Yellowstone County data center ballot initiative stopped by courts

Residents who oppose the center will move forward, too, they said.

Organizer and Broadview resident Kassi Solberg, who pledged to fight the proposed Quantica data center in her hometown, can pinpoint the moment things started to change — at a county commissioners meeting July 9 where previously sympathetic commissioners on the three-person, all-Republican board seemed to turn from allies to adversaries.

When she arrived, she found a packet of papers on every chair that included the county’s recently filed lawsuit against her, complete with the county’s statement and related emails.

The last page listed Solberg’s personal address and claimed the lawsuit had been “hand delivered.”

It hadn’t.

Solberg had not even been scheduled to appear on the agenda.

“Did you put these papers out?” she asked commissioners at the start of public comment.

“We’re not answering that,” said Commissioner Mark Morse, one of the three commissioners  — who are the top authority in the state’s largest county.

Yellowstone County recommends a Special Zoning District

Solberg has become the face of a fight against Montana’s largest proposed data center in the state. A mother of six from Broadview, a small town roughly 30 miles north of Billings with only 150 residents, Solberg first brought concerns to the Broadview Town Council, which ended in a screaming match with one of the members telling her directly, “You can’t stop it.” 

After unsuccessful attempts to halt the project at the small town council level, Solberg came to the Yellowstone County Commissioners for help.

“What the Yellowstone County Commissioners told me to do was go out there and start this special zoning district,” Solberg said. “(They told me) ‘We’ll help you with the regulations, Kassi, just get the petitions in.’”  

Special zoning districts are designated by the county commissioners if they “find it in the public interest, or if 60%  or more of the property owners affected by such a district petition to establish a special zoning district.”

When she began working on the special zoning district in May, it meant she’d have to locate the property owners spanning across 21,142 acres, of which approximately 5,000 are sited for the data center being proposed by Quantica. Solberg tracked down and got the signature of one of the property owners with land bordering the center – a requirement of state law. 

Solberg turned in the signatures during the May 28 meeting. She never heard back until she submitted a public records request. A week after the request, she received a denial of the zoning district in July. 

The letter from Planning Division Manager Anna Vickers said that staff determined “the submittal did not include sufficient draft regulations, supporting documentation or other materials necessary to evaluate the proposed zoning district and its intended regulatory framework.” 

Solberg refers to the process now as a “wild goose chase.” 

“Now they needed all the regulations done,” Solberg said. “I’m not a zoning director. I’m not a planning person. I don’t know these things. They told me to get the signatures, and I did.” 

Next came the petition. 

A ballot initiative is born in Broadview, dies in court

When Solberg initially looked into the process for a state ballot initiative to regulate data centers, the deadline was too close to have a shot at collecting enough signatures. After inquiring about a county ballot initiative, however, she was told the deadline would be Aug. 12. 

Solberg submitted language requiring two-thirds voter approval in a special election for any new data center within Yellowstone County. The Yellowstone County attorney approved the language on June 25. 

Solberg immediately set up a website, Yellowstone Valley Voices, meant to explain the process of the ballot initiative, help volunteers sign up, and announce places signature gathering would take place. She needed 16,650 valid signatures, and before the Tuesday court decision, she says she’s collected more than 12,000 signatures. Yet in the middle of signature gathering, the county launched its lawsuit that sought to — and successfully — halted the citizen-led initiative.

The county’s legal battle against her rested on two pillars: First, a previously unrecognized change in state law and a state Supreme Court decision from earlier this year. Less than two weeks after after the county had signed off on her ballot initiative, the county changed its position, saying the initiative violates state law because it overrides the county’s zoning and land-use authority. 

The county’s case leans into on a 2026 Montana Supreme Court case that invalidated a Treasure County initiative that sought to regulate wind energy. In the case, the state’s highest court ruled that the initiative violated the power the Legislature gives to counties, and ruled the initiative invalid. 

Solberg was stunned by the lawsuit. 

“I have proposed all of these ways that they could have protected us,” said Solberg. “I did all my wild goose chases and now I bring a citizens’ initiative for an ordinance in Yellowstone County. This gives the people the power to vote on data centers. We want to make the decisions on hyperscale data centers.” 

During the July 9 meeting, Solberg took aim at the commissioners’ new tactics. 

“It’s really quite concerning that after several months of pleading and presenting options that would put protections in place, you the Yellowstone County Commissioners are more than motivated to stop us from legally helping ourselves set up these protections,” Solberg said. “We the people want this. We want to have a say in data centers in Yellowstone County.” 

Yellowstone County revokes previous petition deadline

Even though the county had originally approved the ballot language and determined the signature-gathering deadlines, that also changed after Solberg’s efforts began.

In a memo from the Yellowstone County attorney’s office to the Yellowstone County Elections Administrator, the county explained it had been operating from a now outdated election statute, which established a ballot certification deadline 75 days before a general election date, which is Nov. 3. Under the outdated statue, signature certification, the Elections Office set a deadline of Aug. 12.

The current statute not only changed the required deadline from 75 days to 85, but it also requires signatures be submitted four weeks before certification, putting the new deadline at July 13.

“This statutory framework was reworked significantly in 2025 by the Montana Legislature and appears to have created a new timeline for certification and signature submission,” the memo said.

In an interview with the Bozeman Daily Chronicle,  Yellowstone County Attorney Scott Twito said the county became aware of the updated statute after an attorney representing Quantica Infrastructure reached out to the county.

Solberg’s attorney, Brian Miller, noted Yellowstone County said it was fully capable of processing petition signatures through the previously agreed upon Aug. 12 deadline. Miller is also running as a Democrat candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives in Montana’s eastern district against incumbent Troy Downing.

Yellowstone County attempts to ban petitioners

As the issue was being litigated in state district court, Yellowstone County Commissioners took a separate step, which seemed directly aimed at Solberg and her initiative, but leaders said was to create a policy to treat all groups in the same way.

For the July 28 meeting, commissioners proposed a “public access and political activity policy” that would limit signature gathering and other political activities on county property, in large venues such as the MetraPark. The policy would require county approval for those activities, raising First Amendment concerns for Solberg’s group. 

The policy would have restricted individuals “seeking signatures for petitions, initiatives, candidates, or other political or advocacy purposes” on county-owned properties, including hallways, entrances or exits. Those people would be limited to only areas designated by county commissioners. 

The county did not provide proposed maps, and opponents pointed out the policy didn’t address where people would “check in” during the weekend when county offices are closed; and the initial proposal had several misspelled words. 

On July 23, citizens packed the county commissioners meeting, with nearly 50 people giving public comment before commissioners removed the item for consideration. 

“Regular people can bring issues directly to the ballot, and that only works if people are actually able to collect signatures from their neighbors,” said Billings resident Jesc Gallegos. “When I read this policy I couldn’t help but feel that we were being treated as something that needed to be controlled instead of something that should be welcomed.” 

Others raised civil liberty concerns.

“Your actions are shameful,” county resident Paige Driscoll told the commissioners. “Rather than seeing this as a great grassroots effort for what it is, an exhibition of the First Amendment and an opportunity to unite the community to engage in our democratic processes, you’ve taken a stance to instead attempt to stifle the voices of the people.”

Other residents saw a different rationale. 

“Recently there were five petitions circulating and commissioners saw no need for restrictions. Now the only one circulating is a valid initiative regarding data centers,” said Yellowstone County resident Dr. Martha Rhoades. 

Still, others wondered if they could be targeted by the new policy accidentally.

“I am indeed inside a county-owned building. My comments are perhaps unwanted. Perhaps you think they interfere with county business and I for sure did not check in and get permission first,” said county resident Elizabeth Halverson. “Am I on the wrong side of this policy already? If we can’t tell, if lawful behavior is scooped up in this, it needs to be abandoned and a minimum rewritten.” 

Neither Twito nor county commissioners granted interviews to the Daily Montanan, both citing the lawsuit that was still pending.

Montana joins a nationwide fight

A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll of 4,531 Americans found broad public skepticism toward rapid data center expansion. Nearly two-thirds said they don’t view the rapid construction of data centers as a positive development. Only 14% said they wouldn’t oppose a data center being constructed in their community.

Nationwide, $64 billion of data center projects have been blocked or delayed by local opposition, with multiple states passing data center moratoriums and bans through their legislature, as well as county bans through ballot initiatives.

Several proposed data center projects in Montana have recently stalled as well: Atlanta-based real estate developer Ardent withdrew their application for a proposed data center in Great Falls after they determined power availability timelines weren’t viable. A proposed data center near Butte was disrupted by a major industrial land purchase, and the property owner behind a proposed Bonner data center withdrew support for the project as Missoula County moved forward with a temporary pause on new data center development while it considers future regulations.

Solberg and Miller haven’t yet decided if they will yet appeal the court’s denial of the injunction.

One option is a ballot initiative petition to be on the ballot at the next special election, May 4. A ballot initiative appearing on the special election requires 25% of signatures from registered voters rather than 15%, but would allow people more time to collect the signatures.

Another option is a moratorium on data center construction that could be passed through the Legislature. The 2027 legislative session runs 90 days and begins Jan. 4, 2027.