Representatives from the University of Michigan faced a hostile crowd on Wednesday night in Ypsilanti Township. University officials and partners from Los Alamos National Laboratories (LANL) attempted to defend a proposed $1.2 billion hyperscale data center. The residents rejected the pitch.
The facility and the fears
The project involves a 220,000 square foot site. Residents are concerned about electricity costs, water consumption, and noise pollution. These are standard worries for communities across the country facing similar developments. The local anxiety here is specific to the project’s origin. Citizens and local leaders fear the site will advance nuclear weapon research. They also accuse the University of condescension, dishonesty, and ignoring their input throughout the planning phase.
Video from the evening shows the University failed to gain support. Patricia Hurn, a faculty director, read a prepared statement while the audience shouted at her. She listed potential uses for the facility, including cancer care, power grid stability, drug discovery, and sustainable computing. The crowd mocked these claims. When Hurn mentioned infant mortality and clean energy, a member of the audience shouted, “How about healthcare?” Hurn replied that all these goals required strong computing abilities to achieve.
Steven Ceccio, the project’s lead engineer, tried to address practical concerns. He compared the proposed LANL site to The Barn, a massive $56 billion project near Saline Township. Ceccio claimed his project was much smaller in scope. A resident named Andy challenged this comparison. He works in data centers nationwide and called the Barn an aberration. He argued that the proposed Ypsilanti site sits at the top of the size bracket for average US data centers. Andy noted that such facilities are loud, emit pollution, and require generators. He stated they belong in remote areas, not next to schools and apartments.
Throughout the meeting, University representatives avoided calling the project a data center. Ceccio insisted it was a scientific computing center for nonprofit research and development, not a commercial activity. LANL did not attend in person. A woman named Jamie asked why they were absent. The laboratory sent a letter to be read instead. It described supercomputing as an essential tool for modelling and analysing complex systems with greater precision than during the Manhattan Project.
The letter stated no plutonium would be on site and no weapons would be produced. Instead, the facility would use advanced computing to model systems and analyse datasets. LANL pointed to work on wildfire behaviour, disease tracking, and power grid strengthening. The letter conceded, however, that some computational research would relate to nuclear modernisation. This work uses modelling to assess the safety and reliability of the existing nuclear stockpile without physical testing. It involves no manufacturing or production of weapons.
Security concerns and local anger
Residents and township leaders have speculated the site could be a target for drone strikes. Douglas Winters, the township’s attorney, called the proposed site a high-value target. A LANL letter denied that any agency had classified it as such, adding that the township board and city attorney had created the terminology without basis. Winters told 404 Media that it was silly to claim he made up the term. He argued that a facility housing $1.2 billion worth of the world’s fastest computers would not be ignored by an entity like Los Alamos.
Anger grew as the meeting continued. Jennifer Burnside lives roughly two miles from the proposed site. She worked at the University for ten years and was shocked by its behaviour. She said an outside power was entering the community without playing by the same rules. She felt they were being taken advantage of and did not want the data center forced upon them.
Corey, a resident living in a poor neighbourhood about two and a half miles away, said most people could not afford to move if the project turned out as bad as they feared. He felt the University’s argument was that the project would be bad, but that was not good enough for the community. He added that the University had become cartoon-style villains. He said there was no trust and that they did not believe the officials. He stated they did not want Los Alamos there, calling it one of the biggest villains of the 20th century.
Eric, a township resident, asked why the University had not approached the community two years ago. He said they were being asked to join a project when the water was already poisoned. Shalina Nicohl Rankin, a University graduate and resident, said the University needed to appear with the board of regents next time. She stated clearly that they did not want the project there. She said they had not invited them. Rankin referenced the University’s motto, “Leaders and best,” and criticised the partnership with Los Alamos. She described the laboratory as despicable, noting its association with cancer and nuclear bombs. She said they were bringing that into their backyard.
When asked about nuclear weapons research, Ceccio lamented that the weapons existed. He said he wanted a world without nuclear proliferation and would do everything to make that happen. He noted that some institutions exist for national security and that he was proud to be part of that mission. The people of Ypsilanti Township were not proud and made it clear their concerns were not considered.
Brenda Stumbo, a township supervisor, said the University had repeatedly lied to citizens and leaders. She said people were leaving and selling their homes because of the thought of Los Alamos being there. She called the emotion and rage fear and asked the University to change their mind. The town hall ran for three hours. The University promised another meeting on October first. Winters said he would not attend and suggested the University come to the September 15 board meeting instead. The University of Michigan did not return a request for comment.
