Monticello residents testify on data center bills at Capitol

Monticello residents, including Jenna Van Den Boom, Holly Bondhus Neuman, Lisa Keenan, and Bill Saville, testified at the Minnesota State Capitol in St. Paul, bringing their concerns over proposed data center development to state lawmakers. They are part of a growing statewide coalition advocating for greater transparency and oversight in how data center projects are approved across Minnesota. Van Den Boom specifically testified before the Senate State and Local Government Committee in support of two bills, SF 4379 and SF 4296, aimed at increasing public awareness and input. SF 4379 proposes to ban cities and local governments from signing non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) that limit the sharing of information about proposed projects. Advocates argue these NDAs, despite local officials in Monticello declining to sign them for the "Monticello Tech project," still hinder public understanding when developers themselves are bound by them. SF 4296, which advanced out of committee on March 18, would require local governments to hold at least two public hearings and disclose key details, including the developer, end user, facility size, and energy use, before approving a data center project. Senator Erin Maye Quade, DFL-Apple Valley, a sponsor of the legislation, highlighted how projects using code names like "Project Groundhog" in Monticello obscure public knowledge. A more far-reaching proposal, SF 4298, which seeks to establish a temporary statewide moratorium on new data centers until a comprehensive impact study is completed, has been introduced but its path forward is uncertain. The bill has been referred to committee but has not advanced, with advocates expressing concern it may not receive a hearing. Residents from other communities such as Farmington, North Mankato, Pine Island, and Hermantown have joined the push, reflecting broad opposition to the current approval processes. Critics of data centers cite concerns over electricity and water consumption, noise, and environmental impacts, contrasting with supporters' arguments of tax revenue and job creation. The ongoing debate emphasizes the challenge of balancing potential economic benefits with long-term community impacts.