• A Johnson County judge dismissed Edgerton's claims against two residents and the Public Trust Collective over their petition to prohibit high-impact data centres
  • A separate case will determine whether the petition can reach the November ballot, with arguments scheduled for 24 September

The fact

Johnson County District Judge Stephanie Goodenow has dismissed Edgerton's claims against residents Carrie Schmidt and Kimberly Twente and the Public Trust Collective, who helped organise a petition to prohibit high-impact data centres in the Kansas city. The judge granted their motion to strike under the state's Public Speech Protection Act. Edgerton said the ruling was procedural and did not decide whether the proposed ordinance can legally move forward.

The Johnson County Election Office certified the petition on 20 July after more than 200 residents signed it. The proposal would prohibit data centres with a peak electrical load above 10MW or daily water use above 100,000 gallons. The dispute followed DAMAC Digital Solutions' plan to convert an existing property at Logistics Park Kansas City into a data centre. Edgerton's Planning Commission rejected the final site plan in June, but the City Council overturned that decision on 16 July.

A separate lawsuit against the Edgerton city clerk now carries the ballot question. Goodenow denied an emergency request to place the petition on the November ballot but ordered the city to explain why it should not appear. Arguments are scheduled for 24 September.

The assessment

The court ruling does not undo DAMAC's site-plan approval. It deals with the city's case against the people behind the petition, while the separate dispute over whether residents can put their proposed ordinance to a vote is still open.

That leaves two processes running at the same time. DAMAC has cleared an important local planning decision, but residents are still trying to change the rules governing high-impact data centres in Edgerton. The court has not yet said that the petition is legally valid, and it is not yet on the ballot.

For BTW readers, the 24 September hearing is now more important to the project's political risk than this dismissal. If the petition is allowed onto the ballot, attention will turn to the wording of the ordinance and whether it could affect projects that already hold approvals. Until then, DAMAC's existing site-plan approval remains in place.

What to watch

Watch the 24 September hearing and any ruling on whether the petition can appear on the November ballot. If a vote is allowed, the next question will be how the ordinance treats projects with existing approvals. DAMAC's remaining permitting, infrastructure and construction milestones should be tracked separately from the petition case.