Residents press Joliet council for details and delays on proposed data center over air-quality and water fears

Multiple Joliet residents urged the city council on March 3 to press developers for technical details and to reconsider or delay decisions on a proposed large data center, saying the project’s air-quality and water demands could harm nearby families and vulnerable residents.

“On air quality — generators — I asked the consultant what I needed to worry about and I still can’t find whether the generators are tier 2 or tier 4, how many there will be, or how often they’ll run,” Andrea Bamhart told the council during public comment. She asked council members to talk with affected neighbors before voting on plan items slated for later in the week.

Rick Norman, who said he is coping with cancer and is concerned about pollution, told the council the city should prioritize clean water and air over large data centers. “We can live without data centers. What we can't live without is fresh, clean, unpolluted water and air,” he said, and urged the council to vote no on the proposal.

Marjorie McNichols, another resident, pressed for alternatives and sustainable approaches: she noted some data centers use HVO biofuel or waste-heat recovery that reduces nitrous-oxide emissions and suggested Joliet pursue greener designs or smaller facilities. She also raised water concerns and said decisions made now can affect the community for decades.

A technical critic who attended the public open house said city outreach materials and consultants did not provide technical specifications for chillers, water recycling, or substation maintenance. That speaker told the council they could not find clear answers about water usage, glycol chiller containment, or which entities would operate and maintain new substations associated with the project.

The public comments collectively asked that council members (1) insist developers disclose generator type and count and testing frequency, (2) explain projected water demand and safeguards for leaks or glycol containment, (3) evaluate sustainable developers and technologies (including HVO or waste-heat reuse), and (4) delay votes until more technical information is posted and discussed in accessible community forums.

City staff did not present or vote on the data-center approval during the March 3 meeting; speakers noted plan votes were scheduled for Thursday and complained that some required documents were not yet posted online. The council heard these public comments during the formal public-comment period; no formal direction or vote on the project was recorded in the meeting minutes for March 3.

The council did not make a public response to the specific technical requests during the comment period. Next procedural steps mentioned in the meeting: plan votes were imminent (the transcript references plan votes on Thursday) and residents were told staff has an FAQ page, though commenters said key technical details were missing from posted materials.

What’s next: Residents asked the council to require fuller technical disclosures and to consider sustainable alternatives before final approvals. The council’s agenda for the week included separate plan items that may advance the developer’s proposal; those votes were not resolved during the March 3 meeting.