Residents near the proposed Bell AI data centre in Saskatchewan are expressing growing frustration over a lack of transparency and engagement from local authorities. Seven families living adjacent to the site have raised multiple concerns about the potential impacts on their quality of life and property values but report inadequate responses from the RM of Sherwood council. As tensions rise, the local governance structure faces scrutiny over its handling of community feedback.
Local Concerns Ignored
For months, the families have sought answers regarding the proposed data centre, but their inquiries have been met with silence or vague reassurances. In a recent letter to the RM of Sherwood council, the concerned residents articulated their feelings of being dismissed, stating, “At every stage of this process our concerns have been deferred, reduced, or ignored.” Although they do not outright oppose the project, their worries about noise, lighting, and overall environmental impact remain unaddressed.
Doug McKell, whose family has resided in the area for nearly a century and a half, described the difficulty of obtaining information as akin to “pulling teeth.” He expressed his frustration with the council’s governance, remarking, “We have the governance system in place so that these kinds of concerns should be able to be handled through their regular process. For them to ignore that and not deal with us in their normal fashion is very frustrating for everyone in the area.”
Formal Requests Go Unheeded
Between January and March 2026, the group made four formal submissions to the RM of Sherwood council, requesting binding conditions concerning noise control, lighting specifications, drainage systems, and more. However, only the initial submission from January 29 was acknowledged on the public record, while subsequent requests were neither documented nor addressed.
This lack of response prompted the residents to escalate their complaints to the Ombudsman on February 25. The council’s agenda for the following meeting on March 16 included a discussion on the ethics code and the Ombudsman complaint, but significant developments occurred shortly thereafter. Just two days later, four council members, including the Reeve and Deputy-Reeve, unexpectedly resigned, leaving the community in a state of uncertainty.
New Council, New Hope
In the wake of the council resignations, the provincial Ministry of Government Relations appointed former SARM president Ray Orb as the new Reeve, alongside three others to fill the vacated council positions. This change in leadership offered a glimmer of hope for the concerned residents, who submitted another letter on March 25, urging the council to incorporate specific binding conditions into the development agreement.
The following week, an executive summary for a development agreement was published, seemingly addressing some of the residents’ concerns. Promises regarding noise levels and roadway upgrades were included, but the residents remain sceptical. In their correspondence with the RM, they stressed, “A good faith process is not the same as a binding obligation, and we cannot accept one in place of the other.” They are advocating for enforceable commitments to be part of any final agreement.
Community Engagement on the Horizon
On April 14, the residents met with the newly-formed RM of Sherwood council to voice their concerns and advocate for binding conditions. Reports from the meeting suggest a more receptive atmosphere, with both the council and Bell AI Fabric president Dan Rink showing a willingness to listen. McKell noted, “I think moving forward, we’ll be able to work with this… I think they heard our issues and concerns, so that was positive.”
Despite this newfound optimism, no commitments were made during the meeting, and the final development agreement is scheduled for review on April 20. The community remains vigilant, hoping for tangible outcomes that reflect their concerns.
Why it Matters
This situation underscores the critical importance of transparent governance and community engagement in development projects, particularly those involving significant environmental and social implications. As the Saskatchewan families continue to advocate for their rights and concerns, the outcome of this case may set a precedent for how local councils handle similar situations in the future. The balance between technological advancement and environmental stewardship is a pressing issue, one that will require careful consideration and accountability from all parties involved.
