06/16/2026
A 14yr old felt compelled to write this letter to our Mayor, City Council, California Real Estate Mogul, about the DATA CENTER being pushed through in our city off of Garden of the Gods.
*************** We all need to read this!!*****
Good afternoon Mayor Mobolade, Members of City Council, Utilities Board Members, Colorado Springs Utilities leadership, RAEDEN leadership, members of the media, and all recipients,
My name is Kyle, and I am a 14-year-old student in Colorado Springs. Over the past several months, I have spent countless hours researching the proposed Project Ta**us data center. I have attended meetings, reviewed public documents, submitted Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) requests, spoken with residents, reviewed technical materials, and worked to help members of the community better understand the project's potential impacts.
I am not affiliated with any organization, political group, or campaign. I am simply a resident who believes that major projects should be evaluated openly and that residents deserve access to the information necessary to make informed decisions about the future of their community.
After reviewing records obtained through CORA, I am more concerned than ever about both Project Ta**us itself and the lack of transparency surrounding it.
The response I received from Colorado Springs Utilities explained large-load customer policies generally, but it did not answer the specific questions I asked regarding Project Ta**us.
Through CORA, I obtained a document prepared for Colorado Springs Utilities regarding the redevelopment of the former Intel facility. In that document, RAEDEN states:
"AI data center deployments will literally use as much power as the utility or other generator/distributor can provide."
The same document further states:
"The Basis of Design allows Raeden to subsequently build out Kits in a very predictable manner such as long as power exists, the Kits will install up to 300MW Critical Power (420MW Gross Power) to fully utilize all the space and resources at 1615."
That is what concerns me.
For months, public discussions surrounding Project Ta**us have frequently centered around figures near 50 MW. Yet a planning document provided to CSU discusses a potential buildout of up to 420 MW Gross Power.
A 50 MW project and a potential 420 MW project are not remotely the same thing.
If a 420 MW buildout is merely a theoretical maximum, the public deserves to know that. If it is a realistic planning scenario, the public deserves to know that as well.
The same CORA records also discuss natural-gas generation and note potential capacity ranging from at least 60 MW to as much as 200 MW. The document discusses possible expansion of generation resources and scenarios involving CSU-hosted generation infrastructure.
I am also concerned by references to Nvidia GPU-based computing systems, AI-centric deployments, secure computing, and military-related operations.
The Colorado Springs Chamber & EDC publicly stated:
"The company has also stated the facility would support secure computing and operational needs connected to military missions in Colorado Springs."
As someone who has spent months researching this project, I still do not know exactly what that means, and I suspect many residents do not either.
Does this refer to cloud-computing services? Artificial-intelligence model training? AI inference? High-performance computing? Defense-related computing? Classified workloads? Some combination of these activities?
The phrase "military missions" is significant. If it is being used to support public approval of the project, then the public deserves a clear explanation of what that means in practice.
Honestly, the CORA records did not answer my questions. They raised new ones.
These records appear to validate many of the concerns residents have raised regarding electrical demand, infrastructure planning, water usage, and the long-term implications of this project. People should not have to file multiple CORA requests, contact numerous public officials, attend meetings, and piece together technical documents from different sources just to understand a project that could have major impacts on our city.
I am also troubled by the way public participation has been handled throughout this process.
According to information distributed by the City, the deadline for submitting an appeal is 5:00 PM on June 22. At the same time, the City's public calendar shows that both the June 22 City Council Work Session and the June 23 City Council meeting were canceled. I have attached both the appeal notice and a screenshot of the meeting calendar for reference.
As a resident who has spent months trying to understand this project, I find it frustrating that opportunities for public discussion are being reduced while major questions remain unanswered.
I am also concerned that the appeal process requires a filing fee of approximately $176. For some people that may not seem like much, but for many families it is. Public participation should not feel financially out of reach for residents who simply want their concerns heard.
More broadly, I do not understand why important public meetings are so often scheduled at 9:00 AM on weekdays. Many residents work during those hours, attend school, care for family members, or simply cannot leave work to participate. Public engagement should be designed to maximize participation, not make it more difficult. Whether intentional or not, scheduling major discussions during normal working hours can leave many residents feeling excluded from decisions that affect their community.
Good public policy should lower barriers to participation, not raise them.
After months of research, public meetings, and CORA requests, I still have not seen evidence that the claimed benefits outweigh the potential impacts described in the project's own planning documents.
I have heard repeated claims regarding economic development, jobs, and tax revenue. However, I have yet to see independent public analyses demonstrating that those benefits justify the scale of electrical demand, infrastructure requirements, resource consumption, water demand, and long-term community impacts reflected in the project's own planning documents.
Many Colorado Springs families are struggling with housing costs, rent, utilities, groceries, insurance, and everyday expenses. My family feels those pressures as well. Residents deserve straight answers when decisions with potentially long-lasting consequences are being made.
I am frustrated that information this significant has been uncovered through public-records requests rather than proactively shared with the public. To me, that proves exactly why transparency has been one of my biggest concerns from the beginning.
I intend to continue researching this project, its impacts, and the decision-making processes surrounding it because residents deserve a complete understanding of how these decisions are being made and whose interests they ultimately serve.
For ease of reference, I have attached and highlighted the specific portions of the CORA records referenced above, including the sections discussing the potential buildout to 300 MW of Critical Power (420 MW Gross Power), AI-centric deployments, secure computing and military-related operations, and potential generation resources.
I would be happy to provide copies of the CORA records and highlighted excerpts to any recipient who has not yet reviewed them.
Accordingly, I respectfully request answers to the following questions:
• Is CSU planning for a 50 MW project, a potential 420 MW buildout, or something in between?
• Has CSU completed or commissioned any system-impact, transmission, generation, reliability, or resource-planning studies related to Project Ta**us?
• What infrastructure upgrades may be required to serve the project?
• What specific computing activities are contemplated by references to military missions, secure computing, AI workloads, and Nvidia GPU-based systems?
• Will these studies and planning assumptions be released publicly?
• What opportunities will residents have to review and comment on these issues before major decisions are made?
Colorado Springs residents deserve transparency, accountability, and complete information regarding a project of this magnitude.
Thank you for your time, and I look forward to your response.
Respectfully,
Kyle
District 1 Resident
