Data center siting has become a local political question decided at the ballot box and in council chambers. Measures to ban, pause or require votes on data centers outnumbered measures to support them on November 3, and recent council actions show that early engagement, cost commitments and dropped tax breaks separate approved projects from rejected ones.
Key Takeaways
Voters in 10 states decide 41 local data center measures on November 3, with 21 in Ohio.
All six data center measures decided earlier in 2026 favored limits on development.
San Diego paused data centers, but the largest proposal sits on Navy land outside city control.
A Michigan township voted 6-0 to oppose all data centers days after a 700 MW project was announced without consulting it.
Hermantown, Minnesota, approved a 500 MW Google campus after four hours of mostly opposed testimony, showing projects can advance when developers drop tax breaks and accept conditions.
Forty-One Measures in One Night
Forty-one local data center measures appeared on November 3 ballots in 10 states, according to Ballotpedia. Ohio alone had 21. The rest were spread across California, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, North Dakota, New Jersey, Nevada and Wisconsin.
Most would limit development through outright bans, temporary moratoriums or requirements that voters approve future projects. A smaller number would support projects or uphold rezonings. By Ballotpedia’s count, most of the measures nationwide reached the ballot through citizen petitions rather than votes of local governing bodies.
Voters have leaned one direction so far this year. All six data center measures decided before November favored limits. Canterbury, New Hampshire, approved a ban with 84% of the vote. Monterey Park, California, approved a land-use prohibition with 88%. Nottingham, New Hampshire, approved a 12-month moratorium with 90%. Augusta Township, Michigan, defeated a rezoning with 90% voting no.
Why the Ballot Became the Venue
Ohio’s numbers reflect how quickly residents can act. Ballotpedia counted 21 measures across 18 Ohio jurisdictions, and nationally, as of September, 31 of 38 data center measures had reached the ballot through citizen petitions rather than votes of local governing bodies.
State policy is shifting at the same time. The National Conference of State Legislatures found that lawmakers in at least 28 of the 38 states offering sales-tax incentives for data centers pursued rollbacks this year, according to Colorado Newsline. Where states have not set rules, cities and counties are writing their own. Colorado lawmakers killed both an incentive bill and a regulation bill in May; since then, Denver, Broomfield, Loveland, Grand Junction and several counties have paused new projects.
Planning guidance offers a middle path. The Federation of American Scientists recommends defining data centers in local codes, requiring public hearings for large facilities, setting numeric noise limits and residential setbacks, requiring proof of utility capacity and treating community benefit agreements as a supplement to zoning, not a substitute.
Council Chambers Tell the Same Story
Elected officials are acting in parallel. On October 27, the San Diego City Council voted unanimously for a 45-day moratorium on data center permits, extendable to nearly two years, while staff write rules within 180 days. Council amendments call for no data center costs passed to residents, renewable power and minimum distances from schools, parks and child care centers. The pause does not reach the 70-acre, Navy-owned NAVWAR site, where Manchester Financial Group has floated a 400 MW data center, so council members asked the mayor’s office to lobby Congress.
The San Diego proposal shows the scale that triggers action. A 400 MW facility would be the largest in California, by KPBS’s account enough power for about 300,000 homes. The city plans to amend its land development code next year, guided by a stakeholder working group, and council amendments also call for union labor under project labor agreements.
In Delhi Township, Michigan, the sequence mattered as much as the project. Lighthouse Sustainability and the Lansing Economic Area Partnership (LEAP) announced a 700 MW data center on 423 acres, with six hours of battery storage, a $20 million community fund and free rooftop solar for county residents. The township, which already had a moratorium running to April 2027, said it had not been consulted. It ended its LEAP membership and on October 30 voted 6-0 to oppose the project.
Lighthouse, a Colorado-based company, projected $53 million a year in revenue from the project, and township officials said developers had been calling residents and sending mailers before any formal application. The township supervisor said Lighthouse was harassing residents; LEAP declined further comment.
Hermantown, Minnesota, went the other way the same night. After protests halted two earlier meetings and four hours of mostly opposed testimony, the City Council unanimously approved six resolutions for a Google data center of about 1.7 million square feet, with 500 MW of expected demand. Google had dropped a request for up to $80 million in property tax breaks, reduced the project from four buildings to three and signed a $210 million decommissioning agreement. The project still needs state approval of its electric service agreement and faces three lawsuits.
In October alone, Grand Junction, Colorado, paused data centers of 1 MW or more, and Taunton, Massachusetts, banned them outright, costing an industrial owner a prospective 24 MW tenant.
What It Means for Owners: Implications
Local approval is now a political risk that can change in a single election. A use that is permitted in a zoning code this year can be banned by petition next year. For owners of industrial land, flex buildings and powered sites, that risk affects tenant pools, sale prices and financing. Lenders and appraisers will increasingly ask whether a site’s intended use faces a pending petition, moratorium or ban, and buyers will price that uncertainty.
Opportunities
Clear rules attract projects. Communities that write standards for noise, water, power costs and setbacks, rather than pausing indefinitely, give developers a path to approval. Hermantown shows that conditions and commitments can carry a contested project.
Cost commitments matter. Dropping tax breaks, paying for grid upgrades and posting decommissioning guarantees answered core objections in Hermantown.
Community agreements. Negotiated benefits can build support. Lancaster, Pennsylvania, secured $20 million from a data center developer, split between economic development and clean energy funds, with no city tax break and with limits on water use and noise written into the agreement.
Smaller, cleaner projects. Measures and moratoriums often target large campuses. Smaller edge facilities and projects with onsite storage, closed-loop cooling and renewable supply may face less resistance.
Risks
Petition exposure. Citizen-initiated measures can reach the ballot quickly in states that allow them, including Ohio.
Announcement risk. Delhi Township shows that publicizing a project before engaging local officials can convert a neutral pause into formal opposition.
Federal land and preemption gaps. Local pauses may not reach federal property, leaving communities to fight through other channels and leaving developers with uncertain outcomes.
Stranded value. Owners who marketed sites for data centers may need to plan alternative uses if bans pass.
What to Watch
Final results from the 41 measures, whether Ohio communities adopt bans in large numbers and whether states respond with uniform siting rules, as New York, Idaho, Oklahoma and Virginia have done with size thresholds. Owners should track local ballot calendars alongside zoning hearings.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many data center measures were on the November 3 ballot?
Ballotpedia counted 41 local measures in 10 states, including 21 in Ohio.
Have voters supported or opposed data centers this year?
All six measures decided before November favored limits on data center development.
Can a city pause a data center on federal land?
San Diego’s moratorium does not reach the Navy-owned NAVWAR site, so the city is seeking help from Congress.
What helped the Hermantown project win approval?
Google dropped a request for up to $80 million in tax breaks, scaled the project down and signed a $210 million decommissioning agreement.
Sources
Ballotpedia. “Data Center-Related Ballot Measures, 2026.” Updated Oct. 30, 2026. https://ballotpedia.org/Data_center-related_ballot_measures,_2026
Ballotpedia News. “Ohio Leads States in Number of Local Ballot Measures on Data Centers for 2026.” Sept. 21, 2026. https://news.ballotpedia.org/2026/09/21/ohio-leads-states-in-number-of-local-ballot-measures-on-data-centers-for-2026/
Bridge Michigan. “Michigan Township Rejects Data Center Pitch Before Talks Even Begin.” Oct. 31, 2026. https://bridgemi.com/michigan-environment-watch/michigan-township-rejects-data-center-pitch-before-talks-even-begin/
City of Lancaster, Pennsylvania. “About the Community Benefits Agreement.” 2025. https://www.cityoflancasterpa.gov/data-center/community-benefits-agreement/
Colorado Newsline. “Both Colorado Data Center Bills Rejected in Final Days of 2026 Legislative Session.” May 11, 2026. https://coloradonewsline.com/2026/05/11/data-center-bills-rejected-legislative-session/
Federation of American Scientists. “Before Breaking Ground: A Local Government Guide to Better Data Center Policy and Community Benefits.” Sept. 10, 2026. https://fas.org/publication/before-breaking-ground/
KPBS. “San Diego City Council Unanimously Passes Moratorium on Data Centers.” Oct. 27, 2026. https://www.kpbs.org/news/politics/2026/10/27/san-diego-city-council-unanimously-passes-moratorium-on-data-centers
Michigan Public. “Delhi Township Trustees to Vote on Opposing New Data Center.” Oct. 28, 2026. https://www.michiganpublic.org/politics-government/2026-10-28/delhi-township-trustees-to-vote-on-opposing-new-data-center
MPR News. “Hermantown Approves Controversial Google Data Center During Late-Night Meeting.” Oct. 31, 2026. https://www.mprnews.org/story/2026/10/31/hermantown-approves-controversial-google-data-center-during-late-night-meeting
Northern News Now. “Hermantown City Council Passes All Six Data Center Resolutions.” Oct. 30, 2026. https://www.northernnewsnow.com/2026/10/30/hermantown-city-council-passes-all-six-data-center-resolutions-following-4-hours-public-comment/
The Daily Sentinel. “GJ Data Center Moratorium Approved.” Oct. 2026. https://www.gjsentinel.com/news/western_colorado/gj-data-center-moratorium-approved/article_f1a0ba3d-5574-48b0-8580-878bec100d39.html
Times of San Diego. “City Council Unanimously Pauses Data Center Construction Despite Little Power Over NAVWAR Proposal.” Oct. 27, 2026. https://timesofsandiego.com/politics/2026/10/27/city-council-unanimously-pauses-data-center-construction-despite-little-power-over-navwar-proposal/
WPRI. “Taunton Councilors Consider Data Center Moratorium.” Oct. 20, 2026. https://www.wpri.com/news/local-news/se-mass/taunton-councilors-consider-data-center-moratorium/amp/