Today the East Whiteland Data Center had its court debut. This case:

I am about to share exclusive court recollections by an East Whiteland resident who sent me a report:

June 4, 2026 – Hearing to request court to stay any work on site of foote mineral/data center

Mr Schneider began by reading a prepared brief and going through 18 exhibits.  Judge early on asked him if he had any witnesses or any case law to support his brief.  Andy said no because the language of the law speaks for itself.  Judge admonished him for that and said there should be case law to support his position.  Then proceeded to let him read his testimony and go through the 18 exhibits as he went.  Andy’s arguments were consistent with things he had presented at township meeting on data center.  Argued that two entrances meant one entrance right across from Malvern Hunt would have to be built first and would be used by machinery to move earth and cause dirt to be blown around into Malvern Hunt.  Andy quoted EPA website to claim that site is not finally remediated.  Judge asked if he had witness from EPA and other exhibits along the way.  Andy also mentioned that the plan that was approved expired 90 days after it was approved and court should find subsequent actions invalid because plan was already expired.  

Mr Colagreco started by asking the hearing to be dismissed and the judge denied his request.  Mr Colagreco then stated that he had submitted a brief to the court so he wasn’t going to read the brief and the judge said that the court had already read both briefs prior to the hearing.  Mr Colagreco then argued that for the first time in history there is no case law to support a section of code that was in dispute and tried to cast doubt on Andy’s reading of the code. Mr Colagreco also mentioned that there was no harm in allowing them to proceed with moving dirt because Mr Schneider had not presented any evidence to this effect and had not presented any evidence at all other than his legal brief.  Also said that the time for Mr Schneider to appeal was within 30 days of the 2024 approval and that he can’t appeal any longer because he missed that window.  Mr Colagreco also said they are under a 2 year deadline and that time is ticking and that any effort to delay via multiple lawsuits from Mr Schneider could harm them because it could cause them to miss this deadline if they aren’t allowed to start work.  Judge asked Mr Colagreco if they had started any work on the site since 2024 and Mr Colagreco admitted they had not so Judge observed they could have been working all that time if it was important to them.

Judge then heard the township lawyer who is paid by supervisors Directors and Officers insurance it appears.  That lawyer, I don’t remember his name, said that he agreed with everything Mr Colagreco said on behalf of Sentinel.  Didn’t say much other than that.

Judge allowed Mr Schnieder rebuttal and Mr Schneider said that events in March 2026 created need to appeal and that no criteria existed in 2024 to appeal because the events in March 2026 created the need to appeal.  At the end of this, judge offered Mr Schneider the opportunity to submit his exhibits into evidence.  After some back and forth, Mr Schneider did accept the Judge’s offer and submitted his 18 exhibits into evidence.  

Judge then closed the hearing.

– Recollection of East Whiteland resident Tim Caban during the hearing.

No, those two captioned screenshots above are two other court cases. They are pending. I don’t know in what order they will be heard or what will happen.

No decision was made today. I found that interesting. I’m taking that as a positive.

Someone else is an observer of this mess for lack of a better description said to me today (and I quote):

You get to the hearing stage, arguing for a dismissal is almost a waste of time…The guts of the argument is whether or not townships can make it up as they go along, and effectively rewrite the statute through bad process.. which is a denial of due process to the community.

I found that interesting to ponder.

Tonight is the environmental advisory council meeting a.k.a. EAC. Ironically on their agenda this evening is Foote Mineral. And of course, this is also the site for the data center. I’m going to share a document I was sent today relative to that and interesting.

It ain’t over and Captain Green Fig must be twitching, no? It makes you wonder if his snazzy New York developer investor will stick around long-term doesn’t it?

This is the Foote Mineral thing I mentioned. I will also note that this person who wrote this and sent a message. I’m about to share is an environmental lawyer. Next is the message and following that his attachment and that is the end for today for me on my reporting of this ongoing issue.

Message:

John’s message

---

I have attached the Comments I plan to file before COB on Friday June 5, 2026 with US EPA Region 3 in Philadelphia. If upon your review you agree with the content of the Comments, and you would like to join in the Comments, please let me know by email, stratred14@gmail.com. Send me your name, street address and township. I will add you to the list of Commenters. I will send an updated list of Commenters to the EPA, as needed, over the next two weeks.

For those of you who do not know me, I am simply a concerned citizen, like you. I am not being paid by any entity for this work, nor am I a member of any group that has formed in opposition to this or any other data center project. My career has been in environmental law, so I am familiar with the Superfund process, and redevelopment of brownfields. Hence the arcane nature of my comments.

Thank you for your consideration.

John P. Judge
stratred14@gmail.com