Residents press council to halt CoreWeave data center, challenge notice and confidentiality orders

Mayor Linda Clarkage and the Kenilworth Borough Council opened an extended public-comment period after approving a consent agenda that included Resolution 26-172, a redevelopment agreement related to the Onyx/Nest campus.

Residents asked the council to pause work on the redevelopment and on any CoreWeave data-center operations, arguing notice was inadequate and that nondisclosure agreements had kept key information from the wider community. "You passed it without public comment," a resident told the council after noting the redevelopment resolution appeared on the consent agenda.

Why it matters: the redevelopment agreement and planning filings underlie subdivision and reuse of the Nest campus, and several residents said borough records show plans for additional, ground-up data-center construction beyond the site’s current reuse. Those residents urged the council to pursue local remedies including permit challenges, nuisance abatement, conditional-use review, temporary ordinances and a township ballot referendum.

The borough attorney responded to public concerns about notice and confidentiality, saying the nondisclosure referenced by speakers "was nothing more than a confidentiality order that many litigation matters are subject to" and that it related to a tax-appeal matter involving a predecessor owner, not to land-use proposals for the CoreWeave project. The attorney also said affected municipalities had been notified of the redevelopment plan as required by the borough’s public-notice procedures.

Public health and environment fears drove much of the testimony. Rebecca Davis of nearby Cranford pressed the council on noise and infrasound, asking whether the borough will measure baseline infrasound now and again after construction. "We've been told that the sound of the data center will be no louder than the hum of a refrigerator," Davis said, and asked whether borough rules can be adapted to limit infrasound exposure.

Victoria, who identified herself as an autistic adult and pediatric speech-language pathologist, said she had "not seen any credible evidence that AI data centers cause autism, but based on my professional knowledge, they definitely exacerbate what's already there." She urged the council to consider environmental stressors — noise, air quality and heat — in decisions affecting vulnerable residents.

Environmental-justice advocates also spoke. "Everything your constituents have said here tonight is true," Shamar of the New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance told the council, urging officials to listen to residents and consider broader regional impacts.

Council actions and next steps: the redevelopment agreement (Resolution 26-172) was included in the consent agenda the council approved earlier in the meeting (resolutions 26-161 through 26-173). The council moved to enter an executive session later in the meeting to discuss attorney–client matters and litigation strategy; the attorney warned that official action could follow the closed session.

What residents asked for: multiple speakers asked the council to (a) measure and publish baseline and post-construction noise (including infrasound), (b) identify the data center’s planned megawatt capacity and operational details, (c) review whether prior notices sufficiently informed neighboring municipalities and residents, and (d) consider a local referendum to prohibit or restrict AI data centers as a permitted use.

Council response and recordkeeping: municipal staff and the attorney said notices for the redevelopment plan were issued per the borough’s procedures; the attorney characterized the NDA discussed by speakers as a confidentiality order tied to tax-appeal litigation, not a contract controlling land use. The council did not adopt new ordinance restrictions or immediately rescind the redevelopment agreement during the meeting.

The council recessed amid repeated audience disruptions before the end of public comment. The public will likely press the mayor and council for more detailed, documented answers — including site capacity, noise studies, and copies or clarifications of all relevant NDAs and court orders — at the next meeting or through public-records requests.