Weekly Member Update - May 25, 2026

Written By Indivisible Albany Team

Image Courtesy of DeFlock Tucson

Suddenly, the Tech Oligarchs Are Invading the Capital Region

We suppose it was only a matter of time. Behemoth AI data centers have been sprouting like toxic fungi all across the Country, so we should have assumed that the mighty 518 would be on the hit list sooner or later. But, we gotta admit, we didn’t think that the first Capital Region data center would be earmarked for the hallowed Kenwood Convent site. After days of rumors about the so-called “Kenwood Tech Center Project,” the Times Union and Albany Business Reviewfinally dug up details late last week. EKG Group, a real estate investment firm “focused on placemaking industrial and hi-tech development across the US,” apparently informed the New York Independent System Operator of the project back in November and reported that it would require 180 megawatts of electricity, enough to power more than 150,000 homes. According to a spokesperson for Albany Mayor Dorcey Applyrs, the project developers have already met with representatives of the Applyrs administration, the Albany Common Council and unspecified “community groups;” the Mayor is reportedly doing her “due diligence.” State Senator Patricia Fahy told the Business Review that she is concerned about the project and has her “antenna up.” As of this writing, we haven’t seen anything about the project on the home page or social media of Assembly Member Gabriella Romero.

As TU columnist Chris Churchill has noted, the developers and owners behind this project are clearly trying spin it as a “nice” data center, telling the Business Review that this is just part of a mixed-use project that will also include “housing, ground-floor retail, a grocery option, green space with public access, and a new trail connection to the Helderberg escarpment.” And don’t worry about the megawattage, that’s just a “theoretical ceiling.” Sure, Jan. Amid rumors that the Kenwood data center would be on the June 2 agenda of the Albany Planning Board, that Board took the extraordinary step of putting a notice on its website declaring that it “does not have an application for 451 Southern Boulevard (Kenwood), for a data center or any other use at this time.” What this tells us is that the community is already apoplectic about this proposal and is ringing the Planning Board’s phone off the hook. Notwithstanding the absence of the Kenwood data center on the June 2 Planning Board agenda, we fully expect that folks are going to show up anyway to give public comment and, inasmuch as we’re not ones to tell people to keep their opinions to themselves, we’re not going to discourage it. But, be forewarned, the Planning Board asks public commenters to register at least 24 hours in advance and, given the absence of the data center as an agenda item, you might not get to be heard. If you want to vent your spleen, you could also contact Fahy, Romero or Applyrs, or your member of the Albany Common Council or Albany County Legislature.

And vent your spleen you should. Even putting aside the fact that data center energy consumption competes with homes and businesses for precious wattage, data centers are also notoriously thirsty and consume vast amounts of water every single day. That’s why this isn’t just a City of Albany issue, much less an issue for just the City’s environmentally disadvantaged South End. The City’s delicious drinking water is primarily supplied from two resources, the Alcove Reservoir and the Basic Creek Reservoir, both of which abut communities as far from Kenwood as Berne, New Scotland and Westerlo. And its not just water usage to be concerned about; there is also groundwater contamination, noise pollution and a host of other concerns for not just Albanians, but also for the People of Glenmont, Elsmere and Feura Bush. And lest we forget, data centers are the necessary infrastructure for AI-powered mass surveillance. Is it really any wonder that data centers are being fought tooth and nail everywhere they are being proposed?

As if data centers were not enough, we’re apparently going to have to contend with robot cars too. Inexplicably, and somewhat out of the blue, Senator Fahy announced this week that she is sponsoring legislation to bring Waymo self driving cars to Albany and Rensselaer Counties as part of a “pilot program.” The justification, apparently, is that New York “needs to make sure we’re staying ahead of these massive technological revolutions really underway with AI” because “China is ahead of us on so much tech” and we therefore need to “give some technology a chance.” Sorry to use the good Senator’s quotes out of context, but that’s all she gave to the Times Union, and there’s nothing more about this proposal on her website. In the absence of another explanation, we’re tempted to conclude that our Senator is just carrying water for Governor Hochul here, as the Governor’s own efforts to expand Waymo upstate have stalled in the face of opposition from organized labor and profound concerns over safety. Waymos are also yet another instrumentality of mass surveillance. So, we’re not really sure what Senator Fahy is thinking on this particular piece of legislation, but we’re definitely not fans. While we’re somewhat gratified that passage of the bill does not seem imminent since, contrary to the reporting by the Times Union, Senator Fahy’s bill does not yet have a “same as” bill sponsored by Assembly Member John McDonald, you should still make your voice heard about Capital Region Waymos by commenting on the bill online.

Data centers, Waymos and Flock, the three-headed technological monster that no one has asked for, will be the unified topic of our next public forum/Member Meeting on June 8. We’ll have more details on that in next week’s edition.

The Week in Flock

  • Data Centers and robot cars may be the new kids on 518 block, but Flock surveillance is still looking over your shoulder 24/7. As reported by News10, we held the latest installment of our Get the Flock Out public education campaign in conjunction with our comrades in Colonie Indivisible last week. We’re already starting to plan for the National Week of Action Against ALPRs scheduled for August 16-22.

  • Meanwhile, our friends in DeFlock Troy keep making headlines. The Times Union Editorial Board lambasted Troy Mayor Carmella Mantello for her absurd state of emergency, calling it for what it is, a Trumpian abuse of power. Meanwhile, the Troy City Council held its first public hearing concerning its proposed Local Law #3 last Thursday (the Public Safety Committee starts at the 30:30 mark). We’re frankly alarmed that the Troy City Council is letting Mayor Mantello up off the mat where Flock is concerned, however, as it agreed to table its proposed local law for 60 days in exchange for the administration and police applying some “internal controls” on how the surveillance cameras will be used in the interim. In our view, the time to negotiate how ALPRs might be used in Troy will not come until after the existing Flock cameras are removed; while Troy tries internal controls, Trojan data keeps being uploaded to Flock servers every single day.

  • As we’ve said before, Troy’s proposed Local Law #3 is derived directly from proposed state legislation sponsored by, among others, Hudson Valley Senator Michelle Hinchey. The NYCLU put out a piece this week on how ALPRs put us all at risk and how the proposed state law can curtail the potential abuse of ALPR technology going forward.

  • It’s not just Mayor Mantello who can’t bear the thought of life without Flock. A pro-Flock Town Councilmember in Texas crashed out after Flock got ejected from his town. He proposed “banning the Internet” in response.

  • If you needed another excuse to force Flock surveillance out of your local community, Kash Patel has one for you. 404 Media is reporting that the FBI is looking to get its hands on nationwide ALPR data so that it can track people without having to get one of those troublesome and pesky judicial warrants. Be afraid, very afraid.

  • Congress could have ended the scourge of Flock surveillance with a single sentence last week, believe it or not. A bipartisan amendment to the federal highway bill would have effectively banned ALPRs for all uses except toll collection. Following a 10-minute debate before the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, however, the amendment was defeated by 20-44 vote. Notably, the amendment was supported by more Republicans than Democrats, with New Yorkers Jerry Nadler (NY-12), Laura Gillen (NY-04) and the Hudson Valley’s own Pat Ryan (NY-18) all voting Nay. The only Democrats who voted in favor of strictly limiting ALPR use nationwide? Chuy Garcia (IL-4), Robert Garcia (CA-42) and Maxwell Frost (FL-10). Very disappointing.

Rankled by Rank Choice Voting

Last week, we hyped the petition being circulated by RCV Albany seeking to bring ranked choice voting and unified elections to the City of Albany, and it apparently made some local Democrats big mad. Stunningly, some even asked us to take down our social media posts about it, suggesting that our position on the issue is inconsistent with the views of “the community” (read: Albany County Democrats). The argument, as we understand it, is primarily concerned with the unified-election piece of the ballot proposal and it goes something like this: Ranked Choice Voting is fine, so long as the party primary system is still preserved. Let the Democrats fight it out in their ranked choice primary, and the Republicans have their own ranked choice primary, and then let the winners have at it in November (where the Democrat will invariably win, because Albany). One single unified ranked choice election, on the other hand, which would be open to any candidate who can get the requisite number of signatures, regardless of party, could conceivably permit a non-Democrat to win in the City of Albany, and that’s apparently just untenable. Imagine the horror show, say the naysayers, if a Republican, or a Communist (gasp!), was able to persuade 50+% of the City’s populace to rank him or her? Albany could have its first non-Democrat Mayor since the Dawn of The Machine in 1922 with the election of William Stormont Hackett! Next, you’re going to tell us that Nipper is getting replaced with a statue of an Elephant!

Well, what our critics don’t seem to understand is that we are not interested in a system which, by its very design, perpetuates Democratic Party hegemony in the City of Albany (or beyond). Don’t get us wrong, we think the modern-day GOP is a rabidly corrupt and authoritarian movement, and we’d sooner walk barefoot on broken glass than cast a vote for a 21st-Century Republican. But, quite frankly, the existing party primary system has given us plenty of Republicans in Democratic clothes over the years — including a number of current Albany County officeholders —and, in our view, the whole “Vote Blue, No Matter Who” mantra has played a huge role in getting us where we are in this fraught moment. We’re long past believing that Democrats are going to save us, or that every candidate with a big D next to their name is worthy of our support. We’re sick of pulling the lever for better of two devils, and we want a choice between a variety of candidates who need to work for every vote, instead of relying on the shorthand of a party imprimatur to tell us what the candidate supposedly believes.

And, not for nothing, but we apparently have more faith in the People than our friends in the Democratic establishment do. Does anyone really believe that a unified election is going to get a Republican elected in the City of Albany? Or that a unified election is somehow more likely than the existing system to get a Centrist Dem elected over a Progressive? We’re not sure the numbers bear that out. In the 2025 Albany Mayoral general election, for example, there were 15,595 votes cast — a pathetic level of voter engagement that ranked choice voting could fix, by the way — and the Republican, Rocco Pezzulo, got 2,035 of them. Dorcey Applyrs got almost the exact same amount of votes in the general that were cast for all the candidates (12,697) in the Democratic mayoral primary earlier in the year. So let’s graft Pezzulo’s general election votes into the Dem primary and postulate where that would get us if it was a ranked-choice unified election:

  • Total Votes - 14,732 (12,697 + 2,035)

    • Applyrs - 6,564 (44.6% of 14,732)

    • Dan Cerutti - 3,513 (23.8%)

    • Pezzulo -2,035 (13.8%)

    • Corey Ellis - 1,340 (9.1%)

    • Carolyn McLaughlin - 930 (6.3%)

    • Candidate Write-In - 240 (1.6%)

If this was the result after the opening round of a ranked-choice unified election, we’d surely need to move on to multiple rounds to see who got to 50% first; Candidate Write-In’s 1.6% won’t get anyone over the top and McLaughlin’s votes likely wouldn’t either, unless nearly all of McLaughlin’s 6.3% went to Applyrs. But what’s abundantly clear is that the armageddon feared by unified-election opponents — that a unified election would facilitate a Republican victory or elevate the Centrist with Republican votes — is pretty far-fetched. Under the above scenario, the only path to victory by the Republican (Pezzulo) or the Centrist (Cerutti) over the Progressive (Applyrs?) is for all 17% of the electorate who had top-ranked Ellis, McLaughlin and Candidate Write-In to ultimately be reallocated to Cerutti and Pezzulo. That’s highly unlikely and, even if that implausible reallocation did happen, either Cerutti or Pezzulo would still need nearly all of the other guy’s votes in ranked-choice round 5 in order to overtake Applyrs and surpass 50%. In other words, the only way Applyrs loses a ranked-choice unified election with these numbers is if the only people to rank her at all are the 44.6% who ranked her first.

We know what the naysayers will say; it’s not fair to use the numbers from the 2025 mayoral election because a ranked-choice unified election would inevitably look very different from the start, with likely more candidates and a consequentially more fractured electorate. Ok, but so what? As the Co-Chair of RCV Albany recently pointed out, unified rank choice voting works just fine in so-called liberal bastions like Minneapolis, Oakland and Boulder. Moreover, at the end of the day, any winner of a ranked-choice unified election will have the support of at least 50% of the voters. Why is that a bad thing? Fundamentally, if it is your position that Democrat hegemony must be preserved at all costs, what you are really saying is that you do not want a small-d democratic result; you don’t want the winner to have the majority support of the People, necessarily, you just want the winner to be from your team.

One final word to the Democrats who are pressuring us to withdraw our support for the ranked-choice unified election model being advanced by RCV Albany: We don’t answer to you. Do not mistake our general idealogical rapport with Democrats for lock-step conformity with Democrats. From our inception, we’ve been clear that we are not interested in being a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party and, if anything, we’re more interested in creating a new, more responsive, less corporate party of the left — call it the Democrats or something else — an ethos which we believe permeates the entire national Indivisible movement. It’s why we’ve been openly critical of Democrats in the past and why we will continue to be going forward, including in this very newsletter. It’s also why we’ve said from the beginning that primaries are a good thing — ranked choice unified elections are even better — even for those electeds who are doing a good job (in our view). Better that every representative of the People be tested by the crucible of a real election than to continue on and on and on, entrenched in perpetuity, growing more attenuated from the People with every successive unopposed election cycle.

This is also why we’re not going to formally endorse any individual local or statewide candidates in the lead up to the New York primaries next month. We’re not interested in hitching our wagon to any particular horse and instead will spend our attention on telling you who the horses are, what the horses have done or not done, and let you pick your own damn horse. Think of us as more of a racing form than restaurant review.

The Democratic Primary for State Comptroller

So, for example, here’s what we have to say about the Democratic primary for State Comptroller, in the event that you care. First and foremost, we need to point out that it is the only statewide race in which there will even be a primary next month. There are three statewide offices to be filled in November — Governor/Lieutenant Governor, Comptroller and Attorney General — and at least four parties capable of nominating candidates for those seats — Democratic, Republican, Conservative and Working Families (WFP). Theoretically, we could have had 12 separate contested statewide primaries on the ballot on June 23, but no such luck. Antonio Delgado abandoned his race for the Democratic nomination for Governor in February, only days after choosing Democratic Socialist India Walton as his running mate, leaving Governor Kathy Hochul alone on the uncontested line. Same thing on the Republican and Conservative lines of Governor, where Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman is uncontested on each. Even the WFP has an uncontested primary for Governor, guaranteeing that Amy Taylor — who doesn’t even have a campaign website, as far as we can tell — will be on the ballot come November. In the race for Attorney General, incumbent Letitia James is uncontested on both the Dem and WFP lines, and her November opponent, former federal prosecutor and Brett Kavanagh law clerk Saritha Komatireddy, has already secured the Conservative and Republican lines. Make the Road NY General Counsel Sienna Fontaine will be uncontested on the WFP line for Comptroller and Joseph Hernandez will be the Republican and Conservative candidate for that office in November. So there you have it, we’re going to be having a costly primary election on June 23 that will likely be low in turnout because, as far as statewide offices are concerned, everything is already decided in 11 of the 12 possible races. Tell us again why party primaries are better that one unified election?

But back to the Democratic primary for Comptroller, which is notable not only because statewide primaries are so scarce, but also because of who is involved. The Democratic incumbent, former Assembly Member Tom DiNapoli, has been Comptroller for nearly 20 years and he’s never faced a primary before now. In fact, he usually holds not only the Democratic nomination, but also the WFP line and even some other lines on occasion. But this year, DiNapoli has not one, but two challengers from the left; former Kansas State Legislator and ACLU attorney Raj Goyle, and affordable housing nonprofit executive Drew Warshaw. The American Prospect did a deep dive on DiNapoli’s opponents last week that we encourage everyone to read, but both Goyle and Warshaw are focusing their campaigns on energy affordability and leveraging the $250 billion state pension fund — over which the Comptroller has exclusive stewardship — to support affordable housing across New York. While Goyle has the notable endorsement of US Reps. Ro Khanna and Pramila Jayapal, among others, Warshaw counts among his supporters a host of progressive Democratic State Committee members; both Goyle and Warshaw are endorsed by Divest NY, an organization leading the charge for pension fund divestment from fossil fuel companies. DiNapoli, for his part, is clearly the candidate of the Democratic Party establishment, counting a host of Democratic NY electeds — including Applyrs and Albany County Executive Dan McCoy — and a coterie of Democratic County Chairs — including the Chairs of Albany, Schenectady, Columbia, Rensselaer, Schoharie and Saratoga Counties — among his supporters. Notably, all three Democratic candidates for State Comptroller have benefitted considerably from the state matching funds program, but DiNapoli leads the way with over $2 million in state matching funds. On the subject of campaign contributions, however, DiNapoli has faced criticism for taking donations from the law firms his Office uses to bring lawsuits against corporations whom the Comptroller accuses of defrauding the state pension fund.

If there is any benefit to the fact that the Democratic primary for Comptroller is all by itself among statewide offices, it is that voters can devote their full attention to a race which is more than likely going to determine who will get to hold one of the most powerful state-level offices in the Country come next January. Registered New York Democrats are fortunate to have a legitimate choice in this race for the first time in decades — pity it won’t be a ranked choice — and we encourage everyone do their homework by scouring the candidates’ websites and position statements, and by checking out the candidate debate from last Thursday. The choice couldn’t be starker between the Party-endorsed longtime incumbent and one of pair of qualified progressives. Choose wisely.

Odds & Ends

Upcoming Events of Note

  • Indivisible Albany and our partners in the Greater Capital Region Coalition are marching in the 57th Annual Capital Pride Parade in Washington Park on Sunday, June 14, starting at 11:30 a.m. We hope you can join us to march, and then stick around for the Capital Pride Festival, one of the Capital Region’s biggest and most anticipated celebrations.

  • Don’t forget the De-Ice Citizens Bank National Day of Action on June 6; we’ll be gathering at the Northway Mall location on Central Avenue.

  • The AlbaNY Visibility Brigade is hosting a weekly visibility event on the Western Avenue Route 85 overpass. Every Wednesday, starting at 4:00.

  • This coming Friday night, our friends in Troy Indivisible are hosting a party at United Methodist Church in Troy. TI’s Songs of Resistance - Raising Our Voices event will feature food and drink, musical acts and a silent auction of local artists’ work. Details below.

Indivisible Albany Team
Next

Weekly Member Update - May 18, 2026