More than 300 Pittsburg residents filed into City Hall on Monday to oppose a data center approved two years ago without their knowledge — and left two and a half hours later with nothing more than a vague promise to "follow up."

The extraordinary turnout at Monday's City Council meeting marks an escalation in one of the East Bay's sharpest conflicts between AI infrastructure expansion and the communities selected to host it. Organizers who mobilized 13,000 Change.org signatures in a week demanded a two-year moratorium and a citizens' oversight committee. Mayor Dionne Adams gave them no timeline and no action.

The data center at the center of the fight — a three-story, roughly 300,000-square-foot facility generating up to 96 megawatts of power — was approved by the city in 2024 to occupy the former Delta View Golf Course along West Leland Road, next to a middle school and sports courts. AVAIO Digital's Project Perseus is the first approved phase of a larger development the city calls the "Pittsburg Technology Park," a name residents have criticized as misleading. The project survived environmental review and a Center for Biological Diversity lawsuit that settled in December 2025 for $750,000, according to The Dissent's prior reporting.

More than 100 public comments opposing the project were delivered Monday by Pittsburg Unified School District teachers and administrators, the progressive activist group Indivisible Resisters Contra Costa, community leaders, and parents, according to ABC7 News, which covered the meeting.

Lifelong resident Mark Linde, 68, organized the opposition through the Nextdoor social media platform in recent weeks. He told the council he had been raising concerns about the project since 2018, attending meeting after meeting without resolution. On Monday he returned with a specific ask: a two-year moratorium on the development and the creation of a citizens' oversight committee. The council took neither action.

Amhari Perkins, a mother of two who launched a Change.org petition to ban the data center, said she first learned of the project through a council member's Facebook post — not through any official city outreach. Her petition gathered 13,000 signatures in a single week. At the microphone Monday, she put the core grievance plainly.

"Pittsburg is not just a small overlooked city," Perkins said, per ABC7. "It is my home. It is a home where many families come together. Many of us are not asking for conflict, just meaningful communication."

Nineteen-year-old Christina Webster focused on what she called the project's irreversible environmental footprint — particularly the 37 diesel-fueled backup generators slated for the former golf course and grassland site.

"Those mountains are never going to be green again," Webster told the council, according to ABC7. "You are public servants. Serve the public!"

The city's director of community and economic development, Jordan Davis, defended the approval process in a phone interview with ABC7. The data center, he said, would generate tax revenue to fund road paving and youth soccer fields — costs the cash-strapped city otherwise can't cover.

"These types of taxes are good for the community because the community does not need to pay them," Davis said. "It's revenue into the city to reinvest in the city."

Davis also said the city went "above and beyond" to notify residents — pointing to public hearings and email blasts. The law required only that notices be posted at the library and City Hall. Many residents said Monday they first heard about the data center not from any city communication, but through social media years after the council's vote.

Pittsburg carries roughly $80 million in deferred road repairs, according to The Dissent's prior reporting, which partly explains why city officials have leaned into the tax revenue argument. But fiscal pressure doesn't answer the governance question residents raised Monday: who, exactly, was the public hearing for, if the public didn't know about it?

After two and a half hours of public comment, Mayor Dionne Adams said the council would "follow up" on residents' concerns. She provided no timeline. The project remains approved. Construction has not been blocked.