I’ve been thinking about this a lot, and waiting to read an example. This might just be the first I’ve read.

> “…by adhering to local zoning rules set 45 years ago”

I live on Long Island NY. Here on LI and Upstate there are a surprising number of former industrial land and abandoned buildings. It’s the whole package—loss of jobs, years of post-industrial decline, lost revenue and old rules on the books. Ripe for a new industry which, like remote workers, doesn’t need to be located next to the larger communities where their work product is consumed. Gentrification or redevelopment of agricultural land into boiling data centers are the outcomes.

> “It didn’t bother them that a food-distribution center came to Gilroy …” Bozzo said.

It’s a dirty fight. All sides.

Amazon wants to build on cheap land, and not on parcels the cities want cleaned up.

I’m wondering why these data centers are such a nuisance. We’ve had data centers for years. Is it just the fast growth and number? And is there good public data on their sustainability regarding water and electricity and environmental impact? If cities have failed, it’s turning a blind eye from collecting this data.

Two things can be true: the construction can be technically legal and at clear odds with community opinion.

I mean, yes. Amazon can likely do this. But is this strategy really in keeping with its long term interests? I mean, look at the comments in the rest of this very topic. Do you want a communist insurrection? This is literally how you get communist insurrections. People are fucking pissed, and the bourge^M^M^M^M funding-focused growth-minded startup set here are throwing gasoline on the fire.

That was my read as well:

> ...the site had gone through a long approval process, which required public notices and public-comment periods. However, when Gilroy resident Rosa Rodriguez wanted to state her concern about the damage a data center can do to a region suffering from drought, she was told that the comment period had already lapsed in 2024

Is the "circumvention" the headline refers to that public commentary periods are time-boxed? But how could they not be time-boxed?

In fairness to the residents, the negative implications of data centers was probably not well known to them in 2024, but it seems to me that (at least based on the article) all the processes & rules were followed.

I think it's the zoning rules (based on https://www.wsj.com/us-news/how-amazon-built-a-data-center-i...), which seem to provide an expedited process (which for large scale projects like this always seems a bit odd, and seems like it would increase the risk of corruption)?

Arguably if new information arrives which changes the risks or impacts of a project, especially if the project was initially on some kind of fast-track process, then projects should be subject to re-reviewed and scrutiny (which I would expect to have a standard legal process).

It's possible that the official process is a bad one and needs reform. But that's really not Amazon's fault, and it would be super weird for them to set up a bunch of additional hoops for themselves to jump through. Also not very democratic.

> because data centers are this year's culture war hot topic?

Or because they didn't notice until they saw actual construction.

>because data centers are this year's culture war hot topic?

This ain’t the culture war. The public at large is fairly united on one side of this across the typical US political divides. If you want to dismiss this with a cute label to pretend that there aren’t any real concerns here, the only label that comes close to matching the actual dispute is class war.

> now residents want to complain about it years later because data centers are this year's culture war hot topic

I hope one day Amazon or any AI company installs a data center next to your home. Then you will finally understand

That's because this article is the journalistic equivalent of a retweet. The article links to a WSJ[0] article (which is going to be paywalled for many people). Any time you get an article like this TH one, you should try to read the source article.

> There were no public meetings or votes before a lone city staffer gave Amazon.com the green light last July to build a 438,500-square-foot data center on 56 acres of farmland 30 miles south of San Jose.

> Amazon’s project was approved with a single signature—by the town’s community-development director—because it met zoning criteria set 45 years ago for industrial development along a freeway.

> Mayor Greg Bozzo said other big industrial projects have been approved in the same manner over the years, but didn’t cause any uproar.

> “It didn’t bother them that a food-distribution center came to Gilroy without their engagement, but now it bothers them that a data center is coming to Gilroy without them having the possibility of engagement,” Bozzo said.

On it's face this is an incredibly dim-witted comment by the mayor. The people are generally angry about Amazon building data centers, but they're particularly angry at their city council which has been working to conceal the project from exactly the people they have a duty to inform.

It's not about excoriation of Amazon. It's about regulatory capture. And saying Amazon "did nothing wrong" is just being blind to the problem.

[0]: https://www.wsj.com/us-news/how-amazon-built-a-data-center-i...

If you give NIMBYs as much as an inch of decision-making power, they'll find a way of making you regret it.

For all the talk of "negative externalities", they sure aren't shy about imposing them on others.

the police and entire justice system are on the side of capital. The peoples history of the united States by Howard Zinn covers many attempts Luke this. he makes a case for what works and what doesn't. its a large book, but you can find good summaries online.

> Amazon believes that the AI agents need a new home more than humans do and would rather build homes for these agents than for humans.

I can only imagine the level of outrage that would instantly ensue if Amazon announced they were getting into the home-building business.