Skip to content

‘Spineless’: Dozens packed a routine meeting for the Pennhurst data center as board weighs 1.9 million-square-foot proposal

It will be the first of several hearings to determine whether the data center can be built.

Mike Petak of Spring City gestures while speaking to East Vincent Township supervisors in opposition to a data center proposal at the former Pennhurst state hospital grounds, Dec. 17, 2025, in Spring City, Pa. On Monday, April 20, residents made their arguments to be granted party status in the conditional use hearing.
Mike Petak of Spring City gestures while speaking to East Vincent Township supervisors in opposition to a data center proposal at the former Pennhurst state hospital grounds, Dec. 17, 2025, in Spring City, Pa. On Monday, April 20, residents made their arguments to be granted party status in the conditional use hearing. Read moreMarc Levy / AP

A charged hearing over a proposed 1.9 million-square-foot data center at the Pennhurst State School and Hospital site in East Vincent turned to yelling, with officials calling for the removal of an attendee and ushering into a break when the attendees would not be quelled.

The conditional-use meeting Monday evening came as data center proposals proliferate in Pennsylvania, and amid widespread pushback from the region’s residents against locally proposed projects.

The meeting, which ran for more than four hours, established which residents qualified for “party status” in the proceedings. The distinction would allow them to testify during the hearings, present evidence, and cross-examine witnesses as the township’s elected officials weigh whether to approve the massive data center.

“I just want to make sure that we all understand one another. The board has to get through this process,” Joe Clement, the township’s solicitor, told those in attendance. “The board has not gotten anywhere close to making any kind of decision on the application.”

Nearly 60 residents applied for party status; many faced rejection by the three-person township board of supervisors, who voted on each applicant one by one, drawing boos and discontent from the residents with each denial. Officials considered applicants’ distance from the site and attendance at Monday’s meeting, and the potential impact on particular property owners, among other factors.

It was the first step in what will likely be a lengthy process for the township, which has already spent months grappling with the proposal and facing strong public pushback. The former hospital site sits not far from the Schuylkill, homes, and the Southeastern Veterans Center.

Residents have asserted their concerns about the impact on the environment, health, and the power grid at meetings, pressing the board to deny the application. The township’s planning commission and environmental commission recommended rejection. Even elected officials in neighboring Spring City asked the supervisors to reject the project.

The board called for “civility and respect” during the proceedings.

“This is not a request, this is a requirement,” Mark Brancato, chairman of the board of supervisors, told residents at the start of the hearing. “If anyone does get out of line, we will have no choice but to have him or her removed from the audience. I know passions are going to be high. As best you can, please keep your passions under control.”

The current application was revised ahead of the hearings to expand the footprint of the project and add its own power generation and battery storage field to serve the data center. As proposed, it would have three two-story buildings.

The project would replace Pennhurst, a site with a complex history. The hospital opened in 1908, and closed nearly eight decades later after legal challenges to its abusive and neglectful treatment of those who lived there. Controversially, it became a Halloween attraction in 2010.

During the hearings, the data center developer must demonstrate qualification or entitlement to the conditional use of the property, and show that there would be no unintended or unanticipated effects on public health, safety, and welfare, Clement said.

The township on Monday entered its evidence and went through the process of granting and denying party status for individual residents and groups.

Residents turned out in force, showing up early to protest. More than an hour into the meeting, applicants were called up and given the chance to discuss their interest, telling the board their concerns for their and their family’s health, property values, and the environment.

“My husband and I chose this area specifically for its beauty, rural character, and peace and quiet. Watching my children play in the yard while listening to a 24-7, 365 soundtrack of industrial humming is not my idea of a good time,” said resident Rebecca Klinicki, whose status was denied. “It’s really unacceptable when we worked so hard and so long for what we have.”

Carol Lightcap, whose status was also denied, said her household was affected, but she was more concerned for the veterans.

“You deserve a peaceful, quiet country setting to enjoy your retirement. You have given more to our country than most folks in this room,” she said.

As residents spoke, their neighbors cheered them on. As the township denied party status for some of them, they audibly chafed, with one attendee calling the board “spineless, pathetic cowards,” before Brancato called for removal. Residents took issue with the parameters of party status.

Steve Hacker, a resident living just over the 500-foot threshold, called it “absurd” and “arbitrary” to restrict the distance. Hacker and his wife were ultimately granted status.

“Right out my front door, I look at my neighbor, and the driveway to the left of him is included in your plan,” he said. “Any of the particulates in the air, the noise — none of it stops at 500 feet.”

At its next hearing, scheduled for May 18, the board will examine whether the application meets the threshold for conditional use within the zoning. If the board is satisfied with the reasoning, then the applicant will “bear the burden of demonstrating entitlement to the conditional use described in the zoning ordinance,” Clement said.

A spokesperson for the developer said it is “ready, willing, and able to continue” with the hearings.

The Inquirer logo
Inquirer Chester County

Want to get Inquirer Chester County straight to your inbox every week? Sign up here for our guide to the news, stories, and events shaping life in your community.

This suburban content is produced with support from the Leslie Miller and Richard Worley Foundation and The Lenfest Institute for Journalism. Editorial content is created independently of the project donors. Gifts to support The Inquirer’s high-impact journalism can be made at inquirer.com/donate. A list of Lenfest Institute donors can be found at lenfestinstitute.org/supporters.