Crossposted from https://lemmy.world/post/50438867

Furious residents packing city-council meetings have become a familiar scene as proposals for data centers spark backlash in towns across America. But in Gilroy, Calif., known as the world’s garlic capital, there’s a twist: The $2 billion facility that residents are railing against is already being built. “Many if not most residents first learned about this project after construction had already begun,” Coleen Crew, an elementary-school teacher, told the council at a recent meeting. There were no public meetings or votes before a lone city staffer gave Amazon the green light last July to build a 438,500-square-foot data center on 56 acres of farmland 30 miles south of San Jose.

top 4 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 17 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Mayor Greg Bozzo said other big industrial projects have been approved in the same manner over the years, but didn’t cause any uproar.

“It didn’t bother them that a food-distribution center came to Gilroy without their engagement, but now it bothers them that a data center is coming to Gilroy without them having the possibility of engagement,” Bozzo said.

Nomitive determinism: he is a real fucking bozo. All these fucks need to be gone.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago

    Do those other warehouses suck shitloads of extra power and water in an already water-poor state that has rolling brownouts and sky-high power and water costs?

    No.

    So the people are right to know there’s a difference. Apparently mayors are too stupid to know.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    the old nancy pelosi shuffle

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    They can vote out the city and county leaders then change the zoning to warehouses only.

  • source
  • 22 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 117 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Mayor Greg Bozzo said other big industrial projects have been approved in the same manner over the years, but didn’t cause any uproar.

    “It didn’t bother them that a food-distribution center came to Gilroy without their engagement, but now it bothers them that a data center is coming to Gilroy without them having the possibility of engagement,” Bozzo said.

    “We…have an opportunity to change the way that we do business in Gilroy,” the mayor said. “We’re adapting to the times.”

    Seems like the article accidentally misspelled his name with an extra "z". What an absolutely shit take. The corruption here is so obvious.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 108 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Some government leaders signed nondisclosure agreements early in the process

    How can this be even remotely legal. You work for the public you cannot reasonably be held to an NDA that requires you to not tell your BOSS what you're fucking doing!

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 3 months ago*

    Look at what meta did in Louisiana. The governor called up the Speaker and said they needed to pass a blank bill because a powerful donor wanted it and they all got in line, passed the bill and filled it in at the 11th hour. What was in the bill? Why it was approval of a 6 square mile (3840 acre) data center with no oversight or public comment. Just approved one of the largest data centers in the world in the middle of the night.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 3 months ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 61 points 3 months ago (7 children)
  • [+] 7 points 3 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago

    I'm really starting to hate this technique in making titles. Tf does the age of the particular loophole they used matter? It implies that the problem is in using rules that have been around for more than 5 minutes rather than in the action of circumventing the rights of the citizens.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    when the illusion of choice is shattered will the dreamers wake up?

    probably not.

  • source