Data center

Cited court rulings against the county on the data center project — piecemealing, improper ministerial exemption, no EIR — and called for an investigation of officials and litigation spending.

Accused the Chair of using an advisory committee meeting as a personal podium and disputed her claims about data center incentives; demanded litigation cost figures.

Cited a court setback for developer Sebastian Rucci, millions in litigation costs, and questioned the data center advisory committee's makeup; urged putting the data center question on a special ballot.

Thanked Escobar and Cardenas-Singh for raising a data center ballot measure, said trust was damaged by the overturned lot merger, and asked whether cost is a real obstacle to a March 2028 vote.

Chair of the Data Center Advisory Committee presented the committee's unanimous resolution supporting the moratorium.

ACCE organizer from Brawley urged adoption of the moratorium and application of the committee's recommendations.

Retired El Centro senior cited fire, airport, and Kinder Morgan proximity concerns and urged a moratorium.

Argued the county shouldn't approve projects before protective rules exist, urging setbacks, fire standards, and evacuation planning first.

Described how he and four residents pulled their ballot initiative after being sued by developer attorney Sebastian Rucci, and urged the Board to act rather than wait until 2028.

Thanked Supervisor Escobar and urged the Board to vote on the ballot measure at the next meeting.

An Imperial student who skipped class to speak said an election lets both sides settle the question on the merits.

Pressed the Board to show courage and put the question on the ballot rather than fear the outcome.

Supported a ballot measure eventually, but only after the advisory committee produces facts on whether the valley can sustain data centers.

Said residents have attended meetings for over a year and deserve a vote, questioning whether Rucci's side would accept the outcome.

With Imperial Valley Equity and Justice, cited harms to air, water, and quality of life and urged a yes vote on the ballot measure.

Supported the ballot measure so residents can weigh data center pros and cons for future generations.

A UC Riverside PhD in environmental justice said the people have the right to decide directly.

Argued residents are now better informed than the Board and deserve a vote after a year of study.

A physician speaking in Spanish (translated) described data center emissions as endocrine disruptors linked to infertility, Alzheimer's, and fetal harm, urging a public vote.

Urged protection of the Colorado River and the Sonoran Desert's endemic species, saying people should decide.

A Holtville lifelong resident said let the people vote and questioned trading the valley's dignity for jobs.

IBEW 569 electricians union rep urged empowering the advisory committee and cited SB 886/887 protections for ratepayers.

IBEW 569 co-representative urged letting the balanced committee complete its research before any ballot measure.

A Calexico college student said data centers drive her classmates to leave the valley and urged the Board not to take their vote too.

An advisory committee member cited 3,000+ petition signatures and urged the Board to ask residents directly whether they want data centers.

Said community trust in government is broken and urged giving power back to the people through a vote.

Still supported the moratorium but asked the county to draft it to survive a legal challenge.

Praised data center critic Jake Tyson, saying the moratorium vote exists because of his efforts, and predicted more resignations among officials.

Complained the committee moved its meeting location without notifying the public, leaving residents showing up to an empty room, and questioned its separate website.

Criticized the Board's transparency and warned about GM's lithium pullout and possible Ford withdrawal, while praising the advisory committee's leadership.

Questioned the data center committee's bylaws and raised concerns about Sunbeam Little League's suspended nonprofit status and lack of financial transparency.

Criticized the county's rush on the data center and poor roads, asking how residents' concerns reach the advisory committee.

Opposed hyperscale AI data centers, demanding public accounting of infrastructure costs, environmental protections, and campaign contribution disclosures.

Praised the planned McCabe Elementary school and 1,600-home development as a win for local jobs and education, and urged the county to prioritize permanent community benefits over data centers and lithium.

Acknowledged Supervisor Escobar admitting error on the lot merger, urged the Board to call a special election on data centers, and questioned whether Dr. Lang withheld a GIS report from the Board for seven months.

Cited the judge's ruling overturning the lot merger approval and resignations of county officials, warned against gambling the county's future on data centers, and called for a special election to ban them.

Asked for a second moratorium, supervisor term limits, and a special election letting voters decide on data centers.

Celebrated the court ruling as a public victory, credited citizen pressure, and called for resignations of officials he named.

Laid out detailed conditions any data center contract should include: developer-paid infrastructure, renewable power, recycled closed-loop water, and distance from homes and schools.

Demanded to know how the county will protect Victoria Homes residents after the moratorium was invalidated, saying the GIS risk report was ignored.

Said the court ruling proved the county bypassed state law and called on four supervisors and the CEO to resign.

A 21-year-old El Centro resident living near the site asked the board to pass a legally airtight moratorium for the sake of children growing up with pollution.

Supported responsible data center development near Victoria Ranch, saying the community needs jobs and investment, and noted he lives next to the proposed site.

Cited the project's economic study of 1,688 construction jobs and $2.95 billion impact, and urged the county to compete for AI infrastructure investment with facts rather than fear.

Representing Victoria Homes, she urged responsible development, citing failed environmental reviews at the Salton Sea and Hell's Kitchen and objecting to a data center next to residents.

Argued the county needs jobs and tax revenue after the Spreckels closure, and said water allocations leave plenty available for the data center.

Accused the board of pushing public comment to the end, restricting social media comments, and refusing to answer questions about the Imperial data center project and an alleged NDA.

A lifelong valley resident urged a fair evaluation of a proposed data center, citing a study projecting $100 million a year and 1,688 construction jobs, and asked for expert answers on water and power concerns.

Announced a court victory over a data center developer, called for a full ban on data centers in the valley, and demanded the board and county leadership resign.

Encouraged the board to support the data center, citing the commissioned economic study's projections and asking what legacy the board wants on economic development.

Supported the extension but demanded it end in a permanent ban, arguing the ordinance still lets applications be processed as a waiting room for developers.

Supported the extension, said farmers just want to farm, and criticized the county's transparency on the project.

Spoke in favor of extending the moratorium.

Introduced herself as an applicant for the education seat, describing her background in healthcare, education and small business.

Reviewed the applicant list, called it strong, and wished the board well in its voting.

Opposed the committee entirely, calling it government waste and political cover, and demanded a ban on industrial-scale data centers with full public accountability.

Congratulated applicants and praised the transparent selection rules, saying the public will be watching the process.

Said the county is still accepting data center applications despite the moratorium, calling it a broken promise, and urged the board to resolve the litigation and implement a real moratorium.

Cited lawsuits elsewhere over noise, water and air promises, questioned the legality of accepting applications during a moratorium, and warned water is finite in the drought-stricken West.

A working professional with autism, she asked that data centers be kept away from residences because constant electrical noise can permanently harm people with neurological conditions.

Newly appointed committee member urged extension, comparing data centers to solar and wind projects that brought few local jobs while exporting benefits and leaving the environmental footprint here.

A 20-year resident, he warned about water consumption, rising electric bills, diesel backup generators, noise and property values, and asked the board to let SECA complete its report.

In general public comment, she connected data centers to threats against bees — Westmoreland is the honey capital per capita — citing EMF stress, heat islands and a halted Meta data center project.

IBEW Local 569 representative urged rejection of the extension and instead asked for workforce standards, community benefit agreements and clean on-site power requirements.

Demanded Supervisor Kelley account for over $150 million tied to Lithium Valley, called for the Board to stop processing data centers and release records, and referenced a town hall where attendees raised hands saying they don't trust the Board.

Urged the Board to rescind the notice of exemption for the data center and require a full EIR, citing water use of up to 750,000 gallons daily, grid strain and noise impacts near homes.

Asked the Board again to protect Victoria Ranch from the data center, warning of PM10 pollution from idled farmland and lithium battery fire risks, and said she still faces build-or-sell decisions eight months in.

Criticized supervisors for skipping a Brawley town hall on the data center, noted El Centro's refusal to sell wastewater to data centers, questioned fire readiness, and urged a smaller advisory committee.

Demanded resignations, a moratorium date, and answers on the data center's permitting and the lot merger court challenge.

Fearful the data center will surround her development; asked how the board will protect residents and invited all to a July 6 town hall.

Criticized the board's leadership, the lot merger, and Supervisor Hawk's walkout of a town hall.

A tech industry worker from Salton City said data centers are a speculative bubble serving surveillance and military uses, and that no cancer risk increase is acceptable.

Supported the committee but said its findings should come after the November election so new board members can consider them.

A landowner in the Mesquite Lake industrial area opposed the moratorium, saying he and his partner have invested millions trying to develop industrial property there.

Urged yes votes on both items, asked for public noticing of committee meetings, a 30-day public comment period on recommendations, a January 2027 deadline, and voiding of the Imperial and Mesquite projects.

A Quechan and Lakota tribal member urged consultation on sacred sites and opposed development that ignores tribal voices and limited water.

A mother ceded her time to her daughter, who said she doesn't want the data center because of heat, noise, and risk to families; the mother cited her son's asthma and autism.

Submitted a 50-page document and demanded the moratorium apply retroactively to pending projects, asking counsel for a yes-or-no answer.

Asked why the Board isn't listening to residents and called for all supervisors except Cardenas-Singh to resign.

Argued past economic development promises (prisons, solar, lithium) never materialized and urged the county to invest the $12 million public benefit fund in community institutions instead of data centers.

Compared Imperial to Modesto and Fresno, arguing the county can grow its economy without data centers and criticizing Supervisor Kelley's leadership.

Argued the developer's new 'compromise' on buffers and relocation proves residents' original concerns were right all along.

Called for the resignation of four supervisors, the CEO, assistant CEO, and two planning directors, citing public records about the Aten and Clark project and pending litigation.

Argued the valley's economy funnels public wealth to private interests and suggested simply defining and banning hyperscale data centers.

An Imperial resident said opposition to data centers is broad, not a small vocal group, and that her representative called opponents 'noise.'

Noted other county projects faced no such pushback and urged the Board to reconsider, citing water, electricity, air quality, and CEQA concerns.

Vice chair of the Boulevard Planning Group linked AI data centers to mass surveillance via Flock cameras and ICE data sharing, raising Fourth Amendment concerns.

Supported the moratorium but said it must stop pending projects too, and criticized the committee as government 'grading its own homework' unless the public can review its work.

Questioned claims of ample water, citing drying lakes and the Colorado River crisis, and asked who would actually build and operate the data center.

Urged the Board to act with courage and wisdom and stated her support for the moratorium.

Supported both items but said the moratorium must cover pending projects, and demanded the Imperial hyperscale project be voided and subjected to CEQA.

Called the moratorium 'garbage' and demanded a full ban, listing roughly ten data center projects in the county pipeline.

A Calexico resident said there is no such thing as a good data center, criticized the out-of-area developer, and urged a permanent moratorium.

Sierra Club's chapter director supported the transparent process, the moratorium, and CEQA's role, urging environmental considerations stay central to the committee's work.

Supported item 16 but said the board should ultimately ban hyperscale AI data centers, citing emergency response readiness and water security.

Called a ban pro-community, said profit shouldn't be the priority, and urged supervisors to pick a side.

Said the county only acted after seven months of pressure, criticized holding the discussion during work hours, and said approving the committee without the moratorium makes no sense.

Questioned whether construction jobs actually go to locals, cited data center disasters and water use in 115-degree heat, and raised the sixth mass extinction.

Cited data center fires and failures worldwide, argued a pause isn't a solution, and urged a ban.

With the California State Building and Construction Trades Council, said the pause shows the Board is listening, and urged inclusion of open-minded members on the committee.

Supported the committee but not the moratorium, urging the county not to send the message it is 'closed for business.'

Representing 500,000 construction workers statewide, supported the committee but opposed the moratorium, citing legal precedent and examples like Boardman, Oregon's $49 million annual tax revenue.

A young resident said the community doesn't want a data center and asked for an outright ban, saying it benefits outside corporations, not the valley's youth.

With IBEW 569, urged the community to use the 45 days to build solutions and asked that active residents be considered for the committee.

Supported both items but asked whether the moratorium covers current projects and whether developers will get tax breaks or incentives.

An electrician who supported both items, urged no tax breaks for developers and that money stay in the valley.

With the Building and Construction Trades Council, supported the 45-day moratorium and committee as a path to balanced policy.

With IBEW Local 569, supported the item despite reservations about the moratorium, citing long-term jobs.

Of DeBose Design Group, supported the committee with economic development representation but opposed the moratorium, and argued the first data center project would keep IID energy sales local.

President of the Imperial County Building and Construction Trades Council said the trades support the agenda item and will help however they can.

An infrastructure developer supported the moratorium but argued modern data centers use closed-loop cooling and may have less impact than farming, and suggested special levies for community benefit.

With LiUNA Local 1184, supported the advisory committee but urged rejection of the moratorium, saying it pushes jobs and investment elsewhere.

Argued the moratorium's exemption and exit language makes it meaningless and questioned what benefit data centers bring.

Opposed the data center, citing energy demand, water use, diesel generators, noise, and minimal permanent jobs.

Criticized the lot merger vote, demanded a 45-day moratorium under Gov. Code 65858, and said data centers should be banned outright.

Announced she submitted an agenda request for a June 16 moratorium vote and questioned the Board's constitutional reasoning on the lot merger.

Said the Sierra Club lawsuit validates his cure-and-correct demand, questioned the missing $10 million Lithium Valley grant records, and raised conflict-of-interest claims about data center backers.

Asked the Board to put the data center question on the November ballot, noting several cities have already passed moratoriums.

Argued the county cannot spare water for data centers given Colorado River shortages, and dismissed promised job creation as unfulfilled.

Supported a moratorium but cautioned against a total ban, which invites lawsuits; suggested IBEW legal advisors help craft ordinances.

Delivered an extended critique linking AI data centers to military applications and foreign policy, and urged opposition to the resolution.

Called the resolution a Trojan horse, questioned the 1,000-foot setback, and said firefighters lack training and equipment for data center fires.

Urged the Board not to pass the resolution, calling it cover for the next data center application, and challenged Escobar and Cardenas-Singh to initiate a moratorium.

Demanded to know who wrote the guidelines, called for enforceable ordinances rather than guidelines, and urged a ban.

Read a statement from Congressman Raul Ruiz opposing the data centers and urging local officials to protect public health and water.

Presented detailed written recommendations, questioned whether the resolution applies to the current project, and urged an independent consultant.

Criticized the 1,000-foot buffer, the absence of health impact assessments, and the unidentified authorship of the guidelines.

Argued guidelines and resolutions lack legal force and demanded an ordinance plus an immediate moratorium.

Urged rejection of the resolution in favor of a one-year moratorium and a binding ordinance, noting the by-right loophole in specific plans.

Called the resolution a press release rather than a safeguard, criticizing its discretionary 'county determines' loopholes and lack of a moratorium.

Spoke in support of the county's guidelines effort and encouraged an advisory committee including labor representatives.

Called herself pro-development but said the resolution is incomplete and urged a moratorium to get it right.

Speaking for Imperial Valley Equity and Justice, said the resolution falls far short and noted Lithium Valley allows 1.3 million square feet of data centers by right.

Urged a no vote on the resolution and a yes on a moratorium, citing the cities' actions and the by-right CEQA bypass.

Compared the county's 'encouraged' standards unfavorably to China's mandatory data center requirements and urged a ban.

Asked for a moratorium, noting the public still lacks basic information on energy, water, and costs after seven months.

Spoke for growth and jobs, urging the Board to create economic opportunity locally rather than exporting energy and water benefits elsewhere.

Opposed the resolution as insufficient, urging a moratorium until independent studies on water, power, and agricultural impacts are done.

Called data centers extraction, not progress, and urged rejection of the project and a moratorium.

Questioned why the item was scheduled on election day and accused the Board of self-interest.

Argued that if 200 residents show up to speak, the Board must hear all of them — public participation is a right.

Thanked the community for raising voices, opposed a total ban, liked that the resolution puts costs on developers, and suggested a broad advisory committee.

Speaking for COLAB's 200 member businesses, supported the guidelines framework as the right approach over a moratorium.

Called the resolution shameful and self-serving, demanded a 3-5 mile buffer, and urged a moratorium as the Board's last chance.

A mother speaking with her young daughter urged the Board not to build the data center, saying it will make people sick.

Defended data centers for the economic development corporation, correcting what he called misinformation on water, generators, and tax benefits.

Speaking for the state building trades, opposed a moratorium, praised the recent local-hire ordinance, and asked for a seat on an ad hoc committee.

On her third appearance, asked why the Board won't listen, questioned water affordability, and said no to the data center.

Said the resolution doesn't go far enough, doesn't require CEQA, and asked the Board to consider a ban or at least a moratorium.

Cited a news investigation alleging a charity front for an ICE detention center pulled tax breaks, and demanded the county recover the money and act transparently.

Questioned how the data center project was approved without community notice and asked for a county investigation.

Cited Imperial Valley's 3.8/5 vulnerability and 5/5 water scarcity ratings, questioned DC trips with project insiders, and demanded the missing RFP.

Questioned giving a million gallons of water a day to a computer when residents face heat, asthma, and poverty; cited other regions' data-center struggles.

Asked for an update on Escobar's direction for a data-center siting ordinance and urged a Government Code 65858 moratorium; questioned Hawk's land comments.

Criticized ongoing data center lawsuits and questioned Supervisor Hawk's campaign financing disclosures, calling the situation embarrassing during an election season.

Accused supervisors of coordinating with developers, submitted another cure-and-correct letter over alleged Brown Act violations on the April 7 lot merger, and noted the developer is now suing the county over the right to vote on the project.

Thanked the Board and staff for showing up, opposed the data center's use of local water and power, and pledged to support community-driven growth like Acosta's microgreens project.

Said she represents the whole county, not just one city, and opposed any polluting project anywhere in Imperial Valley, citing high local rates of autism and asthma; also asked about a retroactive moratorium.

Demanded a written public apology from Chairwoman Price for his April 7 arrest, denied threatening her, and urged a moratorium on the data center while crediting Supervisor Cardenas-Singh for voting no.

Said leaked emails showed the board knew of the harms, called the conduct 'evil,' and promised voters would recall or unseat members in November.

Disavowed threats but offered engineering ideas — sound dampening, glycol cooling — to mitigate data center impacts, saying the community has spoken against the project.

A Boulevard planning group officer warned about aquifer impacts and criticized out-of-town, paid union presence at the April 8 meeting.

Said the county split the project into pieces to dodge CEQA and joined calls for resignations of staff involved in the emails.

Called the project extraction rather than development and urged investment in local hydroponic farming and microgreens that build skills and keep resources in the valley.

Read a November GIS email detailing battery storage risks near Victoria Ranch and schools and demanded the CEO and involved staff resign.

Criticized the county for accepting misleading developer claims and asked whether the project violates federal noise and quiet communities laws, noting it sits one mile from a school.

Mourned friend Kevin Keyes, who died by suicide after facing scrutiny for opposing the data center, and demanded the board meet the community on its own ground.

Read from public records act emails he called damning, including a developer consultant's 'doomed' email and CEO responses, and asked why CEQA wasn't triggered.

Accused the board of a governance pattern favoring the developer and formally served Chairwoman Price with a notice of intention to recall under Elections Code Section 11021.

A former auditor said District 5 residents want water, electricity, and cost specifics, real job numbers, and a slowed process with full environmental review.

Said most veterans he talks to oppose the project and argued the county should support farmers rather than a data center that could harm agriculture.

Thanked Supervisor Cardenas-Singh for her lot merger vote, cited the county's own GIS risk findings, and asked how the board can approve land actions enabling known hazards.

Announced endorsements from the IV Dems (including recalls of Price and Kelley), then demanded the board cure and correct the April 7 vote on the data-center lot merger, saying the public was barred from discussing a project the board itself relied on. Says he's filed with the grand jury and has CPRA requests pending.

Said it's been nearly a month since the March 26 special meeting on the AI hyperscale data center and the county still hasn't answered the public's questions. 'The public is watching, and so am I.'

Described being arrested and jailed for six hours after the April 7 meeting, said he was exercising constitutional rights, urged the Board to revote the item, and announced a May 7 court date.

Came to support the lot merger but was redirected to the public hearing; later spoke in favor, saying the land has been industrial for decades and state regulations will protect the community.

A music teacher from Imperial who urged Chairwoman Price to lead with integrity and oppose the project; later testified the road vacation and merger amount to piecemealing.

A District 5 resident who asked the board to form an ad hoc committee with community representation before critical decisions, noting the county lacks adequate hospital care.

Executive director of Access to Thrive who questioned the closure of the overflow room, said out-of-town union members were taking seats from locals, and urged the board to invest in community health.

Announced the Imperial Valley Data Center Prohibition Act will be on the November ballot, said he was sued by the developer, and declared a recall campaign against Chairwoman Price is underway.

Demanded the board pause all action and require a full EIR under CEQA, citing transparency concerns and proximity to neighborhoods and schools.

A LiUNA Local 1184 representative backed the project for union jobs, a project labor agreement, and apprenticeships amid high county unemployment.

The City of Imperial's city manager said its lawsuit is about process, not whether the project happens, and described settlement discussions with the county and developer.

Asked whether the board can require CEQA by resolution, when data centers entered the zoning code, and about developer agreements with local agencies.

A 21-year-old who said the backlash is unprecedented and quoted Loudoun County residents' regrets about living near data centers.

An El Centro research scientist who called blanket approval 'grossly negligent' given Colorado River shortages and asked where water cuts would fall.

Called it a million-square-foot footprint too close to homes and schools and asked for a binding contract on promised benefits.

A lifelong resident who said the board would be 'instrumental' in destroying the community if it approves the project.

A school teacher who cited rising July temperatures in Loudoun County since data centers arrived and urged investigation of local heat impacts.

Asked what protects residents if energy demand surges, citing South Lake Tahoe, and noted rising temperatures and greenhouse gases near data centers.

An El Centro resident asking what safeguards exist on air, water, and electric rates if no CEQA review is required.

A Victoria Ranch resident who said residents are being asked for decisions without full information and are 'tired of being gas-lit.'

An SDSU Imperial Valley student who opposed the project over water use, toxins, asthma rates, and energy strain.

Asked the board to consider a six-month moratorium on data center development and cited Monterey Park's actions.

Cited the county's failure to meet federal air standards, questioned the developer's background, and said the Planning Commission vote actually failed.

Lives on the fence line; worried about the berm, dust, and her grandson's asthma, and asked who pays the economist.

A 38-year LiUNA member who supported the project for construction jobs, describing members struggling to find work.

A public health expert who detailed the county's existing air nonattainment, water stress, heat, and noise impacts from data centers.

A student who questioned local job guarantees, BESS fire liability, AI industry viability, and the developer's background.

Read firsthand accounts from Memphis residents near the xAI data center about health and noise impacts.