Residents press council on water and environmental risks of proposed nearby data center; demand moratorium, greater transparency

A prolonged citizen-comment period at the March 16 Farmington City Council meeting featured repeated appeals from residents who urged the council to slow or block a proposed nearby data-center project, citing groundwater and surface-water risks, loss of public river access, and perceived lack of transparency.

Speakers who identified themselves included Kathy Johnson (longtime resident), Mark Pierson (resident and technical commenter), Jeff Schottler (resident), Nancy Arsdall (resident), Terry Pearson (resident), Nate Ryan (resident and former council commenter) and others. Their concerns clustered around four topics: well and groundwater impacts from construction dewatering, harm to the Vermillion River (which several speakers described as a naturally breeding trout stream), the long-term permanence of land use once agricultural land is converted, and frustration about notice and staff/council communication.

Representative remarks included: • Kathy Johnson: “I think you may not be aware… there’s only two naturally breeding trout streams that are close to metropolitan areas… The Vermillion is one of them.” She warned that construction dewatering and wetland impacts near data-center sites can damage trout habitat and public access. • Mark Pierson: “When you operate hundreds or thousands of drives, failures happen every single day… If this trend continues… the space required for a data center like this could shrink dramatically,” arguing that rapid technology change could leave permanent land-use conversions underused in the future. • Nancy Arsdall pressed for written guarantees on well protection and asked whether the city would provide immediate assistance if private wells were harmed; she criticized the council’s approach as favoring developers and urged renegotiation of plat and PUD terms. • Jeff Schottler said residents felt ignored and warned of growing public anger if council proceeded without addressing neighborhood concerns.

City attorney staff and the litigation counsel advised the council they could not publicly discuss claims that were part of pending litigation. Amy (city attorney/staff) told council that a second amended complaint had added claims under the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (MERA), and that attorney-client briefings could be arranged for council under privilege. Mayor Lehn said he would make himself available for one-on-one conversations before meetings to listen to residents while limiting public comment about issues tied to active litigation.

Council members and staff acknowledged residents’ concerns and described next steps including possible attorney-client briefings and continued coordination with county partners on floodplain and access questions. No formal council action on the data-center project occurred at the March 16 meeting; citizen comments were recorded in the public record.