Georgia residents sue OpenAI and county officials over secret data center deal

The Project Camellia Lawsuit

Three residents of Effingham County, Georgia, have filed a damages lawsuit against OpenAI and several local government entities. The legal action, filed in Effingham County State Court on November 6, targets the development of a massive data center campus known as Project Camellia. The plaintiffs, who are local property owners and taxpayers, claim that the land transaction and its specific terms were intentionally kept from the public.

The complaint alleges that the project was designed to be hidden from residents until the land was already committed. According to the lawsuit, this strategy was intended to ensure that public objections could no longer matter once the deal was finalized. The legal team representing the residents argues that the process was a pattern of secrecy designed to bypass the democratic process.

The lawsuit includes 11 distinct counts against the defendants. These include allegations of fraudulent concealment, misrepresentation, and civil conspiracy. The plaintiffs are seeking compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorney’s fees and a jury trial to address what they describe as a lack of transparency.

Scale of the proposed campus

Project Camellia is described in the complaint as a significant industrial undertaking. OpenAI, operating through Octans GA LLC, plans to build a campus consisting of four buildings. These structures are expected to total approximately 4.4 million square feet of space.

The development is slated for the Savannah Gateway Industrial Hub, where it will occupy about 1,440 acres of land. The reported cost for this massive infrastructure project is approximately $20 billion. This scale of investment underscores the growing demand for the physical hardware required to power large-scale artificial intelligence models.

The land was reportedly conveyed to Octans for a consideration of $10. The deed for this transfer was signed on July 24 by Savannah Industrial Development LLC. This entity signed the deed under a power of attorney that was recorded in 2016, which the plaintiffs argue was part of a coordinated effort to secure the site.

Allegations of secret agreements

A central component of the lawsuit involves the use of nondisclosure agreements (NDAs). The complaint alleges that the chief executive officer of the Effingham County Industrial Development Authority signed an NDA with OpenAI on October 27, 2025. It further claims that OpenAI circulated similar agreements to other local officials, including the county manager.

The plaintiffs argue that these NDAs were used as a tool to move the project forward without triggering public concern. They point to a meeting on July 21 where the agenda only listed "Project Gateway." During this meeting, the Authority reportedly held a closed session for over an hour before voting unanimously to approve a memorandum of understanding with Octans.

The lawsuit quotes Authority director Eric Johnson, who allegedly stated that putting the project in front of the public would lead to "no data center" responses based on misinformation. He is also quoted as saying, "We’re not a democracy." These statements are used by the plaintiffs to support their claim of a concerted effort to bypass public scrutiny.

Zoning and legal challenges

The residents also allege that the Effingham County Board of Commissioners violated state and local laws regarding zoning. They claim the board adopted Ordinance 2026-352 on August 4 without holding the two public hearings required by the county zoning ordinance. The complaint suggests the ordinance was presented to the board as a mere technical correction rather than a significant change.

However, the plaintiffs argue the ordinance actually changed the Table of Permitted Uses and the legal treatment of industrial land. This change specifically affected how data centers are categorized and permitted within the county. The residents claim this move was a way to facilitate the project while avoiding the standard public oversight process.

The defendants in the suit include six commissioners, the county manager, the Authority CEO, and several corporate entities. While the county leaders have denied the claims, a spokesperson stated that the board does not comment on pending litigation. The residents are also pursuing a separate, ongoing lawsuit to block the county from approving the project entirely.

Impact on the local community

The lawsuit highlights the friction between large-scale industrial growth and the rights of local residents. One of the plaintiffs, Raymond Carver, lives in a neighborhood adjacent to the proposed development site. He has expressed frustration that local officials have left residents feeling ignored and lied to during the planning phases.

The legal team representing the residents emphasizes that the case is not an attack on AI technology itself. Instead, they describe it as a demand for accountability regarding how government power is exercised. They argue that government power should come from the consent of the people rather than secret meetings with multi-billion-dollar corporations.

Moving forward, the case will likely hinge on whether the county's actions constituted a legal violation of transparency requirements. The residents are seeking three times actual damages on the racketeering count. As the litigation proceeds, the outcome could influence how other municipalities handle requests from major tech companies for land and infrastructure.