The Coachella City Council on Thursday night approved a 45-day moratorium on new data center development, directing staff to draft a permanent ban and voting to terminate its development agreement with the company behind the project.
The decisions came after weeks of mounting opposition from residents, who packed council chambers, organized grassroots outreach efforts and urged city leaders to reject a proposal by Stronghold Power Systems to build six data centers in the city.
As part of the motion, Mayor Frank Figueroa directed staff to return during the moratorium period with language establishing a permanent ban.
"We've heard people," Figueroa said before the vote. "They want the 45-day urgency ordinance that initiates the moratorium, but also they want the long-term ban and ensuring that this topic will not come back."
It marks a significant shift for city leaders, who had previously explored a Municipal Utility Development Agreement that was tied to the data center project.
Residents say data centers will impact water, energy use and public health
The proposed project, known as the Coachella Valley Technology Campus, would span up to 450 acres of agricultural land near the intersection of Avenue 52 and Fillmore Street. Stronghold Power Systems -- the company behind the project -- proposed building six large data centers on the site. The first phase called for three buildings totaling roughly 1 million square feet each, with every facility requiring up to 90 megawatts of electrical capacity.
The scale of the proposal drew scrutiny from residents, who for weeks attended council meetings and town halls to question its potential effects on water supplies, energy demand, noise levels and public health in a region already facing environmental challenges.
Maria Duarte, who has lived in the valley since the 1970s, said she worries the project would bring more costs than benefits to local residents.
"We don't want our prices to go up. We don't want our water contaminated," Duarte said in Spanish. "This company is here to make money and in the long run it's going to affect us negatively."
Loretta Perez, a Coachella resident and member of the United for Autism and Abilities Foundation, urged the council to adopt a permanent ban.
"We barely have enough water for ourselves," Perez said before the meeting. "If we don't put a permanent ban, anyone can just come in and start writing up proposals on data centers."
Residents also argued that the debate extends beyond Coachella city limits because communities throughout the eastern Coachella Valley share many of the same environmental concerns.
Residents question why city leaders did not act sooner
While the council's actions to place the moratorium and end the agreement with Stronghold were largely welcomed by opponents, some residents remained skeptical of city leaders and questioned why they didn’t take action sooner.
Many questioned why the city council decided in February to approve the Municipal Utility Development Agreement with Coachella Valley Power Services LLC, an affiliate of Stronghold, that would have created a city-owned electric utility to service areas of Coachella.
Councilwoman Denise Delgado acknowledged residents' frustration before the vote.
"We know you're hurt, we know you're angry, we know you're disappointed, and you have every right to be," Delgado said. "But we are trying our very best here, this entire council, to try to make it right."
Following the moratorium vote, the council voted to terminate a municipal utility development agreement with Stronghold that had been approved as part of the city's efforts to explore creation of its own utility.
In a statement released after the meeting, Stronghold criticized the decision.
"Stronghold Power Systems is disappointed by the City Council's decision to terminate our development agreement," said Alex Rodriguez, government affairs advisor for the company. "We came to Coachella with a project that would provide substantial benefits to the City, built around leading-edge environmental protections."
Stronghold said it is reviewing the council's actions and considering its options moving forward.
Residents who opposed the project welcomed the vote but cautioned that their work is far from over.
"Community members are feeling happy, content about what happened," said Stephanie Ambriz, a community organizer who has helped mobilize opposition to the project. "But I think it's too soon to celebrate. It ain't over until the council puts a permanent ban or ordinance with strong legal protections."
