Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
A dozen members of the Indianapolis City-County Council have spoken in opposition to Google’s planned data center in Franklin Township.
The controversial project cleared a key hurdle last week when the Metropolitan Development Commission voted 8-1 in a ballot vote (instead of a voice vote) to grant preliminary approval to the company’s request to rezone nearly 470 acres for the project. But opponents, including the district’s councilor, are hoping that the city’s legislative leaders will halt the rezoning in the coming weeks.
Republican Councilor Michael-Paul Hart represents the area in which the Google project would be constructed, on the far southeast side of Marion County. Typically, rezoning cases that the Metropolitan Development Commission approves are brought to the council as part of a package that can include multiple projects. If councilors take no action, the commission’s decision stands.
Councilors may call down a specific zoning case and request a public hearing be held at a subsequent council meeting. A majority of the council must approve this action.
Hart plans to do this at the council’s Sept. 8 meeting, with the hope of stopping Google’s controversial development, which has prompted concern from residents, in part, that the project will strain energy and environmental resources.
Six Republicans and six Democrats have publicly come out in support of his efforts. Historically, councilors have supported a district’s representative regarding divisive projects.
In a statement Friday, Republicans on the council said their caucus would adhere to “traditional norms and customs” of the body, “under which members should defer to the district councilor on rezoning cases.”
Democrats Jesse Brown, Kristin Jones, Frank Mascari, John Barth, Andy Nielsen and Jared Evans have made public statements against the data center.
Barth wrote in a statement posted to social media that the project “raises major concerns about water use, enormous energy demand, noise, and the long-term loss of land that could be used for housing or community projects.”
What happens now?
When Hart moves to call down the proposal on Sept. 8, a majority of councilors must vote to schedule a public hearing for the measure. That means that just one more councilor, aside from those who have already publicly supported Hart’s move, needs to vote in favor of holding a hearing.
The public hearing could potentially be held Sept. 22, at the council’s next regularly scheduled meeting, but Hart told IBJ it may be delayed because the timeframe gives little room for notice of the public hearing.
After the public hearing, three-fifths of the council, or 15 councilors, must vote to adopt, amend, or reject the proposal. Hart told IBJ that he’s hopeful that 20 councilors will come out in opposition to the measure in advance of that vote. And he’s optimistic his colleagues will defer to his position when considering the rezone.
It’s a precedent he said he followed in the case of a recent vote on an affordable housing project in Council President Vop Osili’s district.
“His request was that we support it, and so I supported it,” Hart said. “There is that mutual understanding between councilors, regardless of party, that you [as the district councilor] know best.”
The Metropolitan Development Commission last week also introduced a request to consider a 10-year property tax abatement for the first building planned for the complex, which has an estimated cost of $314 million.
Total estimated costs for the first phase of the campus total $914 million, including an investment of $600 million for equipment to power the facility.
The abatement must still be considered by the commission and presented for a public hearing on Oct. 1.
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to clarify that the vote was held via ballot rather than by voice, which prevents immediate public disclosure of each member’s vote.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
Very happy for the work Michael Paul Hart is doing for the community. I was shocked that the Metropolitan Development Commission voted 8-1 in a secret ballot to grant preliminary approval. They clearly have no concern for the people residing in the area. Perhaps the decision makers at the Metropolitan Development Commission need to be replaced. Hopefully when the mayor is replaced, they will depart with him and his ideology that has generally hurt the very people he is supposed to serve and protect.
Secret ballat???? Of course!
Seriously? You’d prefer an industrial park (which is the alternative use that’s been proposed) with the traffic, semi-truck traffic and the related strain on road infrastructure?
The excessive water and electricity use and demands are the reason for folks opposing this use.
Kevin P.: +1
You might get more jobs with an industrial center.
Yes, David. We would. You apparently haven’t wrapped your mind around the incredible energy demand of these facilities. Rate payers pick up the tab. In total this data center will generate about 10 permanent jobs. Its a terrible investment for the community .
Chasing away business worked well for AOC.
New York is doing quite well, as for DC, not so much, even with their watered down Arlington project. So, AOC didn’t “chase” away anything. Just admit you’re obsessed with her for other reasons and move on.
As for this project, business is very welcome in Indy, always has been, but not the sort of massive soul-sucking projects like this one with its incredible electrical and water needs that will overwhelm existing infrastructure.
In today’s Bloomberg news there is an article regarding electrical rate increases and these power consumers…
High correlation between having data centers and higher electrical bills for the general population.
We are in unknown territory today with AI coming. To snub Google would be foolish. We vote in these people who don’t have a strategic mind.
David G – Unknown territory is all the more reason to put a pause on such projects that demand enormous amounts of energy – that require extra infrastructure to support the extra demand, and stress out the grid – and consequently impose the extra costs on everyday rate payers.
What a run-on sentence. Didn’t feel like editing it. 🙂
David, it’s not like data centers are going to lead to economic development. Google isn’t going to locate a new technology center filled with high paying jobs here to be closer to the data center.
There are rural areas around the country, West Virginia, for example, that in a fit of strategic genius welcomed these centers. The electrical consumption, and the noise emanating from these centers all day and night have created hell holes in rural America. That’s part of why they want to build them near urban areas, in the hopes no one in a city will notice them, and no one will notice the impact on their electrical bills as these centers require vast new electrical sources. I can’t wait for a new Marble Hill or Three Mile Island on the south side of Indy…
Ditto Kevin P.
Hope all goes well as I think this is great!
I look forward to a public hearing on this project, as I am interested in learning more about the risks data centers pose to the community. I also hope these risks will be presented as results of analyses of this particular site, versus talking points such as, “…in West Virginia …”