A Wyoming judge dismissed a citizen challenge to a permit for a proposed data center near Evanston, ending one legal effort to slow the project even as local concerns over transparency, safety, and environmental impacts persist, WyoFile reported.
Here's what to know
Residents Christy Katzl, Wilhelm Katzl, and Marijke Rossi filed a July 16 petition challenging Uinta County's approval of a conditional use permit for Prometheus Hyperscale, which Third District Court Judge James Kaste dismissed.
In that filing, the residents claimed that the project could reduce property values and pose safety risks to both the community and the environment.
They also alleged that county officials and the developer held private meetings without notice and failed to complete or release environmental impact studies, especially those related to the "closed-loop" system the developer has said it plans to use.
On Aug. 4, Kaste approved Rossi's request to voluntarily dismiss her portion of the case without prejudice.
He then dismissed the remaining claims on Aug. 17, noting in part that the petitioners did not respond within the required time to Uinta County Attorney Loretta Howieson Kallas' July 24 motion to dismiss.
TCD Picks » Quince Spotlight
💡These best-sellers from Quince deliver affordable, sustainable luxury for all
The judge also found that the petitioners had not shown that they suffered harm different from that of the public at large.
Because they did not identify a specific injury unique to them, Kaste ruled that they lacked legal standing.
More background
Large data center proposals are increasingly drawing local concerns over land use, electricity demand, water consumption, and public oversight.
Even when such projects promise jobs or tax revenue, residents often want much more information before construction begins.
That tension is especially pronounced with AI-related infrastructure.
Hyperscale data centers can support tools that help forecast energy demand, improve grid efficiency, and better integrate wind and solar power.
However, the facilities consume enormous amounts of electricity and, depending on the cooling system, significant amounts of water.
They also raise concerns about cybersecurity, misuse, and the potential for higher energy bills if utilities are forced to build additional infrastructure.
In Uinta County, the conflict has involved questions about procedure as much as the project itself.
The petitioners alleged nepotism involving county commission Chair Mark Anderson and Commissioner Eric South, and Katzl separately filed an Aug. 4 objection along with an Open Meetings Act violation notice.
According to the report, Katzl also asserted that the county had not answered several public records requests she submitted on July 14, July 21, July 22, and Aug. 1.
What's being done?
The permit remains in place, and county officials have publicly defended their handling of the matter.
During an Aug. 4 county commission meeting, Kallas pushed back on Katzl's complaints and disputed the allegation that the county was concealing records.
"She [Katzl] asserts that there is an active hiding of public records," Kallas stated, before explaining that the county uses a formal records-request process.
Kallas added that even without the proper forms, the clerk's office in Uinta County could take up to 30 days to fulfill requests if it chooses to proceed.
Even with the legal challenge dismissed, the debate over oversight is unlikely to fade.
"The Court can only conclude that the Petitioners do not have standing to challenge Uinta County's decision to issue the Conditional Use Permit," Kaste wrote in his ruling.
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.
