(RNS) — It’s a “follow the money” thing.
A few weeks ago, residents of Prince George’s County, Maryland, received a text message telling them about the benefits of data centers: jobs, investment, economic opportunity.
The message wasn’t signed. It didn’t say who had paid to send it. But it linked to a website belonging to something called the Interfaith Action Movement.
It sounds like a coalition of religious leaders. But the leaders, followers and houses of worship were not disclosed by the IAM contact.
And the timing was interesting. Less than a week earlier, Prince George’s County had imposed a two-year moratorium on hyperscale data centers. Residents were already fighting over the environmental costs, the economic promises and who would ultimately benefit.
So who was behind this “interfaith” campaign?
RNS reporter Aleja Hertzler-McCain followed the anonymous text to a Seventh-day Adventist faith leader and political consultant with connections to Maryland, New Jersey and a campaign-finance scandal in Bermuda.
This transcript was generated using AI tools and may contain minor transcription errors.
Aleja, welcome to Complexified.
HERTZLER-McCAIN: I’m glad to be here.
HENDERSON: Okay, what appeared on people’s phones in Prince George’s County on July 10th?
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Yes, so there was a text and it looked like many other political texts residents get — we’re all flooded with things related to issues, things related to candidates. I actually got the text, and I’m a Prince George’s County resident. Didn’t even open it because I assumed it was a political text, until I started seeing people online complain about it and highlight that it came from this interfaith group. And then my curiosity was piqued.
So it starts with a screenshot of a news clip from Loudoun County about data centers — that’s a county in Virginia — and then it makes quite an argument for the economic benefits of data centers in Prince George’s County. I can read the text if you’d be interested.
HENDERSON: Yeah, that’d be great.
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Okay, sure. So we start with that screenshot, and then it goes: “Prince George’s County deserves to lead the nation in ensuring that every family has a fair opportunity to build wealth, access new technology and participate in the economy of the future. In neighboring Loudoun County, data centers generate an estimated $1.3 billion annually, funding schools, public safety and emergency services while allowing residents to maintain one of the lowest real estate tax rates in Northern Virginia. Data centers could assist in removing barriers to economic mobility, bridging the digital divide, lowering property taxes, providing historic community benefit agreements and investments while prioritizing environmental responsibility. To join the movement, click here.” And then we see this www.interfaithaction.net link.
HENDERSON: Those are some big claims, and you live right there. Tell me what the context was that this text was received (in). What was happening around data centers in Prince George’s County?
HERTZLER-McCAIN: So Prince George’s County is going through a bit of a rough time right now, particularly for the county budget. It’s a county that has a lot of federal workers, and because of the Department of Government Efficiency, also known as DOGE, impacts last year, there have been a lot of jobs lost in the region, and people are bracing for even worse budget impacts coming later. So there’s a lot of economic anxiety. And I think maybe that’s one of the reasons politicians are talking about data centers to try to creatively think about how to expand the tax base. And also, there’s just so much anxiety about all of it.
It was definitely an interesting text to receive, I think, as someone from Prince George’s County — immediately you see “neighboring Loudoun County” and you think, no, Loudoun County isn’t a neighboring county, even though it is across the way. So there’s definitely maybe someone who reads the text closely who will think, is everything else true in here? But yeah, it comes at a moment where there’s a lot of stress and anxiety in the county over finances.
HENDERSON: So immediately there’s something fishy about this. Why did residents start to get suspicious? You said you saw people talking about it online?
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Yeah, there’s no polling about how people feel about data centers specifically in P.G. County, but the national polling we have is pretty anti-data center. A poll from Gallup found that 70% of people in the U.S. oppose data center construction in their area, and weaving in religious breakdowns, that lies among people of no faith and also Protestants. Protestants were about 70%, and then Catholics were about 65%. So across the spectrum, there’s just kind of an anti-data center sentiment.
And I think we were starting to see that in local political races — politicians who didn’t really have a stance on data centers started to seem to come out against it as the primaries got closer, which to me indicates that they probably were hearing from voters that it wasn’t something super popular. So I think we don’t know for certain, but a lot of the politics suggests that data center construction isn’t super popular.
And the messages online were — yeah, people saying, “Who is this from? Are they trying to manipulate us? Is this data center developers in disguise?” Definitely some suspicion around, what is this interfaith group? So people went from, “Oh, another annoying political text,” in some of the comments, to true anger.
HENDERSON: Okay, so as you start digging into this, what did you find?
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Well, it was a bit of a rabbit hole. So the first website it takes you to doesn’t even say who’s behind it at all. You have to click around on the website for it to say “Interfaith Action Movement” on other pages, where it says it’s a coalition of religious leaders. And even then it doesn’t say who it is — you can’t see any names, any denominations, anything like that.
I actually ended up finding my best clue by clicking on the privacy policy where you were signing up. And there it had an email for Interfaith Action Movement of New Jersey, which of course also raises eyebrows because, you know, we’re in Maryland, not New Jersey. But the email, I was able to link it directly to a Facebook page and other pages related to — yes, yes — a group in New Jersey that’s led by a Seventh-day Adventist ordained elder and political consultant named the Reverend Derrick Green. So that’s kind of the initial bit of my investigation.
HENDERSON: Were other people making the same discovery about the group underneath it, or did people just assume this is an interfaith group?
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Yeah, I mean, people had raised some questions, and I did find that one group on Reddit had identified Reverend Green. I don’t know that they went much beyond that. And then also, I at that point had started calling people in anti-data center activism who had been public about that. And they too had concerns. They had a lot of worry that there were outside forces funding pro-data center activism — not just like in this text, where they had suspicions, but also they had some suspicions that there had been paid people showing up at county meetings. I think there’s just a lot of suspicion in those groups about whether any of that pro-data center activity is legitimate.
So they had had some suspicions and had found Reverend Derrick Green, but I, with a bit more of a journalistic background, then knew what my next steps would be in terms of checking. I checked the Maryland lobbying list, I checked Maryland campaign contributions, I checked a lot of other news coverage, just to get a full sense of, okay, what do we know about Reverend Derrick Green? And I also called him, and I learned a little bit that way too.
HENDERSON: What did you find out about this Interfaith Action Movement? Is it an actual group, or is it just this one guy, Derrick Green?
HERTZLER-McCAIN: So I did call Derrick Green, through the phone number that was listed on his Maryland lobbying profile — so that was public. And we had a conversation, and he said he wasn’t open to sharing any other members of his coalition. He cited their privacy. He did tell me that he’s working with Protestants, Jews and Muslims, but without any other names, pretty broadly telling who exactly he’s working with. Especially given he has a good amount of New Jersey roots as well, how many of those people are in Prince George’s County is also a question.
HENDERSON: Did you ask him how his work was funded? … Sending these mass text messages, it’s not cheap. So who paid for this?
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Yeah, that’s obviously a huge question for me and other people who cared about where this text came from.
HENDERSON: Follow the money.
HERTZLER-McCAIN: I asked him, and he was not willing to share. I also asked him whether he had talked to local politicians about the text, and he said he hadn’t yet. But I asked him whether he’d also talked to data center developers, and he said he had. So we don’t know where the money’s coming from, but we do know what he’s telling us about who he’s talking to — he has said he’s been in conversation with data center developers.
HENDERSON: And I don’t know if you reported on this or talked about it, but is this legal? Are there legal issues with claiming you’re a group and advocating through text messages like this?
HERTZLER-McCAIN: So the rules around text messages are different depending on whether you’re advocating for something that’s actively on a ballot or not. And in this case, we’re not leading up to any type of ballot measure about data centers in the fall. This wasn’t about a specific candidate — this was just issue advocacy. So as far as I could tell, this is absolutely perfectly legal, and there’s not a lot of tools we have to really trace the money in the same way as if it were more related to a specific election issue.
The other thing that kind of raised my eyebrows was — I, as someone who follows local news but maybe not as well as I could have, kind of thought the issue was settled. I thought there’d been a moratorium passed, that this was just off the table for the next two years. And so I was kind of like, what’s going on? But as I was talking to anti-data center activists, they were telling me that actually they were worried that the fight was still active, because the moratorium, as they read it, still has loopholes that could allow new data center construction. And also that there’s a county council member who has submitted some zoning changes that would make it easier in the more rural parts of the county to construct new data centers. So that’s the other interesting thing — it does seem like, despite a moratorium, at least according to anti-data center activists and what I was able to read, too, there is a sense that a needle could be moved if public opinion moved on this.
HENDERSON: This is an important piece of the puzzle. I don’t know if we had hit this earlier — that it’s not only the context of Prince George’s County’s general sentiment around data centers, but there was a specific measure at the county level to limit data centers, and an ongoing argument and kind of fight for public opinion around real policy around data centers.
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Yeah, absolutely. And it was interesting because our county executive, Aisha Braveboy, had both supported the moratorium but also said publicly to the Banner, which is a local publication, that she thought data centers could be an important part of economic development. So you kind of see that maybe there’s a bit of balance she’s trying to take between maybe it’s public opinion and her own position — maybe it’s just that there’s different warring priorities going on right now — but there really is kind of a balance people are striking.
And it’s interesting to bring up Aisha Braveboy, because when I was checking Derrick Green’s registered lobbying history, he’s recently, or currently, a lobbyist for a Maryland city outside Prince George’s County. But he also was a lobbyist earlier this year — a registered lobbyist for Prince George’s County government, which would be the executive branch led by Aisha Braveboy. So he is in communication with a politician who has publicly made similar arguments about economic development and data centers as this text message has.
HENDERSON: Even though he said he is not talking to legislators. So one of the legislators who is making decisions about data centers is actually connected in some way to Reverend Derrick Green, who is the only person you can find associated with this text message that is trying to push and promote support for data centers, claiming that it will lift up the community and improve the economy and lead to more equality, even.
So after the break — when competing groups invoke faith and economic justice, how can a community determine who they actually represent?
HENDERSON: Aleja, as you started to dig into Reverend Derrick Green, tell me more about what you found on his background.
HERTZLER-McCAIN: So we’ve already heard a little bit about his lobbying history, which is immediately a place I thought to look. But also I wanted to look into his campaign contributions — right, so what are his political donations like? And one of the things that jumped out at me is that his registered state for all of his campaign contributions in the last year or so is New Jersey. So when I talked to him on the phone, he told me, “I’m a longtime Prince Georgian, from Prince George’s County.” And, you know, it’s possible for those two things to be true — he did serve as a senior advisor to New Jersey Governor, or former New Jersey Governor, Phil Murphy. So he kind of framed it as, “I went to New Jersey to do this job, but my roots are in P.G. County, I’m back in P.G. County.” But all of his recent campaign contributions list New Jersey. And when I went and also looked up the 501(c)(3) registration for Interfaith Action Movement, his name is the one that’s on it, and that’s also registered in New Jersey. So there’s a lot of New Jersey ties here in all of this.
But then, yeah, I went and looked at the campaign contributions, and it turns out that the highest amount that he’s donated is over $4,000, in different amounts at different moments, not all at once, but to Aisha Braveboy, who’s that county executive we talked about. So he’s got a lobbying relationship with her, and also a campaign contribution relationship. So whether they’re aligned on other issues, or what might have motivated that, I don’t know. But he’s donated to a lot of different politicians, but far and away the most he’s donated has been to her.
HENDERSON: To her. And he’s also a reverend — say more about where he is ordained.
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Yeah, so I looked into that a bit. I sent a comment request to the Seventh-day Adventist Church to confirm his ordination, and I didn’t hear back. But it is something that’s been listed in public profiles for a long time, so it would be really surprising if that were not true. He describes himself as an ordained elder, which is different than maybe what we call a pastor in other traditions. But when I asked him about his current congregation, he also declined to share that, citing some privacy reasons. So there’s not a lot we know about actually his involvement in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, except for the fact that a lot of his political involvement for a long time has been related to him being a faith leader.
So he’s listed on a lot of these New Jersey-related politics websites as the Reverend Derrick Green. He specifically, for Phil Murphy, worked on relationships with religious leaders. And he told me that in 2020, when he was in that role, he started doing a daily prayer call every morning with faith leaders throughout the country, and that started out of COVID-19 and then continued for other issues. So he’s made being a faith leader a core part of his political work. But I didn’t learn unfortunately too much about what he’s actually doing with the Seventh-day Adventist Church these days.
HENDERSON: Okay, you talked about in your article that you found a scandal in Bermuda — this is a strange twist. Tell me more about this.
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Yeah. When he was serving in New Jersey, a New Jersey paper had dug into his relation to this Bermuda campaign finance scandal, back — I believe it kicked off in 2012. In the early 2010s, he set up a secret bank account of $350,000 with contributions from U.S. businessmen, to support an opposition political party in the Bermuda election. And the New Jersey reporting says that party leaders actually didn’t know about the bank account that he and a business associate were working on when it was set up. But it all ended up — after the elections, the party came into power, and the premier, the government leader, then ended up on a private plane that belonged to one of those businessmen who’d contributed to the account, going to Washington, and then went and met in Washington with that businessman. And the whole thing blew up, such that it was called “Jetgate,” and the premier had to resign.
HENDERSON: So this guy, Reverend Derrick Green, who is connected to this text, has this long history of supporting political candidates, pushing specific agendas, and has actually been a part of a campaign finance scandal in Bermuda. Now bring us back to the argument over data centers in Prince George’s County — how does he come to be a part of this argument? Do we know?
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Yeah, I mean, like I said, there’s a lot we still don’t know. But what we do know is that there are really battle lines being drawn nationally, locally, in the fight over data center construction. And people are clearly bringing faith into it, right? We’ve mostly seen, nationally, faith groups join the anti-data center side of the coin. So locally there’s a group called Interfaith Power and Light DMV, and that has been very vocal against data centers. They’ve done a photo petition of people from different congregations holding signs that say their communities should make decisions over data centers, or there should be community decision-making. They’ve testified at different county hearings, in other parts of the county, or in the region — Loudoun County is part of what they look at. And Loudoun County, as we mentioned before, has some of the most data centers of the whole country — it’s called Data Center Alley. So it’s been an intense issue regionally and nationally.
But yes, there has been really strong faith presence in terms of kind of public-facing advocacy that’s anti-data center. And so it’s not surprising that there would be some faith voices coming out for data centers.
HENDERSON: When Green argues in this text to support data centers, what argument is he making specifically?
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Yeah, so especially on the phone, he kind of also talked about Prince George’s County’s unique place. So one thing that outsiders might not know is that until 2022, Prince George’s County was the wealthiest majority African-American county in the United States. And I probably should say majority Black, because there are also people of African descent who don’t identify as African American here. But it is a place where Black stability, Black economic success is really foundational to the county, and also something that can be an anxiety in a time when so many people have lost federal jobs, and many of them being part of that group. So yeah, in 2022, neighboring Charles County became wealthier. And there’s definitely a bit of anxiety about Black economic stability and success in the county, and the success of everybody else too, right?
And so he was making the argument about how are we building an economically viable future for Black and brown communities. In this text he talks about lower taxes in Loudoun County, and I definitely think that’s a continuous conversation in Prince George’s County — how can we change the tax base so that there’s less burden on residents? And also making claims about how important this technology is, that everyone’s using phones, that we use phones all day, and that data centers are something we need — those are kind of some of the foundational arguments that he’s making.
HENDERSON: And so the local faith leaders who spoke out against this text that was sent, what arguments are they making?
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Yeah, they have a variety of arguments. Obviously their core argument is that local communities should decide, but what they’re saying is local communities don’t want this, don’t want this at all — that people are concerned about the environmental impacts and pollutants that Prince George’s County already has, what are called “sacrifice zones” — that’s environmental justice terminology for places that already have high burdens of pollution — and so they’re worried that the pollution from data centers, and other environmental problems, would compound and create even worse situations there. They’re also worried about rising utility costs — that there have been concerns about data centers driving up electricity prices in other places. And so they really said, “We’re worried about the impact on the most vulnerable people in our communities, and that it’s foundational to our religious faith to look out for the most vulnerable people.” And also bringing in that racial justice argument — how is this going to impact Black and brown communities? And one of the key organizers with Interfaith Power and Light, Robin Lewis, who’s their director for climate equity, said, “I’m extremely connected in the Black church. People in the Black church don’t want this.” So that’s a big thread through all of this.
HENDERSON: It’s interesting, because it seems like there’s — well, there’s several complex layers to this — but one of the things in this story is that there are two big questions. One is the fight about data centers: Are they good or bad for a community? And the other piece, though, is when groups invoke faith and say they are a part of an interfaith group, and call for economic justice or environmental justice even, how can a community determine who they actually represent, and who is funding that work? This really brings to light those questions that are underneath that reality — that faith communities often provide a voice for moral authority, but whose moral authority is it, and who’s actually paying for it?
HERTZLER-McCAIN: And I think that’s part of the reason why doing this reporting is in the best interest of the community, right? The more information you have about the faith leaders who are making moral arguments, the better people can assess whether they represent the community or not, right?
HENDERSON: Yeah, there should be real transparency around that.
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Yeah, I think there would be a lot of people who would say to Reverend Green that they want to know more about who he’s working with, and want to know more about what’s going on there, and that that would increase trust in what he’s doing. But I also think maybe there are people who say, of course there should be faith voices on both sides of any issue, and it’s not surprising that there would be.
HENDERSON: Aleja Hertzler-McCain, thank you for bringing us this story and being with us on Complexified.
HERTZLER-McCAIN: Glad to be here, as always.
HENDERSON: Complexified comes to you from the Institute for Religion, Politics, and Culture at Iliff School of Theology, in partnership with Religion News Service. Senior producer is Jonathan Woodward. Associate producer is Josh Perez. Producer is Roxanne Stone. I’m Amanda Henderson. The world needs us now — we need more thinking, more questions, more curiosity, more Complexified. Share this episode with the last person who spam-texted a million people. And email me right now at complexified@iliff.edu. That’s complexified at i-l-i-f-f dot edu.
