Voters Said No To Data Centers In 46 Of 47 Local Ballot Votes. Here Is What They Actually Decided

🔍 Read the full analysis: Voters Said No To Data Centers In 46 Of 47 Local Ballot Votes. Here Is What They Actually Decided on ThorstenMeyerAI.com

Before you orderOffer from Amazon

Get the latest gadgets delivered free with Prime

• Fast, free delivery on millions of items
• Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
• Member-only deals all year

Start your free Prime trial →Free trial for eligible customers · Cancel anytime

As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.Hide

Voters in 46 of 47 local ballot measures on data centers voted for restrictions or were leading that side, according to a public tracker’s unofficial results as of November 5. The November 3 questions in 10 states covered different policies, from outright bans to zoning decisions and advisory votes, so the tally does not mean voters made one uniform decision about data centers.

The tracker, Data Centers on the Ballot, is maintained by Redbud Consulting and groups measures by whether the outcome would restrict or allow data center development. At 12:30 p.m. Eastern on November 5, it listed 47 measures, with results posted for all: the restriction side was ahead or had won in 46, while Harwood, North Dakota, was the sole exception. The tracker says none of the results is certified.

The count changed after election night. At 6:16 a.m. Eastern on November 4, the tracker listed 45 measures, with results in 40. It later added a nonbinding question in Belvidere, New Jersey, and a charter amendment in Piqua, Ohio. Ballotpedia listed 41 measures before the vote, using a different counting approach. These totals differ partly because sources included different local questions.

Of the 47 measures in the tracker, 37 are binding and 10 are advisory. The tracker reports 41 complete election-night counts and six still being counted as of November 5. Across the measures, it lists 260,177 votes, with 72.8% cast for the outcome it classifies as restrictive. The source article says its author checked seven results against official election sites in Kansas, Nevada, Florida and North Dakota; those seven matched the tracker. For other results, including Ohio, the author relied on the tracker and available local reporting.

Local Votes Shape Project Approval

The results suggest that local approval has become a material factor for companies considering data center sites. Some measures would block or limit future development; others require a public vote before a project can proceed. The source article says many votes target future projects rather than campuses already under construction, but the effect depends on each measure’s wording and legal status.

The policy debate is also tied to the resources and economic benefits communities expect from large facilities. The source article describes opponents as raising concerns about water and energy use, while supporters point to jobs and tax revenue. Ballot language in some places set limits using megawatts or gallons per day. The results do not establish which concerns drove individual voters, or whether voters in different communities were responding to the same issue.

Products Worth Considering

Jackery HomePower 3600 Plus Portable Power Station, 3584Wh, 3600W

AmazonView Latest Price

DJI Mic 2 Wireless Microphone System (2 Transmitters, Receiver, Charging Case)

AmazonView Latest Price

Anker SOLIX S2000 Portable Power Station, 2,010Wh, 1,500W

AmazonView Latest Price

As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.

A Count Built From Different Ballots

The headline figure comes from a tracker that includes ballot questions directly about data centers, such as bans, capacity limits, zoning referendums, developer agreements, rules requiring voter approval and advisory questions. It maps differently worded questions into “Restrict” and “Allow” outcomes to produce a combined count. That makes the number useful for tracking the broad direction of votes, but it does not make the underlying measures equivalent.

Examples show the range. In Hubbard, Ohio, voters were asked whether to ban data centers of any size; the unofficial tally reported in the source was 2,622 in favor and 802 against. In Boulder City, Nevada, voters rejected a question to allow data centers on city-owned desert land, according to the tracker’s cited count. Other measures set size thresholds, imposed temporary pauses or addressed zoning decisions. The source says local questions also differed in whether they were binding.

“Nothing on the page is certified.”

— Data Centers on the Ballot tracker

Certification and Local Effects

The November 5 totals remain unofficial, and six counts were still being completed according to the tracker. The source article verified seven results directly against election authorities, not all 47; its account of the remaining measures relies on the tracker’s linked sources and local reporting where available. Certified totals may change.

The combined tally also cannot show how much support each specific policy received across all communities. An advisory question may not change local law by itself, while a binding ban or zoning referendum can have a more direct effect. The source material does not provide the full text and legal status of every measure, nor does it establish the eventual effect on proposed projects in each location.

Final Counts and Local Implementation

Election officials must complete and certify the results. Until then, the tracker’s 46-of-47 figure is a snapshot, not a final statewide or national determination. Local governments and project developers will then have to respond to the specific result and ballot language in each jurisdiction.

For communities with binding measures, the next steps may involve applying new rules to proposals or resolving questions about how the measure operates. Advisory votes may instead inform later council decisions. The source material does not give a common implementation timetable, so what happens next will vary by town and by the legal form of its ballot question.

Key Questions

What does the 46-of-47 count mean?

As of November 5, the Data Centers on the Ballot tracker classified the restriction side as having won or leading in 46 of 47 local measures. The results were unofficial, and the measures covered different policies.

Were all 47 votes binding?

No. The tracker classified 37 measures as binding and 10 as advisory. An advisory result does not necessarily change local law on its own.

What was the one result favoring data centers?

The tracker listed Harwood, North Dakota, as the exception. Its question concerned review rules for large projects; the source reported an unofficial tally of 105 yes votes to 325 no votes.

Why did reports give different numbers of measures?

Sources counted different sets of ballot questions. The tracker listed 45 measures on the morning after the election, then added two; Ballotpedia listed 41 before the vote. Their inclusion criteria and counts for some states differed.

Are the results final?

No. The tracker described the results as uncertified as of November 5, and six counts were still being completed. Official certification could change some totals.

Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com