Broadview resident responds to data center suit with claims of her own

In turn, Yellowstone County sued over the initiative on July 8, alleging that it was illegal. 

This week, Solberg took another step in her campaign against the data center plan when she brought two counter-claims, including one that seeks to bring the town of Broadview into the case as a defendant. 

One of Solberg's claims filed July 28 accuses Broadview's government of not being forthcoming with the public. The other claim alleges that Quantica Infrastructure's plans would severely harm Solberg's quality of life and her water well.  

“The establishment of the Quantica data center in the Broadview area would more likely than not have a devastating impact on Solberg’s ability to access and likely have a devastating effect on farming and ranching operations throughout the region and beyond,” Helena attorney Brian Miller wrote in the suit.

The filing alleged the development of Quantica’s data center and its connected energy projects like planned gas, wind and solar would likely constitute a trespass and nuisance to Solberg, in addition to reducing Solberg’s personal rights under the Montana Constitution. Consequently, the lawsuit asked for a permanent halt to the development of the project. Otherwise, the data center “would more likely than not deplete all of the water from the well on her property.”

Quantica has previously told the Billings Gazette it plans to use a closed-loop system in the water-limited area of Broadview. The cooling process can greatly reduce the amount of water a data center can use by keeping water in the system, but increases energy demands for a data center overall.

Specific plans for a water source haven't been publicly shared by Quantica. The company is still going through early phases of the planning and permitting process.

Solberg denied the allegations made by Yellowstone County, which claimed the data center initiative is illegal by exceeding the scope of the county's authority. 

Solberg’s allegations also included the city of Broadview as a defendant, which previously wasn’t a named party in Yellowstone County’s lawsuit. The filing describes Solberg trying to get answers from Broadview’s town council repeatedly, but to no avail. 

“None of the city council members took the potential impacts on water from the Broadview data center seriously,” the complaint stated. “All of the members stated they knew about any potential impacts from the Broadview data center and expressed zero interest in learning anything about this critical issue.”

Solberg found their reaction to be “inexplicable and irrational,” a court document stated. She then inferred the council members likely signed nondisclosure agreements with Quantica that would limit how much they could share with the public. Solberg said she was aware of other agreements Broadview members had entered into with the developer.

Consequently, the filing asks Yellowstone County District Court to produce all nondisclosure agreements with the town of Broadview and for them to be considered null.

Broadview couldn’t be reached for comment. The county declined to comment, citing the ongoing litigation.

Other data center companies nationwide have entered into NDAs with elected officials, often when needing to acquire land or access to it, though Quantica’s parent company has had the 5,100 acres of land in one form or another for years.

In a statement to the Gazette, Quantica denied entering into any NDAs with elected officials.

“We’ll continue sticking to following the law and dealing honestly in facts which is what Montanans expect and deserve — not peddling unfounded claims, conspiracy theories or wild speculation,” the company said. 

Quantica further said they remain committed to being good neighbors and wanting to protect the "Montana way of life."

Email records obtained this month via a records request by the Gazette indicate that Quantica met with county commissioners about a week ahead of the company’s press release announcing the project in August 2025. But those initial records didn’t show any evidence of confidentiality agreements, nor much advance knowledge from commissioners of what the project might entail.

“All — here is the press release for the proposed data center,” Yellowstone County Chair Mark Morse wrote on Aug. 19, 2025 in an email to other county commissioners in Montana. “Talked about solar possibly wind generation in addition to power from NWE (NorthWestern Energy). Proposed siting is SW of Broadview on the transmission line so they can get the NWE power.”

His comment made no mention of gas power, which Quantica began working through the permitting process this year with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality on, according to past records obtained by the Gazette.

Following the Yellowstone County Commissioner’s tabling of a policy that would have restricted the activities of signature gathering on county property, Miller filed an additional request of the court. That filing made on behalf of Solberg is to ensure that the Broadview resident and other volunteers don’t face new signature gathering requirements before the Aug. 12 deadline to get signatures for their initiative.

“Allowing Solberg and others to continue to peacefully exercise their First Amendment rights to defend their land and their sovereignty, is a matter of the highest public importance,” Miller wrote in a request for a preliminary injunction. “The county should not be permitted to unlawfully abridge those rights prior to the Aug. 12, 2026, deadline.”

The document asserted that the county had failed to show a necessary reason for the policy. It noted that the signature gatherers spread across the county in recent weeks have not had any complaints filed against them, and have always gathered them in the public rights of way.

“The Policy stated that its enactment is to ensure members of the public have safe, unobstructive and impartial access to County buildings, but the County provided zero evidence or information that petition gathering activity has led to any such problems,” the attorney noted in the challenge.