city could expand public education and review. “We demand a 3–6 month moratorium on existing preliminary and final planned unit developments for data centers in Joliet,” Griselda Chavez said in her remarks as a lifelong Joliet resident.
Multiple commenters alleged they were effectively shut out of the public process because seats were filled early by organized groups. Alicia Morales, a lifelong Joliet resident, said the meeting room was dominated by union members and non‑residents, leaving little room for local residents who arrived early to speak. “This does not feel right when a decision of this magnitude is being considered,” Morales said, calling the venue choice exclusionary.
Other themes in public comment included: • Water and utilities: Several residents warned that switching to Lake Michigan water and new development could raise household utility bills and increase the risk of housing instability for low‑income residents. • Environmental and public‑health concerns: Commenters raised worries about water consumption, air and noise pollution and potential impacts on nearby natural resources such as Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie. Felix Ortiz asked the council to consider pollution safety parameters and water sustainability when approving developments. • Community benefit agreements: Speakers, including Portia Gallegos (Joliet homeowner and member of Joliet Residents for Responsible Growth), urged the council to negotiate robust community‑benefit agreements that include outreach in multiple languages and engagement with regional conservation staff. • Transparency and recordings: Cassidy said portions of the publicly recorded hearing from the prior meeting appeared edited or missing and said she planned to file a freedom‑of‑information request and possibly a lawsuit if recordings were intentionally altered.
Council members and staff repeatedly acknowledged residents’ concerns and said community input had influenced changes to agreement drafts. But they also defended their decision‑making process, noting staff work, outside legal review and negotiated conditions attached to the approvals. Several council members thanked staff for the hours of review and said the approvals included conditions they believe will protect residents, including generator standards and negotiated community investments.
The public‑comment period underscored sustained opposition and mobilization in Joliet. Residents said they will continue to organize and monitor implementation of the development agreement; some speakers warned of electoral consequences for members who supported the project.
The council did not rescind the vote during the meeting; public commenters left the meeting with commitments from city staff to continue community engagement and from council members to oversee implementation of the project conditions.
