3 ms·

I think it's the zoning rules (based on https://www.wsj.com/us-news/how-amazon-built-a-data-center-in-a-california-town-without-anyone-noticing-8610bb67?st=tdRR

I think it's the zoning rules (based on https://www.wsj.com/us-news/how-amazon-built-a-data-center-in-a-california-town-without-anyone-noticing-8610bb67?st=tdRRxh https://www.wsj.com/us-news/how-amazon-built-a-data-center-i...), which seem to provide an expedited process (which for large scale projects like this always seems a bit odd, and seems like it would increase the risk of corruption)? Arguably if new information arrives which changes the risks or impacts of a project, especially if the project was initially on some kind of fast-track process, then projects should be subject to re-reviewed and scrutiny (which I would expect to have a standard legal process).

mrloopex 2mo ago
There’s no such thing as a “final” contract. Everything is open to relitigation. I mean look at the E Jean Carol and President Trump case.
gruez 2mo ago
>Arguably if new information arrives which changes the risks or impacts of a project, especially if the project was initially on some kind of fast-track process, then projects should be subject to re-reviewed and scrutiny (which I would expect to have a standard legal process). What "new information" arose aside from the general datacenter backlash that's been brewing this year?