“Had there been a little bit of public grousing and complaining about these data centers, but it went away, I think they wouldn’t have done anything,” he said.
Lancaster Stands Up, which is part of Pennsylvania Stands Up, has shared its documents and experience with other chapters of the organization, especially those involved in data center fights themselves, Arcoleo said.
“Where they’re winning, they’re stopping the data centers to begin with. Where they’re losing, they’re at least demanding that the community benefits agreement be at least as good as Lancaster’s,” he said.
Complementary solutions
CBAs are only one aspect of the major new strategies that states are rolling out for the data center boom.
Pennsylvania’s regulations, as well as the proposals from Illinois and Michigan, include provisions that protect ratepayers from bearing the cost of data center projects and prohibit developers from entering into certain nondisclosure agreements to maintain transparency.
Republican senators in Michigan say that the legislation is more talking points than substance. State Sen. Jim Runestad, assistant minority caucus chair of the Michigan Senate, has proposed a one-year moratorium on data centers. Absent a moratorium, developers may still be able to have their way over community’s needs, he said.
Mandating community benefits between local government and developers may mean that “some board, county board, city board, negotiates something for themselves, which may be a swimming pool close to the elected official’s backyard,” he said. “It’s all fluff.”
While CBAs can be valuable tools for some communities, blanket local zoning ordinances can provide many of its benefits, said Christina Libre, attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center.
