Bayonne council pledges to block data centers after large public outcry

Dozens of residents filled the Darth E. Harrington Council Chambers on April 15 to oppose adding “data center” to the list of allowed uses in a redevelopment plan for a peninsula industrial site, pressing elected officials to reverse the earlier zoning change and promising continued public scrutiny.

The public‑comment period stretched more than two hours. “Data centers do not have a place in Bayonne,” said Crystal Laponte, a lifelong resident, arguing that the facilities consume large amounts of water and electricity and would raise utility rates for nearby households. Patricia Hillyard, chair of the Hudson County chapter of the Sierra Club, asked the council to “provide transparency to the community” and to guarantee meaningful public input before any project moves forward.

Why it matters: Residents said the change — which only expands the list of potential uses for a property and does not authorize construction — nonetheless opens the door to projects they said could increase electricity and water demand, create constant noise from cooling equipment and generators, and depress nearby property values. Several commenters called the December 2025 vote that expanded the allowed uses insufficiently transparent and urged the council to bring any future redevelopment agreements back to the public for review.

City staff and council members told the meeting that no specific developer has a site plan before the city and that any actual project would still require a full site‑plan review, utility disclosures and other permitting steps. Director Skylinder (city redevelopment staff) said a developer would have to submit the utility plan and other technical materials as part of a future application and that those documents are publicly posted when filed.

After hearing sustained public opposition, the council president and members recorded a formal pledge by resolution that the current council will not vote to approve a data center in Bayonne and directed city staff to research legal steps to rescind the recently added permitted use. The council framed the action as an intent and a legal research instruction; rescinding a previously adopted redevelopment amendment may require property‑owner consent or other procedural steps, staff said.

What residents asked for: Commenters asked the council to (1) reverse the December amendment that added the data‑center use, (2) require independent environmental, health and utility‑impact studies for any proposed facility, and (3) hold targeted community meetings and better public notice when redevelopment changes are considered.

Council response and next steps: Council members repeatedly told commenters they heard their concerns and that a rescission or a new local ordinance could be pursued. Staff said that, should a site‑plan application arrive, state municipal‑land‑use rules would require submission of utility and site plans that become public record; council members said they could use redevelopment‑agreement conditions to require independent studies and community protections. The council asked staff to return with legal research on rescinding the permitted use and placed a resolution reflecting the council’s intent on the record.

The meeting did not include votes on any specific data‑center project. The council moved on to other business and adjourned; staff said they will report back with research and an ordinance or resolutions as appropriate.