Data center developers in the United States lost almost every local vote they faced on 3 November. Route Fifty, citing preliminary results collected by datacentersontheballot.com, counts more than 40 local ballot measures in 10 states, and opponents of data centers won nearly all of them. Capital B News puts the number at nearly 40 and says that 77% of voters across all the measures voted against data center development. The one result that went the industry's way was in Harwood, North Dakota.
Bans, zoning questions and a 10 MW threshold
The measures were not all of one kind. Monterey Park in California voted by a wide margin to ban data centers permanently, which Route Fifty describes as the first vote of its kind in the country, and neighbouring Alhambra was on course for a citywide ban. Others were zoning questions, charter amendments, voter approval for large tax increment financing districts, or advisory votes that do not bind local officials.
Ohio had the most, with almost 20 towns, cities and counties voting, and opponents won every one. A statewide effort there aims to put a constitutional ban on new data center construction on the ballot, possibly in 2027. In Perry, Ohio, voters placed financial and operating conditions on hyperscalers that seek tax breaks, Semafor reports. In Emporia, Kansas, just over 60% approved a ban on "high impact data centers", defined by a peak electrical load above 10 MW or a daily water draw above 100,000 gallons. Edgewater, Florida, wrote a ban into its city charter, and in Joliet, Illinois, nearly 80% backed restrictions.
In Harwood, about three quarters of the 430 voters rejected a charter amendment that would have required an independent review and a public hearing before large industrial projects, data centers included, could be adopted. More votes are due next month in Arkansas and North Dakota.
What the voters were worried about
The reports name electricity bills, water supply, air pollution and the lack of transparency in deals between local governments and developers, some of them covered by non-disclosure agreements. Semafor adds that banks and asset managers financing the build-out have started to treat local opposition as a credit risk, and that hyperscalers are hiring community liaisons.
The generator yard is on the ballot too
None of the reports lists generators among the issues. Anyone who has sat through a planning hearing knows where the questions go once water and power bills are done, though: how many diesel sets, how often they run on test, at what time of day and how loud at the fence. Emporia's definition stands out because it counts load and water, not floor area. Projects that still go ahead in towns like these will need a permit file that answers those questions before they are asked, with the test schedule, the exhaust after-treatment and the noise at the boundary set out in plain terms.
Sources: Route Fifty, Capital B News, Semafor