Lakeland PBS has posted he video from Representative Josh Heintzeman (Republican) and Nicky Hardy (DFL) debate in the Lakeland PBS Debate Night 2026. I’m not sure if they use the word data center, they do discussion permitting and other issues around recruiting new businesses in Minnesota (around minute 14)…
St. Cloud city staff are recommending the Planning Commission hold the line on its proposed data center rules, without a cap on water use or a wider buffer from homes.
The commission takes up the city’s first-ever data center rules again Tuesday at 6:00 p.m. at St. Cloud City Hall, after postponing action in September and sending staff back with a list of questions.
In a memo to commissioners, Community Development Director Matt Glaesman says a water cap isn’t needed because every project already gets checked against the city’s water capacity before approval, and the city can require changes or deny a project that threatens supply. St. Cloud’s treatment plant can produce 24 million gallons a day. Average demand is about 8 million, with summer peaks around 15.5 million.
Staff also say widening the buffer between large data centers and homes from a quarter mile to a half mile would wipe out much of the land where one could go. They add that it would bring little added benefit, since any facility must already meet state noise limits at the property line.
Commissioners also asked what a data center could mean for city revenue. The memo doesn’t give a local estimate. It points to Meta’s planned Rosemount facility, which is expected to generate more than $1 million a year in property taxes, and notes that some cities have offered tax breaks to land these projects.
Faribault Daily News reports...
Two city planning commissioners were in agreement. They would not accept the environmental commission’s recommendation to prevent a data center from shining light on any adjoining property. Instead, commissioners suggested the wording revert to only residential properties.
More about the meeting…
When the Faribault City Council directed the environmental and planning commissions to work together to create standards for any data center developments coming into the city, the two bodies sat down in a work session Aug. 17.
It was the only meeting where both bodies worked together.
Two months later, the environmental commission voted to send its recommendations to the planning commission, where it will approve or reject the suggestions made by Lamb and her fellow members.
But Lamb went into the planning commission’s Oct. 5 work session thinking she and other members of the environmental commission would get a chance to explain their recommendations. She left feeling frustrated and worried about the timeline to approve these standards.
“Now that we essentially signed something that says this is our recommendation, we have not been invited to come back and continue the process. So basically, this was our last opportunity. I was told I cannot speak and we no longer can be involved in the process. We’re done,” she said. “We literally had one month to put all our presentation together. But we worked hard and we did what we needed to do. I wish we would have had more time. I’m thinking the public hearing will happen whether they’re ready or not, and that to me is so disheartening, because Faribault citizens deserve better.”
During the two hour meeting, some members of the planning commission were red-faced, others rubbed their temples as King and Planning Manager Harry Davis explained the different recommendations made by the environmental commission. No final decisions were made on Monday and commissioners will continue to deliberate on the environmental commission’s recommendations at its next meeting on Oct. 19.
Hermantown Mayor Wayne Boucher tabled a vote Thursday on an environmental review for a Minnesota Power transmission line proposed to serve Google’s planned data center.
Residents who spoke in opposition said the city is not complying with a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources shoreline standard related to the project.
“The city is in violation of the shoreline ordinance and Minnesota law, and by passing this tonight, so is the city in violation,” said Clarissa Ek, a Solway Township resident.
Boucher questioned whether the city should approve a resolution referencing an ordinance that is not in compliance.
“We have an ordinance that’s not in compliance, but we are being asked to approve a resolution that refers to the ordinance that’s not in compliance aren’t we a little ahead of ourselves with that?” asked Boucher.
There is no word on when work to address the issue will be completed or when the council may vote again.
National Council of State Legislators reports...
Data center development is drawing increased attention in state legislatures as artificial intelligence and cloud computing expand. Alongside electricity demand and economic development considerations, lawmakers are examining how the facilities’ use of water to cool their many servers will affect local supplies and infrastructure.
NCSL’s review of 2025 and ’26 legislation, updated this week, identifies about 100 bills and resolutions in 39 states addressing data center water use and related planning.
The report notes two focal points:
Minnesota gets a mention…
Minnesota’s data center law (HF 16; 2025) required consideration of conservation measures during permitting. For covered projects proposing more than 100 million gallons of new or additional annual consumptive water use, the state Department of Natural Resources must ensure that measures promoting conservation, efficient use and watershed health are reasonably considered. These may include reclaimed water, closed-loop cooling and partnerships with local utilities to reuse discharged water.
Schools, Health and Libraries Broadband Coalition (SHLB) takes a look at the economics of discontinuing (or reducing) E-Rate programming, which pays for a considerable amount of broadband connectivity in schools and libraries…
The Federal Communications Commission is considering eliminating or significantly reducing E Rate support ($2.6 billion in 2025) for broadband connectivity and related services provided to schools and libraries. While eliminating the program would reduce Universal Service Fund expenditures, it would also increase the effective cost of broadband services for public and private K-12 schools and libraries that increasingly rely on digital connectivity to support teaching, learning, school operations and security, cybersecurity, internal and external communications, and access to online educational and informational resources. Nearly every critical function in schools and libraries now relies on the network, including door locks and access controls, security cameras, bus scheduling and transportation systems, cafeteria
payment systems, payroll, student information systems, attendance and grading platforms, and communications with students, staff, and families. Because broadband has become an essential educational input rather than a discretionary expenditure, schools and libraries cannot simply replace connectivity with teachers, books, buildings, or other educational resources. Paying more for connectivity therefore leaves less money available for the other goods and services needed to provide education and library services.
We use Brattle’s BEYOND computable general equilibrium (“CGE”) model to estimate the economy-wide contribution of E-Rate. Our primary counterfactual eliminates the program while recognizing that broadband and internal network infrastructure remain necessary inputs. The results indicate that eliminating approximately $2.6 billion in annual E-Rate support would reduce real GDP by approximately $4.2 billion annually, real wages by $2.8 billion, and tax revenues by approximately $1.5 billion. Thus, each dollar of E-Rate support is associated with approximately $1.60 in GDP. The measured economic loss exceeds the amount of federal support removed because without E-Rate, schools and libraries must devote more of their own budgets to connectivity, leaving less available to support the overall level of education and library services. As school spending generates greater follow-on economic activity than
broadband spending, institutions purchase fewer non-broadband goods and services from other suppliers and use less labor, and those reductions propagate through household income, spending, and tax revenues.
Eliminating just support for connectivity infrastructure (Category 2), including routers, switches, Wi-Fi access points, cabling, managed internal broadband, and related infrastructure needed to distribute connectivity within schools and libraries, would also have substantial effects.
Eliminating Category 2 alone (approximately $1.2 billion in annual support) produces an estimated $2.5 billion decline in GDP, $1.6 billion reduction in real wages, and $0.9 billion reduction in tax revenues.
Finally, we find that even unsubstantiated concerns about waste, fraud, inefficient procurement, or otherwise unproductive expenditures do not materially change these
conclusions. Even under a deliberately conservative assumption that 2.5% of E-Rate support generates no intended economic benefit given that the improper payment level has already been found to be lower than 1.5%,1 the associated GDP loss is approximately $113.9 million, or
only about 2.7% of the GDP loss from eliminating E-Rate altogether. The results demonstrate that eliminating a productive program to prevent a comparatively small amount of ineffective spending can impose economic costs substantially greater than the inefficiency being addressed.
The FCC’s review should therefore distinguish between monetary savings and economic benefits.
Broadband Breakfast reports...
A flood of fiber projects funded by a federal broadband grant program could increase the likelihood of damaged buried utilities, researchers said Thursday.
The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program is expected to fund more than 270,000 miles of buried fiber, according to an analysis from New York Law School’s Advanced Connectivity Law and Policy Institute.
The MN Star Tribune looks at data centers as a key political issue…
With less than four weeks remaining before the November 3 general election, Republican U.S. Rep. Pete Stauber and DFL challenger Trina Swanson met in Duluth Tuesday evening for what could be their only televised debate, offering voters in Minnesota’s Eighth Congressional District a direct comparison of their positions on mining, economic development, immigration enforcement and the financial pressures facing working families.
Here’s what they said about data centers…
Data Centers and the Question of Community Accountability
Data-center development also featured in the debate, reflecting the growing controversy surrounding proposed large-scale technology facilities in Minnesota.
The issue has particular relevance in Hermantown, where Google is pursuing a major data-center project and where both candidates have personal connections to the community.
Stauber has previously emphasized the construction employment and economic investment associated with the proposed Hermantown facility. He has argued that the project could benefit the region if developed appropriately.
Swanson has raised concerns about transparency, environmental review, electricity demand and the use of nondisclosure agreements by public officials involved in data-center negotiations.
Her criticism has focused partly on whether communities receive enough information about proposed developments before consequential decisions are made.
Those concerns have become increasingly important as Minnesota evaluates data-center proposals requiring substantial electrical capacity and infrastructure investment.
Supporters argue that such facilities can generate construction jobs, property-tax revenue and investment. Critics question the relatively limited number of permanent jobs, the potential burden on electrical systems and whether existing utility customers could face additional costs.
The debate placed those competing concerns within the broader congressional race, although the available reporting does not establish a detailed exchange of new policy commitments from either candidate on the Hermantown project.
The unresolved question for residents is how elected officials would ensure that major technology investments provide measurable public benefits while protecting taxpayers, utility customers and natural resources.
McLeod County Chronicle reports...
Revolve Labs has launched a new website aimed at answering questions about its data center under construction in Glencoe.
The website follows a public presentation last month by Jim Fleming, director of customer operations for Revolve Labs, at the Glencoe City Center. During that presentation, Fleming said the company planned to create an online resource where residents could find additional information and supporting sources about the project.
The new site, available at revolvelabs.ai/community/glencoe, covers topics including construction, sound, water, electricity use, jobs, and the project’s potential impact on the community. Revolve Labs said it plans to continue updating the site as the project moves forward.
Construction is underway at 670 11th St. W., where Revolve Labs plans to complete the new data center in April 2027.
The facility will provide computing infrastructure for artificial intelligence applications. One of its primary functions will be “inference,” the computing process that occurs when an AI system receives information and produces a response. The company said its high-performance computing infrastructure supports applications in healthcare, agriculture, education, and financial services.
The MN Broadband Task Force met in Isanti heard from Midco about their business and their experience working with the Office of Broadband Development (OBD). OBD gave an update and the Task Force member met in small groups to discussion two aspects of the annual report: Affordability Economic Opportunity, and Workforce Development and Mapping, Policy, and Funding. Not enough people showed up for the mapping discussion (although folks may have shown up after the initial 5 minutes) so I attended the affordability discussion, which was pretty interesting, especially when talking about speed goals. There’s always a balance between was consumers need and what providers are offering, especially with the BEAD shift from fiber to satellite.
Meeting Agenda
10:00 a.m. – 10:45 a.m. Welcome from Teddy Bekele, Chair, Minnesota Governor’s Task Force on Broadband, roll call, approval of minutes from September Task Force meeting, and presentation and introduction from Melissa Wolf and Midco.
Questions:
Tell us about line extension.
It allows us to reach individuals who are farther away from our network. They are longer drops, more rural properties. We stay in contact with folks who may apply and we evaluate where the houses in need are. They are shorter contracts – usually within 6-12 months we start to build.
Do you see things in other states that are working better?
OBD is the gold standard. We talk more about what MN is doing well.
What’s Midco Mobile?
It’s our cell phone offering.
10:45 a.m. – 11 a.m. Continue Task Force discussion on E-Rate and update from Task Force member work since September meeting.
Where does the TF stand with E-rate?
11 a.m. – 11:15 a.m. Office of Broadband Development (OBD) overview and updates from Bree Maki (Executive Director, OBD).
Questions
Are there any projects with only minimal scope changes?
Most have something but there are a few. We are losing providers, especially fiber providers due to rising costs. This is turning into an anti-fiber project due to costs.
We have gone from 160,000 unserved locations to 60,000 – due to private investment.
BEAD does not work well in a state that state broadband speed goals that surpass federal definitions.
Some projects are getting close to starting. Some folks are waiting on signing contracts until they know what’s happening on a layer higher than one project alone.
11:15 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Subgroup work time, have leads share out (1—2 minutes) on work at and since September meeting, breakout into subgroups for work time. Subgroups will aim to identify and finalize information needed for the background section to support eventual recommendations.
The video gets wonky at this point. My plan was to record one group and take notes for the other, but only one person showed up for the Affordability Economic Opportunity, and Workforce Development group. So I shifted to recording Affordability Economic Opportunity, and Workforce Development. Also I took screenshots of the document as changes were being made, which may be moderately helpful.
Do we need to prepare MN Government that we need to return to Border to Border in light of BEAD not really coming to fruition? YES
Do we need to discuss speed goals? Is it still 100/20 – then yes.
What are industry standards? NO one has really addressed it. With wireless and satellite becoming the de facto BEAD answer, conversations have shifted.
We should focus on symmetrical, that would push fiber. Government funds should not go to inadequate speeds with limited growth.
If BEAD stayed at gig access, this would be an easier discussion but since the feds are no longer there, we won’t likely get traction for the federal discussion.
Open the floor to other business, November’s meeting plans, and meeting wrap-up. Meeting adjourned for online attendees.
The group didn’t appear to reconvene online.
The Minnesota Star Tribune reports...
Construction unions build data centers, and the projects are particularly lucrative for blue-collar workers. As a result, trade unions are divided in the First Congressional District. Some have backed Johnson, while others endorsed Finstad, a two-term Republican from New Ulm who has said data centers can benefit local communities and that Congress should not ban them in cities that want them.
It’s the latest example of how data centers and AI are shaping politics — not just the economy. And it’s another source of friction between trade unions and Democrats in Minnesota, as labor groups grapple with a large faction of DFLers who oppose big construction projects such as copper-nickel mines and oil pipelines.
“On one side we have the folks that support our rights to collectively bargain and labor standards,” said Tom Dicklich, executive director of the Minnesota State Building and Construction Trades Council. “On the other side, [Republicans] may not do that, but they support the projects.”
The article continues to outline perspectives from various Congressional races in Minnesota looking at how candidates approach the data center issue.
Google’s proposed data center in Pine Island got a vote of confidence from the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce on Tuesday, Oct. 6.
The chamber, which represents businesses in Rochester and surrounding communities, said Project Skyway “represents a significant opportunity for Pine Island and the surrounding region through new investment, job growth, infrastructure, education, tax-base growth, and continued economic development.”
Developed by Twin Cities-based Ryan Companies, LLC, the data center project would support more than 700 skilled trades jobs during construction and create roughly 100 permanent jobs once the data center is operational, making Google Pine Island’s second-largest employer.
The project would include $100 million in utility and road infrastructure upgrades/expansion funded by Ryan Companies, a $24 million fund to support Pine Island schools, $3 million in direct funding for the city of Pine Island — in addition to the more than $130 million in new property tax revenue — over the first 28 years of the project, according to a financial agreement passed in February 2026.
An agreement between Xcel Energy and Google would add 1,900 megawatts of new clean-energy resources to the grid, including 1,400 megawatts of wind, 200 megawatts of solar, and 300 megawatts of battery storage.
Grand Rapids Herald Review reports…
A coalition of nine Minnesota organizations has launched a new website aimed at informing voters about issues surrounding large-scale data center development in the state.
The coalition, No Dirty Data Centers MN, announced Monday that its website, mndatacentervoter.org, is intended to serve as a nonpartisan resource for voters concerned about the potential health, environmental and financial impacts of hyperscale data centers. The site presents information in a question-and-answer format and outlines policies the coalition says are needed to protect communities.
The article mentions the organizations involved…
According to the coalition, organizations behind the website include Clean Water Action, Coalition for Responsible Data Center Development, CURE, Health Professionals for a Healthy Climate, Minnesota Interfaith Power & Light, Mukwa, Sierra Club North Star Chapter, Stop the Pine Island Data Center and Stop the Hermantown Data Center.
After more than two hours of public comment and council discussion, the Northfield City Council voted 7-0 Tuesday night to reduce the required setback between data-processing facilities and parks or trails from roughly three-quarters of a mile to 200 feet.
But the setback change was only part of the story. In a separate motion, the council also directed staff to explore a tiered regulatory framework for data-processing facilities as part of the upcoming Land Development Code update, looking beyond just power consumption to include water use and other emerging concerns.
Some of the details…
The city’s regulations include 17 performance standards covering noise, water use, glare, vibrations and more. They also require a conditional use permit triggered by any water use.
And more on the vote…
After the vote, the council approved a second motion directing staff to explore the tiered regulatory framework and performance standards recommended by the planning commission, looking beyond just power consumption. That motion also passed without dissent.