Boulder City authorizes appeal of BLM's approval for adjacent data center after sustained public opposition

The Boulder City Council on July 6 unanimously authorized the city attorney to file a notice of appeal and petition to stay a June 26 Bureau of Land Management decision that found prior environmental review for a solar-plus-battery project was "adequate" for a proposed Townsite Solar 2 (TS 2) data center on federal land within the city's jurisdiction.

The action, passed as resolution 81‑63, follows several months of public debate and a full night of public hearings in which dozens of residents warned that a hyperscale data center would strain water and electrical systems, harm wildlife and change the city's character. City Attorney Britney Walker told the council the BLM's determination represented a departure from its usual interagency review processes and that the city has grounds to challenge the Bureau's use of a 2023 solar environmental analysis to justify a new industrial use.

"This is a departure from previous precedent and procedure," Walker said in explaining the proposed appeal, adding that the city could seek a stay that would halt further development while an Interior Board of Land Appeals considers the case.

Residents offered extensive technical and quality‑of‑life objections during public comment. Christine Schachinger, a local technology consultant who has followed data‑center issues nationally, told the council that claims about low water use were misleading: "They're gonna use 650,000 gallons of your treated wastewater," she said, urging independent environmental study. Another resident, Caitlin Blajo, said her "biggest concern are our water supply and our electrical infrastructure" and asked the council to oppose the project wherever it was proposed.

Deputy City Manager Michael Mays had earlier told the council the TS 2 site under consideration was roughly 88.5 acres and that the company had previously submitted an application to the city to add data‑center uses to that parcel; TS 2 later withdrew that city application. City staff nonetheless said the BLM decision on the adjacent federal parcel left the city vulnerable because the federal grant includes conditions and could require public infrastructure connections that would be maintained by the city.

Several speakers pointed to the scale of the proposed data center cited in federal filings and public comment: the BLM record describes a potential conversion to several buildings; a commenter referenced a 300,000‑square‑foot facility and a 167‑megawatt load in the record for consideration. Residents and councilmembers both stressed uncertainty over water sourcing, potential increases in residential energy costs and the need for better interagency coordination before such a land‑use change proceeds.

After discussion the council voted to authorize the city attorney to pursue the appeal and a petition to stay the BLM decision; the vote was unanimous. If the Interior Board grants a stay, construction and permitting actions related to the BLM determination would be paused pending the appeal's resolution. Walker said she would keep the council and public apprised of filings and any rulings by the Interior Board of Land Appeals.

The city's action comes amid wider community steps: the developer withdrew its local application and the council separately approved resolutions removing two other parcels from the city's Land Management Process list.

Next steps: the city attorney will file the appeal and petition to stay; the appeal process will determine whether the BLM must complete further environmental review and interagency consultation before the project can proceed.