Opponents of a Grayslake data center development have filed a lawsuit against the village, project developer T5 Data Centers and landowner Alter Asset Management Company, asking that a judge void previous approvals and agreements as community backlash grows.
The Alter Group sold the land to T5 in 2024. Michael Alter is the head of the real estate agency and owner of the Chicago Sky professional women’s basketball team.
The announcement of the long-awaited lawsuit was made Wednesday evening, during an educational event put on by the Lake County Illinois Data Center Opposition Coalition, a group formed specifically to oppose the Grayslake project. It was met by cheers from the crowd.
Filed on behalf of the Preservation of Community Well-being Collective, the lawsuit’s plaintiffs are residents and property owners in Saddlebrook Farms, Grayslake, Mundelein and Round Lake Park.
It calls for several forms of relief, including a declaration that the 2024-2025 approvals be made invalid and unenforceable, a judgment vacating and setting aside those approvals, an order voiding the development agreements between Grayslake and T5, and a permanent injunction prohibiting Grayslake from issuing further permits to T5.
For Michael Smith, co-founder of the opposition coalition, the lawsuit is a major step for the group, which aims to stop the development.
“We feel like we have a really strong case to present to the court,” Smith said Wednesday. “We’re hopeful the courts will agree with us and take the steps that we’re requesting.”
It’s not the only lawsuit in the region against data center developments: Chloe Russell, the attorney representing the Lake County residents, previously said she’s been working with similar groups in Joliet and Yorkville. Last month, a settlement was reached in the Yorkville lawsuit.
Grayslake Mayor Elizabeth Davies said Friday the village had not been served with the lawsuit.
In a statement, T5 CEO Pete Marin said the company will respond to the lawsuit through the legal system, but officials are “confident we’ve followed the letter and intent of every law and regulation every step of the way.”
“Our goal is to bring a great facility to the region that will not just power the smartphones, computers, and technology that we all rely on every day, but will also deliver … (substantial) new taxes and fees to the benefit of Grayslake Village and Lake County,” Marin said. “This is a once-in-a-lifetime investment, and Grayslake residents and their leaders will get to determine how to use it.”
Residents organize
Wednesday’s event was part educational forum — featuring guest advocates and professionals who spoke about potential health and environmental risks posed by data centers — and part advocacy training. The crowded room of homeowners and residents was told about how to do research, how to organize and how to put political pressure on officials.
“We felt it was really important for the public to get the truth around what the concerns and impacts will be, rather than the sugar-coated opaqueness presented by T5 and the village of Grayslake,” Smith said.
Residents and speakers raised numerous concerns during the event: air pollution from backup diesel generators, the exact nature of the closed-loop cooling system, the risks of soil and well-water contamination, and noise and light pollution, among others.
Some residents of area communities criticized Grayslake for being a bad neighbor, and allegedly moving ahead without proper notification and public input. The lawsuit expanded on that, accusing the village of obfuscating the nature of the development during the earlier stages of approvals.
Previously, Davies has said the development site, a 640-acre business park known as Cornerstone, has long been envisioned for such a development, requiring minor planning steps to accommodate the data center campus.
Wednesday evening attendees included area officials and at least one Grayslake resident planning to run against the village’s sitting trustees in 2027. It could be a hint of political consequences from public backlash, and Smith argued there are signs T5 is concerned about public sentiment.
Residents have been reporting surveys from a public relations firm asking about their views on the development. Additionally, T5 had pulled back from an application to permanently fill in nearly 16 acres of wetland on a portion of the site.
Responding to questions about the surveys, Marin said officials had heard concerns from residents online and during a community forum. The survey was to get a “representative picture of what the entire community is concerned about so we can be responsive to those concerns.”
“We have a 20-year history of working collaboratively with communities. We’re trying to do the same here. I believe that withdrawing the wetlands remediation application is an important example of us listening to folks and responding to their concerns,” Marin said.
But online and during public comments at Thursday’s Lake County Stormwater Management Commission meeting, some data center opponents framed the withdrawal as a misdirection, warning of the environmental dangers still posed by the development.
“They want us to think that the environmental threat is solved. It’s not,” one resident said during the meeting.
The commission meeting was also unusually well-attended — a common occurrence at many normally quieter meetings across the area in recent months — and included a presentation about the development from Brian Frank, the SMC chief engineer.
Because T5 had not followed up on its application to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, it has been closed, he said. If it had continued, SMC would have reviewed a soil erosion and sediment control plan, he said.
At this point, the Lake County SMC has no ties to the development, Frank said. However, the USACE’s letter responding to T5’s application had noted a portion of the wetlands on site are isolated, meaning they fall under Lake County jurisdiction.
If the development will impact any of those isolated wetlands, that would have to go through the review and approval of SMC, Frank said.
And although T5 is moving forward with plans that build around the existing wetlands, this could still potentially have impacts; drainage into the wetland, for example.
Frank said SMC will need to make sure too much water isn’t being sent into the wetlands, and a hydraulic review would fall under SMC. This process is not happening at this time, he said.
