
Box Elder County rejects effort to bring data center approval to voters
Box Elder County officials rejected referendum applications seeking to overturn the county's approval of the proposed Stratos Project data center, citing Utah law. The county determined the resolutions were administrative actions, making them ineligible for a public vote. The opposition group, Box Elder Accountability Referendum (BEAR), plans to challenge this denial in court.
Box Elder County officials have rejected referendum applications aimed at overturning the county's approval of the proposed Stratos Project data center. In a press release issued May 28, County Attorney Stephen Hadfield stated that the resolutions related to the project are administrative actions, not legislative acts, and therefore cannot be subjected to a referendum under Utah law.
The Box Elder Accountability Referendum (BEAR) group had filed applications to challenge Resolutions 26-11 and 26-12, which approved the county's participation in the Military Installation Development Authority (MIDA) Stratos Project Area and authorized an interlocal agreement for the development. Hadfield's decision asserts that these resolutions merely provide consent for land inclusion and implement existing agreements, rather than creating new laws.
This decision follows weeks of public opposition to the data center project, with concerns raised over water use, environmental impacts, tax incentives, and a perceived lack of transparency. BEAR lead sponsor Brenna Williams previously indicated that the group anticipated a denial and has a team of lawyers prepared to challenge the county's decision in court. County officials have stated they will not grant further interviews while the sponsors consider legal action.
A fiscal impact analysis by County Auditor Shirlene Larsen estimated that repealing the resolutions could result in a loss of approximately $5.4 million annually in guaranteed revenue, and an estimated $108 million annually at full project capacity. The county also projected potential annual emergency service costs of $5.4 million if the development proceeded without the resolutions.