Ferguson City Council members have approved a proposal to redevelop the former Emerson campus and data center after months of controversy and criticism from residents.
The council voted for the redevelopment 4-3, Tuesday during a tense council meeting where residents spoke out in droves against the proposal.
The proposal is a revitalized version of one introduced this spring — which also sparked controversy among residents. The city council rejected the plan in a 3-3 vote with one abstention. Like the previous bill, this proposal would redevelop the 217 acre former Emerson campus. The city would give up to $1.5 billion in tax incentives and issue up to $22 billion in industrial revenue bonds.
Next Revolution Technologies LLC, which is run by Onder Law founder and managing partner James Onder, purchased the campus earlier this year. The campus already includes a smaller data center, but the new proposal includes a potential future expansion for a 300 megawatt data center within the development.
The proposal also said Next Revolution would pay Ferguson $700,000 for the city to mitigate community impacts and fund emergency services. Next Revolution would also provide $250,000 to start an environmental mitigation fund and pay for environmental monitoring equipment.
This proposal would require Onder to give $7.5 million over 10 years to the Ferguson Neighborhood Improvement Program. It handles beautification efforts, including sidewalk repairs and an exterior home improvement matching fund. While the program was once a part of the city, it broke off into a nonprofit. That has given residents pause over how much money will go directly to the city.
The proposal comes during an intense moment where people across the country have rallied against data center proposals out of concerns about high utility bills, harm to the environment, limited job opportunities and worries over artificial intelligence safety. Last week, Missourians held a protest in Jefferson City to call on lawmakers to pass a data center moratorium.
Almost all residents who spoke during the meeting's public comment section Tuesday objected to the proposal.
Some called for a vote among residents.
"We have to listen to them," said Vernon Norman, a Republican running for the 14th district Missouri Senate seat in the November election. "I would encourage you to strongly consider putting it to the vote. Give the people a chance to actually have their voices heard."
City Councilman Jamil Franklin proposed to table the council's vote for six weeks to vet the contract and address its environmental concerns but it failed.
"What is wrong with a 60-day pause," Ferguson resident Lady J Huston said. "What is the rush?"
Ferguson resident Becky Mueller also criticized the vote not to table the bill and said the bill didn't do enough to prevent environmental harm.
She said many of these environmental standards are unenforceable and criticized the language that claims Onder's LLC would have to abide by certain standards.
"Mitigating is not the same as fixing damage," Mueller said.
Mueller and others said the bill also lacked detail on environmental protections.
"We don't have ordinances that define what levels of noise and vibration have too much negative impact on residential areas," Mueller said. "There are no stipulations at all in this contract about any attempt on Onder's part to avoid air pollution or water contamination or to regulate heat generation."
Some spoke in favor of the bill.
"No business today, unless you're an artist or something, can really go without data," Ferguson resident Pamela Hartley said when speaking about the current data center on campus. "All of this has already existed on this site and no one is dying from it."
Nick Kasoff, one of the council members who introduced the bill, had said this would help the city get out of a financial crisis that led to numerous layoffs. This summer, the city approved a budget that cut 12 full time positions to save about $2.2 million.
"After this year, it gets worse if we even make it through this year," Kasoff said.
Some public commenters, as well as council members Franklin and Naquittia Noah who voted against the proposal, questioned whether there was a potential conflict of interest between council members and their relationship to the Ferguson Neighborhood Improvement Program.
Kasoff objected to claims of a conflict of interest, noting that he and others on the council are not on the board and that councilman Mike Palmer is only a council representative for the Ferguson Neighborhood Improvement Program. The board's chair was also campaign treasurer for several members of the council.
"We are there to be seen and not heard unless spoken to," Kasoff said. " We're specifically not supposed to be influencing boards and commissions."
Palmer said he abstained earlier this year because at the time, he was in direct communication with Copeland to buy property from them.
City Councilman David Williams said the development will take the city out of its financial troubles and spur economic growth.
"Businesses don't want to come to Ferguson, now they will," Williams said.
Another resident, Richard Buthod, said the Ferguson Uprising cast the city in a negative light and he worries that legacy will continue with the passing of this bill.
"[The world] knows that Ferguson will sell out Black people to somebody that comes in and throws money at the city council," Richard Buthod said "You don't see data centers being built in Ladue."
Copyright 2026 St. Louis Public Radio
