‘This is not an anti-tech town’: backlash to datacenter in city once home to IBM

East Fishkill Halts Proposal for Giant AI Datacenter Amid Historic Tech Identity

The Saga Begins

The controversy stems from Treetop Development’s plan to build a multi‑gigawatt artificial intelligence facility in East Fishkill. After acquiring property in the hamlet—initially targeting a standard warehouse—researchers discovered Treetop had joined the New York Independent System Operator’s interconnection queue to request connections for an estimated 1,000 megawatts of power. That demand matches the profile of a modern AI campus rather than a modest warehouse project.

Unlike most proposals, this facility requires more capacity than a traditional data centre. At approximately 1,000 megawatts, it would consume more electricity than the entire city of Buffalo (≈275,000 residents), while East Fishkill’s population stands at only about 30,000.

“Residents have been speaking out against it to stop any application from entering the town for the data centre,” said Melissa Hoffmann, an East Fishkill resident and organizer with a local chapter of Food & Water Watch, an environmental advocacy nonprofit.

However, supervisory officer Nick D’Alessandro clarified that no formal application had yet been submitted to Westchester County, and the planning board reported none existed. He emphasized that standalone data centres are not listed as a permissible use under Village ordinances. Nevertheless, the commission earlier mandated a three‑year moratorium on installations exceeding 20 megawatts, intended to grant the community time to weigh environmental, hydrological, and socioeconomic impacts.

The temporary ban passed unanimously in June and prohibits new facilities larger than 20 MW until July 2029, pending a comprehensive study of water resource challenges and local ecosystem effects. Treetop Development has appealed the measure, arguing that the moratorium effectively functions as a de‑facto prohibition on future hyper‑scale AI campuses.

A distinct break from the broader debate comes from Professor Tanya Radford, a lifelong resident who identifies as deeply embedded in technology despite her vocal opposition. “This is not an anti‑tech town,” she declared. “I am an educator who builds digital tools every day.” She contends that opposition focuses on scale—not on embracing innovation outright.

Traditional Innovation Hub

Historically, East Fishkill earned its reputation as an “innovation hub” through the legacy of IBM. During the latter half of the twentieth century, IBM’s semiconductor research and fabrication plants transformed the hamlet into a national centre for chip making, creating thousands of skilled positions and laying the groundwork for today’s iPark 84 complex, which hosts mixed‑use commercial and residential spaces. Remaining IBM sites still anchor the local economy, and one tenant is currently expanding an existing facility by roughly 150 megawatts—still far below the ambitious 700–1,000 megawatt scale advocated by Treetop.

Community leaders stress that opposition targets the unprecedented scale of contemporary AI infrastructure rather than all technology initiatives. “The pushback is really about size,” stated resident Fran Caracappa, a county‑level candidate. “That Treetop centre would require 1,000 megawatts—residents do not wish to shoulder higher electricity rates simply because a larger data centre moves in.” Additional scrutiny focuses on potential job creation, with locals expressing doubt that short‑term construction work will translate into sustainable employment for local families.

Sign up to TechScape

A weekly exploration of how technology reshapes everyday life

after newsletter promotion

The broader conflict reflects a nationwide rift. Rural communities and towns that once embraced high‑tech development are increasingly questioning whether cutting‑edge AI infrastructure provides sufficient local net benefit given its heavy demand for electricity, water, and land.

“This is not an anti‑tech town,” Radford added. “I teach students to use technology every day.”

Enterprise Appeal

Treetop has not tolerated the town’s prohibition without resistance. In a seventeen‑page legal submission filed to the board—later reviewed by The Guardian—the company argued the three‑year moratorium unlawfully targets its property and amounts to an informal indefinite ban rather than a legitimate temporizing measure.

Its counsel noted that the firm spent years and substantial resources preparing the case: completing environmental reviews, conducting wetland studies, analyzing traffic patterns, and coordinating with utilities. By contrast, officials insist that no downtown application has ever entered the record and that the moratorium creates valuable breathing room to assess whether contemporary zoning adequately governs this novel category of industrial development.

Residents celebrate the outcome. “People are winning,” Hoffmann observed. “Communities that stand in defiance of these facilities are proving their resolve.”

Source link