Despite heartfelt and fact-based testimony, the Metropolitan Development Commission (MDC) approved the rezoning of 467.66 acres in Franklin Township (near South Post Road and I-74) for a data center in an 8–1 decision. This ruling is an egregious slap in the face to residents, who now face the prospect of enduring water, air, noise, and light pollution, alongside increased traffic and other disruptive effects.
A preordained outcome cloaked as open deliberation
It was painfully clear—even before Deep Meadow Ventures finished its presentation—that the MDC had already made up its mind. Instead of pressing with probing questions, commissioners lobbed softballs that failed to challenge the petitioner’s carefully constructed narrative. Commissioner Gregg West, for instance, seemed more concerned with aesthetics than impact, asking whether the “future condition” drawings accurately captured the scale of the buildings and how the center would look from Post Road. These questions appeared designed to soothe suburban sensibilities rather than protect public health or safety.
Calderon’s gleaming pitch and the ugly reality behind it
Representing Deep Meadow Ventures (a front used by Google to obscure its involvement), attorney Joseph D. Calderon argued that the center would serve the public good by storing everything from emails to YouTube videos and operating 24/7 to meet digital demands. He framed the project as essential infrastructure, a benevolent cornerstone of modern life.
He also revealed that AES—the same utility company currently seeking another $30‑a‑month price hike for residents after already raising prices in 2024—recommended the site and would supply its power. Let that sink in: a company actively draining residents’ wallets is now being positioned as a champion of community interests. If that isn’t hypocrisy, what is?
IEDC’s dubious backing
Jim Schellinger, CEO of the newly formed Indianapolis Economic Development Committee, also offered his support. He expressed concerns about Deep Meadow’s chronic lack of transparency, yet simultaneously praised the project for its “benefits” to the community. His hollow praise tore down his own credibility in a failed attempt to appear balanced. If Google cannot be transparent now, how will it ever be held accountable?
The residents speak—and their words hit hard
Julie Goldsberry, vice president of the Greater Troy Neighborhood Association, spoke in defense of Franklin Township residents, dismantling the claim that the data center would serve the public good. She was not alone.
Nancy VanArendonk, president of the Franklin Township Historical Society, delivered a sobering reckoning:
“The information … showed the problems, the secrecy, the lack of cooperation … I had been involved with this for months. We worked for months with their attorney. I asked in a public meeting, ‘Who is this?’ and they said, ‘We’re not allowed to tell you; they have offices in the United States.’ They wouldn’t get back to us even after we provided an organization with our questions. If they won’t cooperate while trying to pass the zoning, what are the odds they’ll do so if we run into trouble after they start building?”
Her words captured the deep distrust and justified fear of those forced to be stakeholders in a project conducted in the shadows.
Data centers: Not innocent beasts—here’s the real cost
The outrage in Franklin Township is not only righteous but also backed by facts. Major reports and studies underscore that data centers are far from benign additions to a community. Consider the following:
- Water drain: Business Insider’s “The True Cost of Data Centers” notes that these facilities can guzzle millions of gallons per day—some consuming as much as small cities. In the U.S., data center power demand could soon exceed that of entire countries, with public health costs from related air pollution estimated between $5.7 billion and $9.2 billion annually. Worryingly, 40% of centers are in water-scarce regions, despite receiving generous tax breaks for creating negligible permanent jobs.
- Devouring water reserves: A report on Great Lakes states warns that new hyperscale data centers threaten to overwhelm local aquifers, with some facilities demanding over one million gallons daily. The report urges mandatory public disclosure of water use and stringent conservation standards.
- Noise and light pollution: Data centers generate industrial noise—mechanical whirring, HVAC fan hum, diesel generators—with some residents likening it to “an airplane engine idling that never leaves.” Sound can reach 92–96 dB(A), levels high enough to cause stress and sleep disruption, affecting residents less than 500 feet away.
- Environmental and health burden: A 2024 study estimated the public health toll of AI-driven data centers could reach $20 billion annually by 2030—double that of coal-based steelmaking—with the greatest burden falling on economically disadvantaged areas.
- AI’s Hidden Thirst: Commissioners were informed that the proposed data center would be planned to consume two to three million gallons of water per day—potentially over a billion gallons per year. Globally, AI data centers consume 560 billion liters annually, a number set to double by 2030.
This data is not merely academic; it provides a visceral example of the deleterious effects of unchecked capitalism. It reveals that what profit-hungry leviathans like Google and AES pitch as a public service is, in fact, environmental overreach cloaked in corporate PR.
Organizers understand: Head them off at the pass
Community organizers know that halting the data center before ground is broken offers the best—and perhaps only—chance of preventing irrevocable damage.
VanArendonk’s uncertainty is not paranoia. If the petitioners hid their identity and ignored residents during the pre-zoning stage, what hope is there for accountability after construction begins?
A community cornered—and resistance emerging
Residents are not powerless. They have witnesses on their side: from local watchdogs to global climate studies. Their best interests are protected not by profit-seeking corporations, but by common sense, science, and the power of organized resistance. They have each other.
Goldsberry and VanArendonk remind us that residents are not disposable. They are the legacy of a place, its memory, and its future. While the MDC’s vote may stand today, history will remember how this was fought—and at what cost.
Working-class Hoosiers deserve better than this. Much better.