Michigan residents voted down a $16 billion Stargate AI data center, then construction began anyway

[midian182]

A hot potato: While it's fair to say that a lot of people really dislike AI, those living near AI data centers hate the technology even more. The latest example of why sentiment against these facilities is so negative is the $16 billion Stargate AI data center, which is being built despite a township board voting to reject it.

Unsurprisingly, the few thousand residents of the small community of Saline Township in Washtenaw County, Michigan, were worried about OpenAI and Oracle's massive new $16 billion Stargate data center. Their concerns covered the usual issues: excessive water usage, the power draw on the regional grid, a huge increase in traffic, and the transformation of agricultural land into industrial campus.

The project, developed by Related Digital, was originally presented as a $7 billion facility before its price tag more than doubled. It is tied to Oracle and OpenAI's Stargate infrastructure push, the $500 billion plan to build the compute backbone needed for the next generation of AI services, including ChatGPT.

Saline Township Hall

Residents assumed they had killed the proposal last year when the township board voted 4-1 to reject the rezoning request. Two days later, Related Digital and the landowners sued the township, arguing that the rejection amounted to exclusionary zoning because there was no land zoned for industrial use. Within weeks, the township settled, and construction eventually began anyway.

Residents did get some perks from the deal. The township secured around $14 million in community benefits, including money for farmland preservation and the local fire department, along with environmental restrictions and limits on water use. Related Digital also says the facility will use a closed-loop cooling system rather than evaporative cooling, meaning ongoing water consumption should be far lower than the worst-case scenarios locals feared.

Also read: Amazon data center linked to rare cancers and miscarriages in Oregon, report warns

However, the power problem is another matter. The campus is expected to draw around 1.4 gigawatts of electricity from DTE Energy, roughly the output of a nuclear power plant.

Related Digital says Oracle will fund the infrastructure needed to serve the site and that existing ratepayers could even save money by spreading fixed grid costs across a larger customer base. But critics, including Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel's office, have challenged whether those protections are enough.

Michigan towns have clearly taken notice of what's happening in Saline. At least 19 municipalities have enacted moratoriums on new data center development, while Washtenaw County commissioners have encouraged more communities to do the same. A bipartisan state bill proposing a one-year statewide pause has also been introduced, though Governor Gretchen Whitmer and House Speaker Matt Hall oppose the measure.

AI data centers are doing little to endear themselves to the public. As we recently reported, these facilities are delaying Texas housing projects by hiring away electricians.

There was also the JPMorgan data center expansion that received a $77 million tax break despite being expected to create just one permanent job. Meanwhile, in Festus, Missouri, voters ousted half the city council after it approved a $6 billion AI data center.

Permalink to story:

Michigan residents voted down a $16 billion Stargate AI data center, then construction began anyway

 

[NumberNine]

Two days later, Related Digital and the landowners sued the township, arguing that the rejection amounted to exclusionary zoning because there was no land zoned for industrial use. Within weeks, the township settled, and construction eventually began anyway.

In that case why even bother buying land? The town is theirs now.

 

[pnntmp]

The title implies those building the datacenter simply ignored the law and started building, which is very obviously not the case (as it becomes clear from the article itself).
Who in their right mind would waste tons of money building something illegal?

The residents did not get "some perks" from the deal, they got millions of dollars they wouldn't have gotten otherwise, along with plenty of jobs ... not to mention the auxiliary positive effects for the local businesses.

I don't get it, what's the point in using every opportunity to spread AI hysteria?

 

[psycros]

Big Tech once again pushing us towards a dystopian future where the only jobs will be the dirtiest, low-paying ones. Who will buy their services and products when nobody can afford them?

 

[brucek]

To me the story is about whatever ridiculous law allowed this:

"Two days later, Related Digital and the landowners sued the township, arguing that the rejection amounted to exclusionary zoning because there was no land zoned for industrial use."

I'm going to assume a lot of detail was lost in that one sentence summary, but the idea that a massive industrial facility can force itself into any small town because that town did not already have a massive industrial facility is ludicrous. That's not an AI problem, that's a dumb law problem.

 

[pnntmp]

Big Tech once again pushing us towards a dystopian future where the only jobs will be the dirtiest, low-paying ones. Who will buy their services and products when nobody can afford them?

In this particular case, Big Tech ensured lots of well paying new jobs, along with millions of dollars. Without the datacenter, there would have been zero new jobs and zero dollars.
Isn't the worst possible "dystopian future" exactly the situation with zero jobs and zero dollars?

 

[Hecate91]

Yet another case of voting doesn't matter since the government only listens to corporations with massive kickbacks and incentives for those pushing for datacenter approval.
This isn't "AI hysteria" it's a slippery slope for a future where people get kicked off of their land because big corpo thinks a datacenter is more important than owning land or jobs for the average person.

 

[OortCloud]

The Big Tech firms in the US are utterly lawless nowadays. When the Republicans inevitably lose the next election and a proper administration that actually governs and adheres to the rule of law rather than money and corruption get back in power there is going to be such a reckoning for these ruthless arseho1es.

 

[ragreeen2646]

In this particular case, Big Tech ensured lots of well paying new jobs, along with millions of dollars. Without the datacenter, there would have been zero new jobs and zero dollars.
Isn't the worst possible "dystopian future" exactly the situation with zero jobs and zero dollars?

The number of local permanent jobs varies. Also will be data centers train local people for the jobs?

 

[pnntmp]

The number of local permanent jobs varies. Also will be data centers train local people for the jobs?

Yes, it varies indeed, but having more is better than having less, right?
Besides, the permanent jobs are not the only ones that matter. What's wrong with the temporary jobs? Again, having more is better than having less, right? Without a datacenter, you have neither permanent nor temporary jobs. With a datacenter, you have both kinds. Which is better?
As for the training, indeed the local people will be trained, if necessary, as that's usually the cheaper option compared to bringing in trained workers.

 

[brucek]

Yes, it varies indeed, but having more is better than having less, right?

It certainly depends on location.

I absolutely realize my life style depends on oil refineries, power plants, data centers, etc. However that does not mean I want a company to be able to buy 20 lots in my subdivision and plant one down next door to my house. Zoning has been a thing for hundreds of years for obvious reasons.

You're arguing that a data center should exist somewhere. But that's different than it should somehow be plunked down into a tiny village of farmers that did not have any zoning that allowed it and whose elected representatives voted 4-1 against it.

If the money & jobs are as great as you say, than there must be some people somewhere else who wanted them. That's where it should have gone.

 

[Megalomaniac]

Big Tech once again pushing us towards a dystopian future where the only jobs will be the dirtiest, low-paying ones. Who will buy their services and products when nobody can afford them?

Population will decline. It's already happening.

 

[acrossthestars]

So, it seems to me that, the optimistic outcome―from the perspective of these big tech companies―is that people don't have rights. Like, any rights. Humans become meatbags―fleshy resources to be used and disposed of, as needed.

The ideal world therefore, is somewhere between Judge Dread, where 3 million people live in abject poverty, in a massive skyscraper (ala Peachtree 1), and Cyberpunk, which is basically the same thing but now almost everyone has cybernetic modifications. Which means they have no rights AND are the property of those corporations, because otherwise "who maintains your implants?"

 

[The Eck]

To me the story is about whatever ridiculous law allowed this:

"Two days later, Related Digital and the landowners sued the township, arguing that the rejection amounted to exclusionary zoning because there was no land zoned for industrial use."

I'm going to assume a lot of detail was lost in that one sentence summary, but the idea that a massive industrial facility can force itself into any small town because that town did not already have a massive industrial facility is ludicrous. That's not an AI problem, that's a dumb law problem.

A city can’t just zone all industries out of existence, just like they can’t zone out all residential property. You forget that everyone has rights, even business owners

 

[KelVarnsen]

The title implies those building the datacenter simply ignored the law and started building, which is very obviously not the case (as it becomes clear from the article itself).
Who in their right mind would waste tons of money building something illegal?

The residents did not get "some perks" from the deal, they got millions of dollars they wouldn't have gotten otherwise, along with plenty of jobs ... not to mention the auxiliary positive effects for the local businesses.

I don't get it, what's the point in using every opportunity to spread AI hysteria?

The title doesn't imply that at all. Obviously they found a way to overcome the board's vote legally, and that's what the article is about.

The perks should be measured against the costs the community will incur over time from the data center. When taken in this context, the "perks" amount to chump change in the long term.

And there will be no auxiliary effects on local businesses because it will not produce enough jobs to impact the local community. They're just there to take advantage of cheap land and electricity, which will only drive up the costs of those things in the future.

I also highly doubt the vague environmental protections will actually address all the external costs the come from the center, but that's a somewhat separate issue.

 

[p51d007]

These "data centers" will eventually suck up all the power of the area requiring cut backs. And you know the PUBLIC will be the ones cutting back, NOT the data center.
Eventually, these will work out about as well at that Ivanpah Solar Power Facility that burns up hundreds of birds every year with the mirrors. Solar bypassed that thing long ago but they won't shut it down.

 

[acrossthestars]

A city can’t just zone all industries out of existence, just like they can’t zone out all residential property.

A city can do whatever it wants. It will pay the price, but if it chooses to do so, then so be it.

You forget that everyone has rights, even business owners.

People have whatever rights are enforced. Without some body of judiciary, to compel certain things to happen or not happen, there are no rights―merely vague notions of "civility".

 

[brucek]

A city can’t just zone all industries out of existence, just like they can’t zone out all residential property. You forget that everyone has rights, even business owners

Sure, an existing business owner with a previously permitted business ought to have some rights from not being erased over night.

Not sure how that extends to a new business vastly out of scale with anything around it somehow has the right to trample over the established zoning plan supported by elected policy makers. There's no universal right to make up your own zoning policy or self-issue permits for something you just dreamed up for either individuals or businesses.

Whoever this business is certainly has the right to operate a farm on land they own in that area. Not sure how that magically transforms into an entirely different business. Everyone else has to play by the same rules, why shouldn't they.

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

The Big Tech firms in the US are utterly lawless nowadays. When the Republicans inevitably lose the next election and a proper administration that actually governs and adheres to the rule of law rather than money and corruption get back in power there is going to be such a reckoning for these ruthless arseho1es.

What does this have to do with Republicans? The governor of Michigan Gretchen Whitmer (who would veto a 1 year AI pause) is a Democrat.

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

The title implies those building the datacenter simply ignored the law and started building, which is very obviously not the case (as it becomes clear from the article itself).
Who in their right mind would waste tons of money building something illegal?

The residents did not get "some perks" from the deal, they got millions of dollars they wouldn't have gotten otherwise, along with plenty of jobs ... not to mention the auxiliary positive effects for the local businesses.

I don't get it, what's the point in using every opportunity to spread AI hysteria?

Left out of the article is that property tax revenue is expected to quadruple. $10 million of new tax revenue annually covers the average income of 200 adults or almost 10% of residents: https://bridgemi.com/michigan-envir...ons-mount-as-data-centers-move-into-michigan/

 

[OortCloud]

What does this have to do with Republicans? The governor of Michigan Gretchen Whitmer (who would veto a 1 year AI pause) is a Democrat.

Because a certain human-horror-show has made it very clear he will encourage and protect his fellow horror-shows as they dump all over civilians...

Forbes Middle East English

Trump Blocks States from Enforcing Their Own AI Rules President Donald Trump has issued an executive order blocking states from enforcing their own artificial intelligence (AI) regulations, calling...

www.facebook.com

 

[johnASP]

The title implies those building the datacenter simply ignored the law and started building, which is very obviously not the case (as it becomes clear from the article itself).
Who in their right mind would waste tons of money building something illegal?

The residents did not get "some perks" from the deal, they got millions of dollars they wouldn't have gotten otherwise, along with plenty of jobs ... not to mention the auxiliary positive effects for the local businesses.

I don't get it, what's the point in using every opportunity to spread AI hysteria?

Technically, they did ignore the citizen vote. Their lawyers decided that they’d found a pressure point in the zoning regulations which they could use to twist the arm of local authorities by threatening a lawsuit, which would be incredibly hard to fight for such a small time.

So they literally told the citizens, that they won’t be deciding whether there’s and AI datacenter in their backyard, because the firms have better lawyers than the citizens do.

I believe the spirit of the headline conveys that accurately

 

[pnntmp]

Technically, they did ignore the citizen vote. Their lawyers decided that they’d found a pressure point in the zoning regulations which they could use to twist the arm of local authorities by threatening a lawsuit, which would be incredibly hard to fight for such a small time.

So they literally told the citizens, that they won’t be deciding whether there’s and AI datacenter in their backyard, because the firms have better lawyers than the citizens do.

I believe the spirit of the headline conveys that accurately

That's one giant (and rather mediocre) misinterpretation of the facts.
Nobody ignored citizen vote, because there was no citizen vote. Just some board of 5 guys voted, but they knew very well what they voted was illegal - that's why they immediately backed down when challenged.
Later on, an activist group financed by suspicious NGOs attempted to stop the datacenter again, this time by trying to force a public referendum - which got less than 10% support. That's the actual citizen vote.

 

[Lukili]

Maryland citizens slapped with $2 billion power grid upgrade bill for out-of-state AI data centers — state complains to federal energy regulators, says additional cost breaks ‘ratepayer protection pledge’ promises
News
By Jowi Morales last updated 10 hours ago
Aren't AI hyperscalers supposed to pay for these upgrades?

 

[bclaymiles]

Yet another case of voting doesn't matter since the government only listens to corporations with massive kickbacks and incentives for those pushing for datacenter approval.
This isn't "AI hysteria" it's a slippery slope for a future where people get kicked off of their land because big corpo thinks a datacenter is more important than owning land or jobs for the average person.

Were people kicked off their land? Was eminent domain employed in the matter or did land owners happily make millions when they agreed to sell?

The slippery slope is making broad assumptions based on inadequate information.