An Arkansas mother's public-records request raised a costly question about a West Memphis data center project: If Google was paying only part of the bill for a new solar plant, who would cover the rest?
After those documents surfaced, Entergy Arkansas sued her, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, one of its reporters, and the Arkansas Times.
Here's what to know
Trying to determine who would bear the costs of the West Memphis project, Jessica Kivell turned to the Arkansas Public Service Commission for records. She is a mother, healthcare worker, and concerned citizen.
What she received indicated that the company tied to the facility was expected to cover only one-third of the new solar plant, despite earlier assurances that ratepayers would not end up paying for it.
After obtaining the documents, Kivell shared them with the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, which reported on them. According to a Freedom of the Press Foundation Instagram post, the utility later sued Kivell, the Democrat-Gazette, one of its reporters, and the Arkansas Times, even though the Arkansas Times said it never had the records.
In its lawsuit, the utility said the commission should not have released the documents and claimed they were trade secrets. It also sought to stop Kivell and the news outlets from discussing the records and asked the Democrat-Gazette to remove its story.
TCD Picks » Quince Spotlight
💡These best-sellers from Quince deliver affordable, sustainable luxury for all
The company further challenged the newspaper's calculations about how much of the project the corporate customer would pay for.
More background
Freedom of the Press Foundation said the Arkansas case fit the definition of a SLAPP, or strategic lawsuit against public participation, because such suits are used to burden critics and chill public discussion rather than simply win on the merits.
The group portrayed it as one of two unsuccessful, well-funded efforts aimed at suppressing reporting based on documents the government had released.
The organization also pointed to Supreme Court precedent that, in its view, clearly protects journalists when the government mistakenly releases information it should not have disclosed. From that perspective, the complaint tried to make a resident and the newspapers that reported on the records absorb the consequences of the commission's release.
That mattered because, if the records were accurate and the corporate customer was paying only one-third of the solar plant's cost, the remaining share could affect utility customers who had been told they would not be on the hook.
One commenter wrote, "Corporations need heavy regulation and their power curbed."
What's being done?
By pressing the Arkansas Public Service Commission about who was financing the project, Kivell created a paper trail that brought the cost question into public view. The reporting forced scrutiny of a major business arrangement before the public accepted corporate assurances.
The financing behind clean-energy projects promoted as community wins may not match the pitch, and residents may need to spot possible greenwashing before the bill arrives.
Freedom of the Press Foundation's post also highlighted a separate structural issue: Recourse for SLAPP targets can depend heavily on where a case is filed.
Only the California victim had "any real recourse against the censorial bully who wanted to shut him up — not because that case was any more frivolous than the Arkansas one, but because of the court in which it was filed."
The post also highlighted a pattern of disputes like this one where companies invoke trade-secret claims to keep utility or corporate arrangements out of public view. When that tactic succeeds, everyday people can be left in the dark about whether a data center or energy project marketed as progress may still shift costs onto them.
As Freedom of the Press Foundation put it, "Supreme Court precedent couldn't be clearer that it's not the journalists' problem if the government accidentally shares information it's not supposed to disclose."
Get TCD's free newsletters for easy tips, smart advice, and a chance to earn $5,000 toward home upgrades. To see more stories like this one, change your Google preferences here.
