Voters Reject Data Centers Across 10 States

Voters across 10 US states have delivered a sweeping rebuke to the artificial intelligence building boom, rejecting almost every data-centre measure put to them in local ballots on 3 November.

Preliminary results counted 41 data-centre-related measures across California, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota, Ohio and Wisconsin. In all but a handful of cases, voters backed restrictions, bans or moratoriums — or voted down proposals that would have made building easier. Route Fifty reported that opponents of data-centre development were successful in virtually all of the more than 40 measures, while Gizmodo reported that seven municipalities passed permanent bans and 10 more voted to limit facilities by size or electrical footprint.

The results are preliminary and unofficial until certified, and some votes were advisory rather than binding. Even so, the pattern was strikingly consistent.

Ohio at the centre of the fight

Ohio saw the most votes of any state, with 21 measures across about 18 jurisdictions, reflecting its position as a major hub for data-centre construction. In every Ohio contest with a reported result, opponents of development appeared to win.

In Granville, voters approved a prohibition on data centres with 82.45% support. In Wilmington, voters rejected all four industrial rezoning referendums tied to a proposed data centre, with between 79.61% and 80.25% voting no. In Defiance, voters passed a measure by 63% to 37% prohibiting new data centres requiring more than 25 megawatts of electricity.

Bans, moratoriums and limits elsewhere

Elsewhere, the margins were often just as wide. In Alhambra, California, eight miles from downtown Los Angeles, 82% of voters backed a measure banning data centres within city limits. In Edgewater, Florida, more than three-quarters of voters — 77% — approved a ban on new data centres. In Bloomington, Illinois, voters advised city leaders to impose a moratorium on large-scale data centres, and Morgan County, Illinois, approved an advisory call for restrictions with about 88% support.

In Kansas, voters in Emporia passed a ban on what the measure called “high impact data centers”, defined as facilities requiring more than 10 megawatts of peak electrical load or more than 100,000 gallons of water a day. The measure passed with just over 60% of the vote. El Dorado, Kansas, approved a 10-year ban on high-impact data centres and certain battery-storage facilities by 71% to 29%.

The one exception

The clearest exception was Harwood, North Dakota. There, the secretary of state’s office said 75% of the 430 people who voted rejected an amendment to the city charter that would have required an independent review and public hearing before adopting large industrial projects, including data centres. The amendment would have applied to future projects, not to the controversial Applied Digital campus already approved in the area.

Why voters pushed back

Residents’ concerns centred on water and power. Data centres use large amounts of electricity and water for cooling, and voters worried about the effect on their utility bills, as well as a lack of transparency in deals struck between local governments and the technology companies and developers seeking to build.

“Voters across the country have emphatically rejected the push for AI data centers,” said Mitch Jones, deputy director of Food & Water Action, a nonprofit that campaigns for clean water and food. “Not only in Washington, but in state capitols and village halls across the country, newly elected leaders are poised to stand up to the unregulated, reckless buildout of hyperscale data centers wherever they are proposed.”

The backlash echoes Google’s clash with US schools over AI, another case where a technology rollout collided with local control. Exit polls published by NBC found that 56% of voters described AI and data centres as a crucial or major factor in their vote, and of those, 64% voted for Democrats.

At a Brookings Institution event last month, senior fellow Mark Muro noted voters’ discomfort at how projects had proceeded. “I think it is fair to say Americans have been feeling frustrated this summer and fall at the peremptory way the new technology has been imposed without guardrails, as fast as possible and often through questionable data center deals shrouded in [nondisclosure agreements],” Muro said.

What it means for the AI buildout

The votes do not halt data-centre construction nationally, and advisory measures alone do not create legal prohibitions. But they add a new layer of local approval risk for developers, on top of the market scrutiny already facing the sector — from AMD’s AI chip boom to AI security deals and the wider debate over AI spending.

For companies planning the next wave of campuses, the message from 3 November was blunt: in community after community, voters were asked whether they wanted a data centre nearby, and in almost every case, they said no.