By Roland Murphy for AZBEX
The Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest has filed a lawsuit in Pima County Superior Court on behalf of activists opposed to Beale Infrastructure’s proposed Project Blue data center project in southeast Tucson.
The Arizona Daily Star reported the group filed the lawsuit against Pima County and the County Planning and Zoning Commission, alleging County staff violated Arizona’s open meeting law and misled the public leading up to the Commission’s recommendation for, and the Board of Supervisors subsequent approval of, a rezoning and land use plan change necessary for the 290-acre site for the planned project. The amendments were needed before the County could sell the land.
ACLPI represents an opposition group known as the No Desert Data Center Coalition and two Coalition members.
The litigation claims the intended data center use was camouflaged in a long list of potential uses and development types for the land in an effort to conceal the controversial planned activity.
It also alleges listing the multiple, unobjectionable uses in the Commission meeting background documents was an attempt to avoid public input and controversy and that potential plans in the documentation were “phony.”
Plans Date to Early 2025
Last April, AZBEX was the first outlet to report on the proposal that eventually became known as Project Blue. (AZBEX; April 29, 2025)
Our coverage of what was referred to at the time as the “Southeast Employment & Logistics Center Specific Plan Phase 1” was based on the Commission meeting background documents and included the three conceptual plans presented for the site, made up of office/business center and light industrial, along with three conceptual plans showing possible uses.
The article said: The first concept shows how data centers could be developed under a light industrial plan. The illustrative use shows 10 220KSF data center halls and two logistics and administrative building spaces of unidentified sizes.
The second plan shows biomedical research and development uses combined with manufacturing and warehouse spaces. This concept features 1.2MSF across eight buildings ranging from 50KSF to 300KSF.
The final concept shows 2.05MSF of possible warehouse, light industrial and office/business park uses spread over nine buildings of between 70KSF and 600KSF.
It also included the data center conceptual plan shown in the illustration accompanying today’s article.
The plaintiffs claim, “However, because the Agenda for the Commission’s meeting did not mention Project Blue or give any notice that the County was in the process of selling its property to be developed as a data center, Plaintiffs only learned of the true purpose of the County’s application to rezone the property three months after the Commission’s April 30, 2025 meeting, in about July 2025.”
Plaintiffs Allege County Hid True Intent
One of the two Coalition members named in the litigation told The Daily Star, “…It has become clear that the County administration’s favoritism of Project Blue has resulted in a flawed and unfair process that has ignored the genuine concerns and opinions of the community. As a result, we have been left with no other option but to pursue legal action against the County.”
The plan was originally for the City of Tucson to annex the site into the city limits. The City Council rejected that plan last summer after strong opposition emerged. (AZBEX; Aug. 8, 2025)
Pima County and Beale Infrastructure have continued to pursue the development since Tucson’s rejection. Last month, AZBEX reported the County “Board of Supervisors approved an agreement with Beale regarding several community benefit investment pledges the company has made in association with its Project Blue data center (aka the Houghton Data Center Project) planned near the Pima County Fairgrounds.
“Under the terms of the Memorandum of Agreement, Beale will make $15M in community investments and pledges to match all the energy use from the data centers with renewable energy. Beale made the energy pledge last month (November).” (AZBEX; Dec. 22, 2025)
The plaintiffs are asking the Court to find the Planning and Zoning Commission’s agenda violated the open meetings law and to nullify the Board’s approval. No hearing dates have been announced.