Supporters of a proposed data center project in Coweta, Oklahoma, have faced serious opposition, leading to claims of disingenuous tactics. Critics allege that advocates resorted to generating fake endorsements allegedly from local residents.
One such message read: “Dear Deputy Mayor Barnett, Project Atlas will bring millions in revenue for city services and educational upgrades, which the developer will fund. This appears to be sensible, low-impact growth. Please support this chance for Coweta.”
While the data center proponents may rely on funding, consultants, and automated communications, the opposition maintains one significant advantage: actual voters and the truth.
This particular email seemed to be authored by a known resident. However, when the deputy mayor reached out, the individual clarified that they never composed it and, in fact, opposed the proposal. This was corroborated by local news outlets.
It turns out this was not a unique event. Darren Blanchard, a local farmer and activist, discovered almost 300 nearly identical messages backing the data center in public records. These messages often arrived at unusual times and appeared to come from automated advocacy platforms that generated letters addressed to the city council.
Though automated advocacy is not new, it’s a different matter entirely when someone’s personal information is utilized to send out messages without their consent. This infringement is essentially political identity theft.
“We suspect that local residents’ personal data—including names and addresses—was acquired, perhaps programmed, and entered onto this advocacy website,” Blanchard stated. “About 300 people impersonated members of the Coweta community urging the City Council to green-light a data center. It was entirely fabricated.”
This situation is laden with irony; a company planning to construct a facility for processing vast data is accused of misusing residents’ personal information to manipulate support.
The most shocking instance purportedly involved a deceased individual. Blanchard recounted that a council member received a supportive email using this person’s name on the second anniversary of their passing.
This matter raised alarms among city officials, prompting them to involve law enforcement. Unfortunately, many of the email names have been redacted, complicating matters for residents trying to determine if their identities were hijacked. Blanchard reported fruitless attempts to engage the Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office.
A 270-acre development project led by Beer Infrastructure from San Francisco, which had backing from Blue Owl Capital, was scrapped in late March after facing considerable local backlash and scrutiny.
Coweta’s situation isn’t singular. In Box Elder County, Utah, Kevin O’Leary’s proposed data center complex is expected to consume massive amounts of power and cover a footprint larger than numerous Walmart locations. Public record reviews by the Salt Lake Tribune revealed overwhelming public opposition, with only about 2% of emails supporting the initiative.
In fact, local voters made their stance clear. Recently, two Box Elder County commissioners who favored the project faced defeat in the Republican primary, similarly, the Utah State Senate President, instrumental in endorsing the development, also lost.
In Calvert County, Maryland, three Republican committee members were dismissed for signing non-disclosure agreements with data center firms and then going against their own proposals.
These electoral outcomes underline significant political challenges for Big Tech. There’s strong and often bipartisan local resistance against expansive data centers, driven by concerns over energy consumption, water usage, tax incentives, land usage, privacy issues, and the transfer of private liabilities to the public.
Labeling dissenters as agents of foreign entities or adversaries to progress won’t erase these worries. Moreover, attempting to fabricate support through automated, unauthorized emails will likely backfire.
While astroturfing aims to inflate the appearance of support, Coweta’s case took this further, creating a deception literally from identities unlawfully appropriated, some even from beyond the grave.
Moving forward, Republican leaders will need to make a critical choice. They can align with citizens demanding transparency and autonomy over their environments or side with global entities looking to feign public endorsement.
The opposition may lack the financial clout of the data center lobby, but they carry a weightier asset: genuine voters and the undeniable truth.
