Data centers claim 'public hysteria'

Good morning!

Are the rising number of local data center bans a sign of democracy in action, or proof that town councils are caving to crazed mobs?

Sophie Nieto-Muñoz looks at this issue today as data center developers are increasingly moving to the courts to try to get their facilities constructed here in New Jersey. At least three towns have been sued in recent weeks over their data center bans, with one developer seeking $300 million in damages.

“The action of the Township Committee was clearly based upon public hysteria and political attention rather than sound land use planning,” says the lawsuit targeting Montgomery’s data center ban.

Ben Dziobek, who as executive director of the Climate Revolution Action Network has lobbied towns to reject data centers, said developers are moving the fight to the courts because they have lost in the court of public opinion.

“It’s becoming clearer and clearer that hundreds of people are going to show up in opposition to these projects no matter where they are,” Dziobek said.

Read more from Sophie.

Voter registration: Sherrill on Wednesday offered on update on the voter registration debacle that has made her a target of Republicans nationwide. About a month after she blamed a software glitch at the Motor Vehicle Commission for registering thousands of noncitizens to vote, Sherrill said the state has removed 5,100 people from the voter rolls. Another 1,650 cases were sent to county officials to review because some could be legitimate voters, she said. “I said we would conduct a thorough, complete, and fair investigation, and that is exactly what we are doing. Because that is what accountable government looks like,” she said in a statement. Republican Assemblyman Paul Kanitra told us Sherrill is not doing enough. “Governor Sherrill has over and over again minimized the harsh reality created by her own party members: hundreds of noncitizens have voted in several elections in New Jersey,” he said.

Local: A North Jersey guy has claimed — I think seriously?? — to have discovered a new town in Essex County when he was walking between Belleville and Nutley and noticed there was a bit of a gap between the “Welcome to Belleville” and “Welcome to Nutley” signs. He’s calling the town Beltley, and even though it was founded just days ago, it already has the highest property taxes in the state and the health benefits plan for Beltley workers is in a death spiral. Jack Ford at News 12 gave the matter the appropriate levity, and his story includes what may be the single funniest half-sentence in New Jersey news so far this year: “Asked why he didn't go with ‘Nutville’ instead …”

The Beltley founder, whose name is John "Cozz" Cozzarelli because of course it is, said this to Ford:

Health benefits: A state panel tasked with approving next year’s health premium rates for school workers on the state-run health plan again punted on Wednesday by delaying a vote approving the rates. The board deadlocked when it voted to approve raising the premiums by 34% after teachers union officials urged them to find a better solution. “We’re unions. We negotiate contracts, and we know just simply agreeing to what we know is a wrong thing and hoping they’ll change it is a fool’s errand,” said Steve Beatty, president of statewide teachers union the New Jersey Education Association. One of the commission’s members said they worried that delaying the vote would push a decision into this year’s open enrollment period, meaning some teachers would be selecting plans without knowing their cost.

Courts: The New Jersey Supreme Court on Wednesday issued a divided ruling that bars sex abuse claims from moving forward against the Boys & Girls Clubs of America, with the majority saying the claims against the Georgia-based group cannot be made in New Jersey courts, though claims targeting its state-specific chapters can. In the case at hand, nine people sued the national group, its Hudson County chapter, and a part-time counselor for that chapter for abuse they say occurred between 1976 and 1984. In a rare, two-judge dissent, Justice John Jay Hoffman said the ruling ignores the national group’s failure to protect children in its care. “The majority is mistaken, and the impact of this error on these plaintiffs is grave,” he wrote.