Minnesota Court Rules Faribault Data Center Review Violated the Law. Here's What That Means.
By: Sarah Horner, MCEA Communications Director
A judge just handed Minnesotans a big win in the fight to protect our natural resources and communities from the significant risks posed by hyperscale data center development.
On June 8, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that Faribault's environmental review of a proposed hyperscale data center didn't comply with state law. The City must now go back and do the analysis it should have done from the start: a full, transparent accounting of how this massive facility could affect water and energy resources, noise levels, and the quality of life for nearby residents.
This is exactly what MCEA went to court to achieve.
“This decision is a win for Faribault and all Minnesotans concerned about the impacts of hyper-scale developments in our state. It affirms that people have a right to know what is being proposed in their community and how it may impact their natural resources and way of life before their elected officials approve it,” MCEA’s Executive Officer, Kathryn Hoffman, said of the decision.
What went wrong in Faribault
When a developer proposed converting nearly 85 acres of farmland and woodland on the edge of Faribault into a campus of six massive server buildings, the City was required to complete an environmental review before moving forward. That review, in this case called an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW), is meant to give residents and officials the information they need to make informed decisions about whether a proposal is right for their community.
The Faribault EAW fell far short. For example, it estimated the data center's greenhouse gas emissions from electricity use at 98% lower than what MCEA's analysis indicated was realistic. During litigation, the City admitted that this lowball estimate had assumed the data center project would use no more electricity than a typical warehouse. In reality, data centers consume far more electricity than warehouses, and the Faribault data center project could require as much energy daily as the entire city of St. Cloud.
The environmental study also included little information on noise and noise mitigation, air pollution from on-site power generators, or how the Faribault project could contribute to broader environmental concerns caused by a wave of hyperscale data center projects hitting Minnesota all at once, such as impacts to the state’s climate targets and water resources.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency flagged the same problems in its public comment, calling the air quality analysis "deficient." The court ultimately agreed with MCEA on every major argument.
Why this win is bigger than Faribault
MCEA didn't take on this case in isolation. We currently have active lawsuits challenging inadequate environmental reviews of hyperscale data centers in Hermantown, Pine Island, and Monticello. Just days before the Faribault ruling, a judge in the Pine Island case ordered developers to pause construction until MCEA's challenge can be fully heard.
These cases are connected by a common thread: developers and local governments rushing massive, unprecedented projects through an environmental review process that was never intended for them.
While data centers are hardly new, hyperscale ones are in a different league. They are AI-driven industrial campuses that can consume millions of gallons of water a day for cooling, draw enormous amounts of electricity, generate significant noise and light pollution, and, if enough are built, put serious strain on our state’s already stressed groundwater supply and clean energy goals. If just ten of the nearly 20 proposals currently under consideration in Minnesota were built, for example, they would consume as much electricity as every household in the state combined.
Minnesotans deserve to know how these impacts could play out in their communities before projects advance, not after.
Faribault resident Susan Erickson said she’s grateful that her city officials have to go back and provide that information to her and her neighbors.
"This is a win for the environment, our community, and all future generations who deserve to live on a healthy planet,” Erickson said.
The fight continues
The Faribault ruling alone won’t stop other problematic hyperscale data center proposals from advancing. We need these novel developments to proceed transparently, with fully informed communities, and state guardrails in place to ensure our natural resources and residents are protected. That's a standard MCEA will keep fighting for, both in court and at the Capitol in future sessions.
In the meantime, MCEA’s CEO hopes the Faribault decision sends a message to the industry.
"The playbook of rushing massive data center proposals forward without disclosing their environmental impacts doesn't work in Minnesota. It's not consistent with our democratic values, and it violates our laws,” Hoffman said.
We'll keep you posted as these cases move forward. If you want to follow along, sign up for MCEA's email updates.
###