Minnesota county rejects data center plan, others might follow

The Nobles County Board in Minnesota recently denied a zoning change requested by Bloomington-based developer Geronimo Power for a proposed 640-acre, 400-megawatt data center near Worthington. This decision highlights a growing trend of local opposition to large-scale data center developments across the state, even in Republican-leaning areas. Geronimo Power, a subsidiary of Brookfield Asset Management, had attempted to address community concerns proactively by being transparent about its plans and eschewing non-disclosure agreements, but ultimately failed to secure approval. Meanwhile, Minnesota lawmakers are actively debating several bills aimed at regulating data center development. Sen. Jen McEwen (DFL-Duluth) is sponsoring a Senate bill that proposes a two-year freeze on data center permitting to allow the state to study the industry's impacts. Another bipartisan measure seeks to prohibit non-disclosure agreements between tech companies and local governments, a common practice that critics argue shrouds development deals in secrecy. These legislative efforts reflect broader concerns among residents and some officials regarding increased utility bills, environmental damage, noise, traffic, and water usage associated with hyperscale data centers. Despite the rejection, Geronimo Power's president and CEO, Blake Nixon, stated the company would consider "alternative options, including some other communities that have expressed interest." Supporters like local software architect Dave Serrano and union representatives, such as Kyle O’Neill from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 292, expressed disappointment, emphasizing the potential for significant job creation and economic investment in regions traditionally dependent on agriculture. However, opponents like Sen. Erin Maye Quade (DFL-Apple Valley) voiced distrust in large tech companies' environmental and resource promises, citing past instances of unfulfilled climate goals and the risk of ratepayers bearing the cost of overbuilt infrastructure. Experts suggest that local officials have significant power to shape development agreements rather than simply approving or denying proposals.