SAND SPRINGS — What began quietly in early October 2025 as a proposed introduction behind closed doors has since grown into one of the most contentious land-use fights Sand Springs has seen in years — and now, it has found its way to Osage County District Court.
The project at the center of the dispute is known publicly as “Project Spring,” a proposed data center tied to an 827-acre rezoning request north of Sand Springs near Highway 97 and Rock School Road.
By late 2025, the proposal was facing growing opposition, packed public meetings, and rising concerns over transparency, infrastructure strain, and the long-term impact of large-scale industrial development, marking the grass-roots beginnings of the Protect Sand Springs Alliance.
In an email dated Oct. 2, 2025, Steven L Sacks, president of White Rose Partners, the developer for Project Spring, requested an inperson introduction with city officials at Sand Springs City Hall. The email proposed that attendees execute a non-disclosure agreement before the meeting occurred.
Four days after the email from Sacks arrived, a follow-up email referenced a revised NDA, with Sand Springs Public Schools Superintendent Sherry Durkee asking city staff not to forget to send the updated NDA agreement.
Those communications, now publicly posted by Protect Sand Springs, would become an early flashpoint — fueling criticism that key discussions about the project were happening out of public view.
In an interview Monday, Sand Springs City Manager Mike Carter said he did sign an NDA with the developer as the representative of the city.
“That’s my job,” said Carter. “I’ve signed 14 NDAs for the city.”
Carter said that the primary reason he signed this particular NDA was to discover who the end user was, to help determine if this was a proposal worth considering.
“They don’t have you sign an NDA because they are afraid of the opposition,” said Carter, who added that the only information this particular NDA has protected so far is who the end user is.
Carter went on to say that he expects later this week to be free of the NDA and he will be able to reveal who the end user of the data center would be if it were built.
As to Durkee’s email about a revised NDA, Carter explained that he had the city’s legal staff revise the wording on the original NDA to ensure it was compliant with the Oklahoma Open Records Act.
“We substituted language that would make it compliant,” said Carter.
By mid-November, the proposal moved into the open.
On Nov. 18, 2025, two meetings related to Project Spring were scheduled on the same evening. A developer-sponsored open house was held from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. at Canyons at Blackjack Ridge Golf Course, while a separate community meeting took place at Rock Fire Department on Zink Ranch Road. The concurrent meetings underscored the growing divide between project proponents and nearby residents.
The Protect Sand Springs Alliance had publicly positioned itself as organized resistance to the data center project. Through its website and social media, the group began posting meeting notices, documents, and calls to action, urging residents to attend hearings and scrutinize the city’s process.
On Dec. 3, 2025, the Planning Commission met at Sand Springs City Council Chambers to discuss rezoning that would pave the way for construction of the data center. The Protect Sand Springs Alliance said this meeting marked the first formal step toward changing the land’s classification to accommodate light industrial use.
Less than two weeks later, on Dec. 15, the issue moved to the Sand Springs City Council. Protect Sand Springs Alliance identified that meeting as the point at which council members would vote on the rezoning request, further intensifying public attention and turnout.
While rezoning drew the most visible attention, another piece of the process had already been in motion since early summer — annexation.
On June 23, 2025, months before the rezoning debate erupted, Sand Springs adopted an ordinance annexing tracts of property in Osage County.
This annexation became the legal foundation for a lawsuit filed on Jan. 7, escalating its challenge from the council chambers to the courthouse.
On Jan. 7 and 8, Protect Sand Springs Alliance and several nearby landowners filed suit in Osage County District Court, asking a judge to invalidate Sand Springs’ annexation ordinance and halt further action tied to the property. The suit sought to stop development tied to the data center by challenging whether the city followed Oklahoma law in annexing the land.
The petition argues that the annexation relied on an improper “fence line” method that failed to meet statutory contiguity requirements. It traces the city’s boundary history back to a 1966 ordinance establishing a municipal fence line, then asserts that later ordinances repealed that framework — leaving the 2025 annexation legally unsupported.
The lawsuit also points to a conservation easement recorded in Osage County, alleging that its restrictions conflict with the type of industrial development contemplated for the site.
Beyond the annexation itself, the plaintiffs warn that rezoning activity would cause irreparable harm if allowed to proceed before the court rules. Court documents state that Ringle Family, LLC, the landowner, filed a rezoning application on Oct. 2, 2025, seeking to change the property from agricultural use to IL/PUD-39 (Light Industrial). The plaintiffs are asking the court to issue declaratory and injunctive relief, including a temporary restraining order, to pause rezoning and development while the case is litigated.
Carter is confident that the city’s annexation of the property was done within Oklahoma law.
“We don’t see an issue there,” he said. “We’ve consulted with legal and we believe the claims of the lawsuit are in error. We’ve done everything properly.”
As the legal challenge unfolded, the city’s planning schedule shifted.
The city has planned a Jan. 20 special meeting at Sand Springs City Hall to field questions and hear more concerns from residents.
“We believe the developer will be there and are working to get a representative of the end user there,” said Carter.
The regular Planning Commission meeting has been rescheduled to Jan. 27 at 6 p.m., reflecting a growing uncertainty around how — or whether — the project can move forward while the annexation dispute remains unresolved.
Throughout the process, opponents have consistently cited concerns over transparency, environmental impact, and infrastructure demands, while emphasizing what they describe as a community-driven effort to slow a project they say advanced too quickly and too quietly.
What happens next will be shaped by the court’s response. A ruling on temporary injunctive relief could determine whether the controversy remains confined to legal briefs and council agendas — or whether physical development begins before the annexation itself is judged lawful.
For now, Project Spring stands at a crossroads, its future tied not only to zoning maps and commission votes, but to the outcome of a lawsuit that seeks to rewind the process to its very beginning.