Press Release: Court Rules Environmental Review Adequate in Lakeville Development
Court Rules Environmental Review Adequate in Lakeville Development
Case confirmed previous considerations to build a data center are now inactive
DATE: May 27, 2026 CONTACT: Sarah Horner, MCEA, shorner@mncenter.org, 612-868-3024
St. Paul, Minnesota – Today, a judge from Minnesota’s 1st Judicial District determined that the environmental study of a potential large-scale Lakeville development, previously under consideration for a hyper-scale data center, complied with the law.
The Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA) filed the challenge last August, arguing that the environmental review, called an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR), was overly vague, especially for a project with such significant environmental implications.
While the City’s environmental review did not state whether the project under consideration was a data center, study documents included land-use codes associated with data centers, referenced "computers and ventilation systems" as a primary source of potential noise, and compared the site to other developments described as "technology parks" — language commonly used in environmental studies of hyper-scale data centers.
Documents released during the lawsuit's discovery period went further. They revealed that City officials had fielded data center inquiries about the project and connected data center developers to the study's consultants. They also showed the consultant recommending "vagueness" in the project's description, rather than explicitly mentioning data centers, to "keep the AUAR process rolling."
Despite clear plans for a potential data center, the City’s study failed to adequately analyze the environmental impacts of hyper-scale data centers, which require enormous amounts of water and energy to operate.
The lawsuit later revealed that the City's data center discussions ultimately stopped advancing.
“While we disagree with the judge’s determination that the study was adequate, we are pleased that this lawsuit was able to provide clarity for the community about the intentions for this previously secretive development and assure them that, at least as of now, no data center is planned,” said MCEA staff attorney Luke Norquist. “Furthermore, the Court acknowledged that the City’s vague analysis ‘very well may limit the future applicability’ of the study as a path for data center development. Put simply: today’s order does not green-light a data center project in Lakeville.”
MCEA will continue to follow this proposal to ensure no plans for a hyper-scale data center re-emerge. If a project does come forward, MCEA remains committed to ensuring the project complies with state law and undergoes adequate environmental study.
Lakeville resident Charles Banks said he’ll also be watching the City’s next move.
“I’m frustrated with City Officials for their lack of transparency in informing the citizens of Lakeville of the real intent for this proposal,” Banks said. “I’m committed to asking questions and seeking answers if a project moves forward to the permitting stage.”
The Lakeville case is one of several lawsuits MCEA filed challenging the inadequate environmental review of hyper-scale data centers proposed for communities across Minnesota. Active cases remain ongoing in Hermantown, Pine Island, Monticello, and Faribault. In all the remaining cases, the developments in question are confirmed data centers.
Hyper-scale data centers, which dwarf traditional data centers in scope and scale, have never operated in Minnesota before. The AI-driven facilities can require millions of gallons of water annually for cooling and vast amounts of energy to power their high-tech operations. They also carry implications for sulfide mining, given the metals involved, and can generate significant noise and light pollution for nearby community members.
Beyond impacts on individual communities, the wave of nearly 20 potential hyperscale data centers in Minnesota collectively poses risks to the state’s already strained groundwater supply and clean energy goals. For example, if just ten of the data centers under consideration are built, they would consume as much electricity as all 2.3 million of the state’s households combined.
Many proposals have been marked by secretive processes, relying on non-disclosure agreements and intentionally vague environmental reviews that leave residents without basic information about what is being proposed or how it might affect their communities.
In addition to challenging inadequate environmental review, MCEA and a coalition of other community groups and environmental organizations have called for greater transparency in the hyper-scale data center development process by banning the use of non-disclosure agreements. They are also seeking statewide regulations to help ensure communities’ and the state’s water and energy resources are adequately protected.
Some developers in Minnesota have pointed to voluntary clean energy commitments announced after their proposals underwent environmental review as evidence that their projects meet a high bar and will benefit Minnesota. MCEA welcomes clean energy commitments and wants to see them realized — but voluntary promises are not a substitute for enforceable standards.
“Investments in clean energy should not allow companies to skirt the transparent and democratic processes of our robust environmental laws,” said Kathryn Hoffman, Executive Director of MCEA. “Minnesotans deserve more than a corporation’s word.”
Questions and/or interview requests regarding today’s decision can be sent to Sarah Horner at the contact information provided at the top of this release.
###