In 2024, there was a House Bill (HB 1157) authored by Rep. Robb Greene that came and went without much attention.
The summary of HB 1157 goes like this:
“Provides that the Indiana economic development corporation, the state, any instrumentality of the state, or any other public authority, or any party negotiating on behalf of any of those entities, may not, after June 30, 2024, enter into an economic development agreement or contract that contains any provision, clause, or language that provides that the agreement or contract, or any of its terms, is confidential, or that the parties to the agreement or contract are prohibited from disclosing, discussing, describing, or commenting upon the terms of the agreement or contract.“
It was assigned to the Committee on Government and Regulatory Reform, where it was never granted a hearing. Like so many other bills, it never saw the light of day. But perhaps it should have.
You see, too many of our local municipalities are being required to sign Non-disclosure Agreements (NDAs) for projects promoted by the Indiana Economic Development Corp. before they can even learn what proposals are being presented to their community. In other words, our REPRESENTATIVES are being required to sign NDAs so they are legally bound to NOT tell us the details of proposed projects that will directly impact us. Some will argue that this is normal business practice and that when we elect our representatives, we are entrusting them to represent our interests well. To ask the questions we would ask. To demand the answers we would demand. However, a great many more of us are realizing that too many of our legislators at the Statehouse are Corporate Captives, and their interests are not ours. When corporations that peddle speculative economic growth industries, such as data centers, require NDAs, it is usually so they can then hold all the negotiating power.
I would champion transparency by reintroducing legislation like HB 1157 so that local elected officials are never forced to choose between their community’s economic growth and their community itself.
A Tale of Three Data Centers
This past week three Indiana data center projects have been in the national news. Franklin Township (Indianapolis), Martindale-Brightwood (Indianapolis) and Monrovia (Morgan County). Franklin Township was presented an NDA, which at least one official acknowledged signing. There was strong community resistance, with public meetings well attended and protest rallies held. Due to strong, sustained opposition, Google pulled the project before a likely “no” vote to rezoning was held. There are concerns that this move allows them to resubmit the proposal at a later date when perhaps the public will be less engaged.
Martindale-Brightwood neighborhood in Indianapolis is being met with mixed reviews. A local city council member is in favor but the public is largely against the data center plans. However, there is much less attention on this smaller project and some worry the lack of public attention and protest will allow the council to approve it as being “in the best interest of the community”.
The third data center project in the limelight this week is actually in the House District 60 quiet town of Monrovia, nestled northwest of Martinsville and southwest of Indianapolis Airport, just south of i70. A notably rural community, Monrovia was selected by Morgan County as a viable site for a data center and its town council members were briefed only if they signed an NDA. One did and then revoked it as the community rose up in opposition to rezoning farmland. A small bipartisan group, ProtectMorganCounty.org, has formed in partnership with Citizens Action Coalition to actively organize against further rezoning and building out a data center. They are also pursuing litigation against the proposal. The county government has so far moved ahead, claiming the project is in the best interest of the county, and the town of Monrovia should accept that. For the record, they do not.
In all three cases, it has been the local people rising up and getting involved. They attend local meetings, research what others have successfully achieved, and support one another in effortsto protect water, reduce energy consumption, mitigate pollutants, and address hidden costs to their communities. We know that huge corporations like Google and Amazon actively seek out places of least resistance to build. Much of the AI industry is still speculative, and Wall Street insiders worry that we are witnessing another industry bubble about to burst, similar to the dot-com bubble of the 1990s.
Meanwhile, it is full speed ahead in legislatively approving these large-scale projects, along with approving small modular nuclear reactors (SMNRs) to provide the necessary energy required for these data centers (while actively opposing renewable energy). In her latest substack “Local Elections Matter”, author Mary Noone highlights a sobering statistic: As of March 2025, and according to a Statista report, the United States has approximately 5,426 data centers, Germany has 529 and the United Kingdom has 523.
Even here, we remain in speculation, as this energy source has not been successfully deployed in the US. Yet, even knowing this, our Republican State legislators approved SMNRs to be subsidized by ratepayers, even if they produce no energy. And now we hear that BlackRock and Blackstone, along with other private equity firms, are actively seeking to purchase utility companies because they anticipate the demand for energy will only continue to rise. [https://www.scrippsnews.com/business/regulators-weigh-billion-dollar-utility-takeovers-as-bills-rise-for-consumers]
The same companies investing in AI that is driving up water and energy consumption are also the same companies that invest in water and energy. The more infrastructure demand, the greater the return on investment for utility companies, as they make their profits from infrastructure development. The more they need to develop, the greater the profit. The more energy AI needs to consume, the more infrastructure is needed.
It is a vicious cycle of supply and demand where the investors are the only ones benefiting, and we, the residents and consumers, are the collateral damage.
We are all acutely aware that once drinking water is gone, it is not easily replenished. When our wells run dry or our aquifers are polluted, the bottled water industry is eagerly waiting for our orders. And who owns those bottled water companies? The same corporations that own the data centers and utility companies.
When data drinks first, who comes in second?
###
Let’s Do This Together!!
My name is Michelle Higgs, and I am running to represent House District 60. If you want a different voice in the Statehouse, someone who champions people over profiteers or partisan politics, please consider me your next State Representative. Follow me on social media (@MichelleHiggsHD60) and subscribe to my mailing list "Mondays with Michelle".
