Letter: Danger ahead, please detour

 Jun 12, 2026, Pine Knot News

We need a pause in the headlong rush into artificial intelligence. AI is dangerous. AI lives in hyperscale data centers. A moratorium on these huge projects provides a year to plan a safe path forward.

Here are a few of the threats of AI:

• Cyber vulnerability. Many of the services that we depend on, such as the Internet, banks, power grids, transportation (trains and planes), and others, are dependent on digital networks that have been hit with hacker attacks. AI is boosting the number of those events.

• Questionable government conduct. Since January, Anthropic AI has opposed the use of its product by the Department of Defense for fully autonomous lethal weapons and for mass domestic surveillance.

• Hazardous personal use. We read about people becoming enthralled with the encouraging feedback that a chat buddy provides. Sometimes this leads to tragedy: the State of Florida has filed suit against OpenAI alleging that their systems present a danger of addiction, suicide and violence.

• Accuracy risk. Who has not heard of students and even professionals taking a short cut with AI, only to be shamed when their essays, legal briefs and medical diagnoses are shown to be in error?

• Humanity at stake. The recent papal encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas, consecrates the dignity of human life and calls the misuse of AI sinful.

To be clear, this is not a call to reverse course.

Yes, AI is coming. Yes, we can glimpse the extraordinary opportunities; in just four years, since the release of ChatGPT, free AI apps let the general public create art works and audio, video, and text documents that amaze our family and friends.

There are many lessons about products which have transformed society but have had negative effects that take decades of advocacy to mitigate. Here are a few: the element lead in gasoline and paint; tobacco smoke in public places; the public sale of alcohol and other intoxicants; fossil fuels in a changing climate; and the big one, nuclear fission. Today, the U.S. is at war (or maybe not?) because of atomic weapons.

Presently, we, the people, have no effective control of AI, a product that will probably change our lives. We are not calling for nationalization of frontier AI companies, but how about claiming a major public stake in the big ones?

In the meantime, we want our local officials to pause AI with a moratorium on huge data centers until regulation is in place. This is not a rejection of AI; it is a detour that will get us to the destination and help avoid catastrophe.

John “Sandy” Dugan,

Wrenshall

To the Carlton County Planning Commission:

Interest and concern has been shown in the county regarding the development of large or hyperscale Data Centers. The Carlton County Land Stewards are concerned citizens who want to offer our input and assistance in examining this issue. We believe large and hyperscale data centers bring many complex issues that should be addressed before any action regarding their development is taken by the County. 

These issues include, but are not limited to: 

• Industry-specific zoning considerations 
• Noise, water, air, and light pollution 
• Increased electrical demands and costs 
• Substantial volumes of water usage
• A broad scope of environmental and ecosystem impacts 
• Social, economic, and health impacts 
• Limited lifespans and impending obsolescence from innovative technologies.

We, the Carlton County Land Stewards, suggest that the Planning Commission, County Commission, and the community need more time to learn about Data Centers. Therefore, we request a 1-year moratorium on Data Center negotiations, permitting, and development. During this time the County, in an open, inclusive, and transparent process, including several public hearings, will study and clarify the possible benefits and impacts of Data Centers. The County will take this time to determine the role of Data Centers, if any, in our county.  A moratorium will also provide the County time to develop and implement new ordinances to site and regulate these facilities. This proactive approach benefits the County, its communities, and the environment.

Date: July 7, 2026
To: Carlton County Board of Commissioners
From: Carlton County Land Stewards
Re: Data Center Moratoria
Carlton County Land Stewards, and numerous governmental units in Minnesota,
recognize the value of establishing a moratorium on data center projects. The Minnesota cities
of Minneapolis, Eagan, Rosemount, Carver, Lonsdale, and Inver Grove Heights, as well as Le
Sueur and Wright counties’ moratoria are examples of how other communities have
approached this issue. (See available links on page 2).
These data center moratoria consistently identify the need to protect the health, safety,
and welfare of their communities by providing the necessary time to research currently
recognized issues and learn how they may be best addressed and mitigated. In addition, any
potentially unrecognized issues may be discovered after thorough study, analysis and
reflection. Currently recognized issues include:

• Energy production and consumption and electrical infrastructure
• Taxation, economic accountability, and infrastructure costs
• Land use compatibility, siting criteria, zoning ordinances, and permitting
• Emergency services and hazard mitigation
• Water consumption and cooling technologies
• Storm and wastewater management
• Air, light, noise, water, and heat pollution
• Human health
• Environmental monitoring, protection, and reviews
• Legal challenges for lack of due diligence or contract disputes
  Independent deliberations by these county boards and city councils have all reached
  the same conclusion – the time to plan for how data centers, may or may not, fit into your
  community, is before, not when, one comes knocking at your door. It’s better to be prepared
  and proactive vs unprepared and reactive.
  Therefore, in the best interests of the public, a moratorium is the first logical step in a
  prudent approach to data center development. The Carlton County Land Stewards urge the
  Carlton County Board of Commissioners to adopt a one-year data center moratorium to review
  all pertinent information. This will signal Carlton County’s commitment to uphold its stated
  mission, “To Protect and Enhance the Quality of Life” for our community.
  Respectfully,
  Carlton County Land Stewards

Links to available ordinances passed by Minnesota cities and counties:

City of Carver

City of Rosemount

City of Minneapolis

City of Eagan

City of Inver Grove Heights – see page 15

City of Lonsdale

Wright County

Le Sueur County

Comments on a project’s Environmental, Social and

Fiscal Economic Evaluation
By – Craig Sterle, July 7, 2026
Carlton County Land Stewards (CCLS)

My name is Craig Sterle, I’m here as a member of CCLS. I’m also the
Conservation Issues Chair for the Duluth Izaak Walton League chapter. My
years of engagement in conservation advocacy has involved me in a
variety of different projects, from mining and pipelines, to wildlife habitat

management planning. Most environmental reviews fall short of a well-
balanced cost/benefit analysis.

Proposers lead with strength, job creation and economic growth,
foregoing the required “hard look” at the environmental, social and fiscal
impacts associated with the project’s development, avoiding any
“cumulative impact analysis” that encompasses past, present, and
foreseeable development impacts. (see attached – MN Rule 4410.1700
Decision on Need for EIS, subpart 7-B)
It’s critical to scrutinize a proposer’s cost/benefit statements. Are they
glittering generalities that lack specificity, do they focus solely on the
positive aspects of a project, while largely ignoring or minimizing the

negative consequences? Do they analyze environmental, social, and long-
term fiscal costs to citizens?

Evaluating ecosystem services is key, so everyone sees the monetize
values for ecological costs or benefits. It’s broken into four categories:
 regulating systems (ex. water and air purification, flood mitigation,
carbon sequestration)
 provisioning systems (food and water, timber and forage)
 cultural/non-material benefits (ex. recreation, aesthetic enjoyment,
spiritual enrichment)
 supporting systems (nutrient cycling, soil production)

A robust example by Earth Economic, “The Value of Nature’s Benefits in
the St. Louis River Watershed”, was commissioned by the Fond du Lac
Band of Lake Superior Chippewa in 2015.
It’s important to analyze the short-term benefits associated with new
proposed jobs, spinoff businesses and economic benefits, but take the
“hard look” at long-term costs to Local Government Unit (LGU) for
infrastructure development and ongoing maintenance costs. Determine
whether the perks are worth decades of taxpayer expenses.
Attached is “When the Decision Is Too Big for the City” by Charles Marohn,
land use planner/civil engineer and founder and president of Strong Towns.
He explains communities like Carlton County will find it far harder to
recover from a decision’s mistake when it’s the size of a hyperscale data
center, than a local gravel pit permit. Size matters. He details the issue in
his “When Scale Breaks Decision-making”.
Rigorous environmental review, looking hard and asking difficult questions
on short and long-term financial consequences, is essential. A proposer
that arrives with a battery of legal and technical experts leaves every LGU
at a disadvantage he calls the “The Asymmetry Problem”. The LGU should
seek outside expertise and collaborate with others before making a
decision. This can take time, time the LGU must invest in. Marohn goes so
far as to ask “not just what should be done, but who should be allowed to
decide.” Is the LGU equipped to making the decision?
Finally, environmental reviews should include a Health Impact
Assessments (HIA) that looks at positive and negative human health
consequences from a project.

Thank you for your time.

To: Carlton County Commissioners July 7, 2026
From: Carlton County Land Stewards
I am Sandy Sterle, and I live on County Road 104 in Blackhoof Township. I am part of a grassroots
organization called The Carlton County Land Stewards – CCLS. Years ago, we organized as a group of
families, farmers and landowners to come together and oppose the creation of a new pipeline
corridor through Carlton County. This corridor would have completely disrupted Carlton’s
Breadbasket of Organic Farmers, along with having crossed virgin wetlands, waterways, and
forestlands.
Enbridge came to our door saying they are coming through our land with a single Sandpiper
pipeline, it’s a done deal, and sign this. The push was to sign now for an appearance of a deal and
too fast to gain counsel. They would go on people’s land without permission and try to split the
community. The threat was, if we do not sign now, they will use eminent domain. These
statements were not true, but were power plays used to manipulate, overwhelm, and force
landowners to comply. It was not a done deal. Enbridge had not yet sent their proposal to the
Public Utilities Commission (PUC); and they hid their real intention to create a second right-of-way
for yet more pipelines. As a group, we were able to inform and support each other and other
families. Eminent domain is a last resort after negotiations fail. We did have choices! CCLS wants
you to be aware of manipulation by large corporation’s representatives, and to realize you have
time and choices that lead to better decisions.
CCLS came together to oppose this proposal and we were successful. With the help of our
Commissioner, Enbridge agreed to go down existing utility corridors. Enbridge was required by MN
Court of Appeals and MN Supreme Court for the first time ever to complete an EIS. Our knowledge,
abilities and connections created success. We did not succumb to Enbridge’s pressure. We
educated ourselves and asserted our choices in the process.
This new type of Data Center development may be homeowners and Carlton County’s next
challenge. How many of you were here when Enbridge tried to gain a 2nd corridor? These large
Corporations have tremendous resources to use against families and smaller counties like Carlton.
They make promises of jobs and financial gain, yet they withhold details and hide how they intend
to make profit by socializing their costs. And, it is still unclear what these Data Centers are for?
What benefit if any is there for the Community? It is not a Done Deal! It may become clear that a
Data Center Corporation needs us more than we need them. Then, why not be forearmed to ask
hard questions and make better decisions?
We are asking for Carlton County to take time to prepare. This new type of Data Center
development is not on the same level as an easement, a variance or a new business. They are not
just an economic opportunity. These Data Centers will have legacy impacts to the County and its
people long after their doors close. Please let CCLS, other citizens, informed professionals, along
with the experience of other Cities and Counties be a resource to help you prepare. That is why…
CCLS requests a Moratorium on this new type of Data Center development, so Carlton County and
its citizens have the opportunity to learn, discuss and understand the full extent of the positive,
negative and long-term consequences of hosting them in Carlton County before entering into any
proposal permitting process.

Re: Addressing development of data centers

July 6, 2026

Carlton County Commissioners
Carlton, MN

Dear Commissioners,
Just over two years ago, my wife and I moved to 2370 Bromfield Rd in
Atkinson Township after I retired from the School of Environment and

Sustainability at the University of Saskatchewan. Previously, I held vari-
ous positions in the area of computational science and engineering at IBM,

the University of Illinois, Cornell University, and the US Department of
Agriculture.

It is challenging, even for someone with 40 years of professional experi-
ence, to keep up with the rapidly changing technologies related to com-
puter chips, cooling, on-site power generation, and noise abatement. I

believe that a moratorium on the development of hyperscale data centers
is a practical necessity because the public and elected officials in counties

and municipalities do not currently have the technical expertise to eval-
uate proposals. Adopting a moratorium would allow time to develop a

network of expertise to support informed decision-making.
I have taken the initiative to approach the U of MN Extension service
to explore the possibility of creating a regional sustainable development

partnership patterned after the one already in place in southeastern Min-
nesota. I know that the commissioners and zoning board in Pine County

are currently discussing a moratorium and may be interested in such a
collaborative effort. In addition, I propose the creation of an ad hoc task
force to explore these possibilities as a way to reduce the burden on elected
officials and their staff. A regional sustainable development partnership

would provide a framework for identifying and engaging expertise in ar-
eas such as:

• economics of hyperscale data centers
• AI-related computer technology
• civil, mechanical, and environmental engineering,
• economic and enviromental sustainability.
  Finally, I propose that the task force and regional partnership both include

bands with treaty rights on any lands considered for data center develop-
ment.

Thank you for your consideration of these ideas.
Regards,

David J. Schneider

I’m an Organic Farmer in Carlton County.  In 1976 my wife and I moved to Holyoke  Minnesota from Oregon.  In 1988 we sold the Holyoke place and purchased a farm two miles south of Wrenshall.  We have established a viable business selling vegetables.   

 In 2000 we built an irrigation pond and a root cellar which enabled us to dependably expand our business by making it possible to grow enough vegetables to supply our customers nearly year ‘round.  We had noticed that summer temperatures were getting higher and dry spells were getting longer, which increased our need for irrigation.

 In 2010 we sold the farm to our son, Janaki and his wife Anne.  Janaki has enlarged the root cellar and expanded production to bring total gross sales to over $500,000, and the farm employs 9 summer staff and 4 year ‘round employees.  

Since the irrigation pond isn’t spring-fed we depend on a small well less than 100 feet from the pond to keep it filled.  Even though this well is only 140 feet deep with a 20-foot draw-down, it supplies enough water to irrigate 20 acres of vegetables.

My concern with a data center is that it will use so much water that it will lower the water table to the point that our well will no longer be able to supply us with sufficient water to irrigate, clean and pack vegetables for the local market.

An open letter to Chris Berg,

Zoning and Environmental Services Administrator

Re: Proposed Industrial and Regional Commercial Zoning at the Corner of County Road 4 and County Road 1 in the Carlton County 2050 Comprehensive Plan

Dear Mr. Berg,

I am writing as a concerned resident of Carlton County to formally object to a specific provision in the current draft of the Carlton County 2050 Comprehensive Plan: the designation of the parcel at the intersection of County Road 4 and County Road 1 for industrial and regional commercial development.

I appreciate the enormous effort that has gone into creating a long-range vision for our county. However, this particular zoning decision is deeply at odds with the plan’s own stated vision and goals — and with the character, ecology, and economy of the land it would affect.

I urge you and the planning commission to consider the irreparable impact this decision would make and reconsider this designation before the plan is finalized.

This land is already at the heart of Carlton County’s Agritourism economy

The very first paragraph of the Comprehensive Plan’s vision statement says Carlton County should “evolve to be the premiere regional destination of northeast Minnesota” and “draw visitors from throughout the state and beyond to its charming small towns… stunning natural landscapes, and diverse and welcoming cultural events.”

This parcel sits directly in the middle of an emerging agritourism corridor that is already attracting visitors to Carlton County. Industrial development here would work against precisely the kind of tourism economy the county says it wants to encourage.

Agritourism is a growing industry, driven by consumer demand for authentic, immersive, and farm-to-table experiences. We are already seeing that growth locally.

Directly across from this parcel is a successful pick-your-own berry operation that attracts visitors from Duluth and beyond and offers on-farm lodging. Farm Lola has deliberately built its business around agritourism. Visitors who travel to stay and spend time on a farm are seeking the landscape described in the county’s own plan: “farmland stretching alongside protected forests.”

Nearby, Laveau Butcher Company is developing an agricultural business centered around locally produced meat, including an on-site butcher counter and smoked meats. A mile down the road, another farm-stay operation attracts hikers and outdoor enthusiasts from around the country. Food Farm and Northern Harvest Farm are also nearby and regularly host farm tours, open houses, and other events that draw regional and international visitors.

These businesses are not isolated enterprises. Together, they are creating an agricultural and tourism economy rooted in the rural landscape of this part of Carlton County.

Requiring visitors to pass through a corridor of industrial and heavy commercial development to reach these destinations would undermine the very experience that makes these businesses distinctive. People traveling to experience local farms, food, forests, and rural life do not come here to see industrial buildings and expansive paved surfaces. They come because of the agricultural landscape.

The county’s agricultural tourism history reinforces this point. Laveau Dairy is one of the last remaining dairy farms of its kind in the country, and its land is among the areas affected by the proposed changes. One of the area’s largest annual agricultural events, Breakfast on the Farm, brings regional visitors together for a day of agricultural education and community engagement.

This is an existing economic ecosystem, not a hypothetical future. It should be fostered and encouraged. Industrial and regional commercial zoning could jeopardize this ecosystem and make it more difficult for future agricultural businesses to grow. Local commercial, agricultural, and rural designations would be far more compatible with the economic reality and potential of this area.

This is prime agricultural land

The property at County Road 4 and County Road 1 is not marginal or transitional land. It is productive farmland located within a concentrated area of successful agricultural operations.

That location is part of what makes the property so valuable. Its agricultural use is connected to a broader network of farms, food businesses, farm stays, and agritourism destinations. Taken together, these operations represent an important and growing part of Carlton County’s rural economy.

Once productive farmland is paved, compacted, or contaminated through incompatible development, its agricultural value is permanently diminished or lost.

The Comprehensive Plan itself identifies the preservation of agricultural land as an important long-term priority. Targeting this parcel for industrial development directly conflicts with that commitment.

Recent conversations with the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa also underscored the importance of the agricultural products produced in the Wrenshall area. Maintaining a strong local agricultural economy is not only an economic and environmental priority; it is part of the intergovernmental and regional collaboration that the 25-year plan seeks to strengthen.

A plan looking ahead to 2050 should protect the agricultural resources that future generations will need, rather than designating them for development that could permanently eliminate their agricultural use.

A cold-water trout stream requires special protection

There is another reason this particular parcel deserves heightened scrutiny: a trout stream runs through the property, fed by exceptionally cold groundwater.

Cold-water streams are rare and environmentally sensitive. Their health depends on groundwater quality and temperature, intact vegetation, adequate shade, and protection from sediment, pollutants, and excessive runoff.

Industrial and regional commercial development typically brings extensive impervious surfaces, increased stormwater runoff, heavy vehicle traffic, and the potential for chemical storage, spills, and other pollutants. These impacts pose obvious risks to a cold-water stream and the fishery it supports.

This is precisely the kind of natural resource that a long-range comprehensive plan should be designed to protect.

The county’s plan explicitly commits to stewardship of natural resources. Placing an industrial designation directly over a sensitive cold-water watershed is difficult to reconcile with that commitment.

A century-old barn and nationally recognized cultural destination

The property is also home to a century-old barn that houses the Free Range Film Festival, a beloved annual event that draws hundreds of visitors from Duluth, the Twin Cities, New York City, and beyond.

The festival is more than a local event. It is a distinctive cultural destination rooted in the history and landscape of rural Carlton County. It brings visitors and tourism dollars to the area and has received attention from national media outlets.

Its rural setting is not incidental to the festival’s identity. The agricultural landscape, historic barn, and sense of place are part of the experience visitors are traveling to enjoy.

Industrializing the surrounding landscape would fundamentally change that experience. A comprehensive plan should recognize that historic and cultural resources are often valuable precisely because they exist within a particular landscape and context.

The proposed designation contradicts the plan’s own goals

The most important point I want to make is that this is not simply a disagreement about one parcel or a debate over whether development is good or bad. The problem is that the proposed industrial and regional commercial designation contradicts several of the Comprehensive Plan’s own stated goals.

Specifically, the designation would:

1. Undermine agritourism and sustainable agriculture.
   The county seeks to encourage agritourism and local food systems, yet this parcel sits at the center of an existing and growing agritourism economy that would be negatively affected by industrial and large-scale commercial development.
2. Convert productive agricultural land.
   The plan identifies agricultural preservation as a priority, yet this designation would make the permanent conversion of productive farmland more likely.
3. Put significant natural resources at risk.
   A sensitive cold-water trout stream runs through the property and requires protection from the impacts associated with intensive development.
4. Threaten a significant cultural and tourism destination.
   The century-old barn and Free Range Film Festival are valuable cultural assets whose identity is inseparable from their rural agricultural setting.
5. Work against the county’s tourism vision.
   The county wants to attract visitors to its farms, natural landscapes, small towns, and cultural events. Industrial development at this particular location would diminish the rural landscape that helps make those destinations attractive.

A better vision for this land

I am not arguing that this area should never accommodate economic development. Instead, I believe this land has significant economic potential if zoned properly. The most valuable development opportunity is the one that builds on what already exists rather than replacing it.

Agricultural, rural, conservation-oriented, and appropriately scaled local commercial uses supports the farms, food businesses, tourism operations, cultural events, and natural resources that are already making this area a destination.

This approach would create economic activity while preserving the very assets that make Carlton County distinctive.

I respectfully ask that Carlton County remove the proposed industrial and regional commercial designation for the corner of County Road 4 and County Road 1 and instead adopt future land-use designations that prioritize agricultural, rural, conservation, agritourism, and appropriately scaled local commercial uses. This revision would demonstrate that the goals outlined in the 2050 Comprehensive Plan are more than aspirations, they are commitments.

The Carlton County 2050 Comprehensive Plan is an opportunity to decide what kind of county we want to leave to the next generation. This particular piece of land offers a clear choice that stretches beyond property lines: we can treat it as another location for industrial development, or we can recognize its existing value as productive farmland, critical habitat, a cultural destination, and the center of a growing rural tourism economy. I believe the latter better reflects the vision Carlton County has set for itself.

Thank you for your consideration of these concerns.

Respectfully,

Anne Dugan