Area residents forcefully state opposition to data center plan

Quoddy area residents forcefully stated their opposition to a proposed underwater AI data center off Eastport during an August 5 public hearing on two proposed ordinances for the city. Following the hearing, the city council unanimously adopted a six-month moratorium on data centers at its August 12 meeting.

The hearing, which drew more than 175 people to the Shead High School gym, was preceded by a rally outside the port authority building, where a dozen speakers outlined their reasons for opposing the project. During the hearing, Dwayne Tomah of Sipayik rallied the crowd by stating, "We need to come together as one voice, one people. Let's do this together." Noting that people in the area had previously stopped the LNG proposals and the mining project in Pembroke, he said, "We're going to stop this no matter what it takes." He urged, "Please think about the animals, everything that's being affected. This will impact us for seven generations."

The hearing was held by the city council on citizen-initiated ordinances that would ban large-scale data centers and require voter approval for commercial and industrial development over a certain size in the city. However, because of a city charter provision on proposed ordinances concerning land use regulations covered by the comprehensive plan, city officials believe that review by the planning board is required. A planning board hearing on the ordinances is slated for Monday, August 24, at 6 p.m. Following the hearing, the planning board will make a recommendation to the city council. The council then is scheduled to meet on September 9 and may accept the ordinances or send them out for a vote by the city's residents during the November election.

While the city is reviewing the ordinances, though, city councillor Karen Raye had proposed that a six-month moratorium on large-scale data centers be enacted by the council. Raye noted at the end of the August 5 hearing that the council has a responsibility to ensure that "the ordinances are correct and enforceable."

'Stand for what you stand on'

About 25 people spoke at the hearing, with the crowd breaking into applause after each speaker. The hearing drew quite a few people from the area around Passamaquoddy and Cobscook bays, who all were given the opportunity to speak.

Three of the speakers were from the Passamaquoddy Tribe, including Pos Bassett, the tribal chief at Sipayik, who stated that, while the tribe is not taking a position on the ordinances, it is opposed to data centers in areas with sensitive natural resources. "Sipayik will continue to watch proposals that threaten our fisheries and our cultural resources."

Three area legislators also spoke, including Rep. Aaron Dana, who is running for the Maine Senate. The tribe's representative stated that the bay "is part of who we are. Our ancestors harvested" the fish and other species in the bay. "We have a sacred responsibility to protect them for generations to come." Noting the project would be using "unproven technology," he said the possible effects are unknown. "We should not entertain gambling with the ecosystem," he said. "Let's stand together in solidarity and not allow a data center in our bay."

Stephen Kamm of Eastport said the warming of Passamaquoddy Bay's waters by the data center would have a great effect on marine life. He used to lobster in Long Island Sound, but today "there are zero lobsters" there, he said, adding that a study by the Environmental Protection Agency found that the decline was caused by the increase in water temperatures. With the Gulf of Maine warming faster than 99% of the world's oceans, adding to that temperature rise would be "insanity," he stated.

That point was echoed by Julie Keene of Trescott, who has fished commercially for years. She commented, "Not one thing happens in the waters around here that doesn't affect all of these waters." A price cannot be placed on the area's heritage and culture, she said. Speaking emphatically, Keene stated, "You have to stand for what you stand on," with the crowd breaking into loud applause.

Birdy Velveteen of the Eastport Coalition for Healthy Oceans (ECHO), which proposed the ordinances, said the citizen-initiated petitions "return approval power to the voters." Stating that voter referendums on large-scale projects are common, Velveteen said the ordinances would give "us a say on who sets up shop on our island."

Only one person spoke in opposition to the measures. While opposed to the data center, John Morton said he would be voting against the ordinances because of his fear "of the law of unintended consequences." He noted that city has to take "a good hard look" at why young people are moving away from the area.

Another Eastport resident, Kevin Raye, noted that, unlike other projects such as the Pittston oil refinery and the LNG proposals that divided area communities, the data center plan "has united people of all stripes in opposition." But he observed that the council "has a responsibility to weigh the ordinances carefully" and that they may need some amendment, although substantive changes should not be made to them.

Some speakers chided the council for not speaking up and acting more quickly to stop the project. Alan Skinner noted that the council "keeps saying it's too soon to do anything. You need to act on what people want. You need to listen to the people. We shouldn't even be here tonight."

Fisheries 'are not a testing ground'

At the beginning of both the rally and the public hearing, Cipelahq Ehpicik, or Thunderbird Women, sang the water song about the Skutik or St. Croix River that flows into Passamaquoddy Bay, where the data center would be located.

The rally, organized by ECHO, drew about 50 people. Joshua Nicholson of ECHO said their effort is part of "a fight everywhere that land and water are being exploited for profit against the wishes of the people who live there."

Another member of ECHO, Gunther Valentin, noted that many communities depend on the waters of the bay for their livelihoods. People living in the area won't benefit from the project, he said. "A small group of wealthy people are the only ones to gain." Laurie Stone urged the city to allow the residents to vote on the two measures, stating, "Let's enact the ban now."

Reiterating a point made by other speakers, Deborah Gillespie noted that thermal discharges from the data center could warm the waters of the bay, endangering species such as lobsters. "Our fisheries are not a testing ground," she stated.

People across Maine are grappling with the possible impacts of large-scale data centers, Megan Smith of the Maine People's Alliance pointed out. Residents "need to decide if they align with the vision for their community." Shaun Haskins of the Cobscook Institute in Trescott reviewed the fisheries in this area that have been exploited in the past and pointed to the consequences of the choices that people make. "We need to insist we make our choices carefully for the future of this region."

Data center proposals around the country are "a speculative bubble" and most of them won't end up being built, stated Coleen O'Connell of the Center for Ecological Teaching and Learning in Edmunds. She urged that developers be required to post a registered capital bond upfront to ensure that any costs are covered.

The $413-million underwater AI data center is being proposed by DeepGreen Western Passage SPV LLC, which has applied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for a two-year preliminary permit to conduct environmental baseline studies and engineering work. The project would be located in Western Passage off Kendall's Head and extend south nearly to Harris Point in Eastport. While DeepGreen is seeking a permit for 400 acres, the active infrastructure would occupy only about 7% of the space, or just over 27 acres.

On July 15 FERC sent a letter to DeepGreen identifying deficiencies with the application and giving the company 45 days to correct them. If the company successfully amends the application, FERC will issue a public notice with a 60-day deadline for public comments and requests for intervenor status. If a preliminary permit is issued, it does not authorize any construction. The company would then have to apply for a license from FERC for