Data center developer sues Archbald to overturn council rejection vote

Data center developer sues Archbald to overturn council rejection vote

News ClipScranton Times-Tribune·Archbald, Lackawanna County, PA·4/29/2026

A data center developer, Archbald I LLC, has sued Archbald Borough Council in Lackawanna County Court to overturn the council's rejection of its Project Scott data center campus. The lawsuit alleges due process violations, abuse of discretion, and predetermined opposition by the council during the conditional use application process. The developer is also claiming a "deemed approval" due to the borough's procedural failures and missed deadlines.

zoningoppositionlegalgovernment
Gov: Archbald Borough Council, Lackawanna County Court, planning commission
Archbald I LLC, a Delaware-incorporated developer, has filed a land-use appeal lawsuit against the Archbald Borough Council in Lackawanna County Court. The developer seeks to overturn the council's March 27 rejection of its proposed Project Scott campus, which includes 18 data centers on approximately 400 acres in Archbald. The lawsuit alleges that the council violated procedural requirements of the state Municipalities Planning Code, abused its discretion, erred as a matter of law, and acted in bad faith. Specifically, Archbald I LLC claims the council's decision to deny the conditional use application was based on an incomplete hearing record, thereby violating the company's due process rights. The developer also accuses the council of attempting to pressure them into agreeing to an extension to cure the borough's own procedural failures regarding public notices. Furthermore, the suit alleges predetermined opposition from certain borough leaders, citing the appointment of a planning commission member who publicly opposed data center projects. Archbald I LLC also issued a public notice asserting "deemed approval" for the project, arguing that the borough failed to complete the required hearing within the legal deadline, which automatically grants approval under state law. The borough has not yet formally replied to the lawsuit, and officials declined to comment on the pending litigation.