Voters in 10 U.S. states will decide 41 local ballot measures related to data centers on Tuesday, November 3, according to Ballotpedia. Twenty-eight proposals would restrict development, while 13 would make it easier for projects to move forward.
The measures arrive amid concerns about rising electricity costs, water use and the infrastructure required to operate facilities that support cloud services, streaming, internet applications and artificial intelligence systems. Communities are also debating whether developers should bear the costs associated with expanded generation capacity, transmission lines and other upgrades.
The measures are spread across California, Florida, Illinois, Ohio, Kansas, Maine, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota and Wisconsin. Ohio has the largest share, with 21 proposals. Communities including Sunbury, Defiance and Oregon are considering restrictions on data centers that consume more than 25 megawatts of electricity.
In California, Alhambra voters will decide whether to prohibit data centers within city limits. Edgewater, Florida, will consider a ban on new facilities and expansions. Illinois voters in Bloomington, Morgan County and several townships will consider advisory questions about data center construction and restrictions.
Kansas proposals include limits on large data centers linked to electricity and water consumption. Several Maine communities are considering temporary moratoriums. In Nevada, Boulder City voters will decide whether to permit data centers in the Eldorado Valley Transfer Area. Downe Township, New Jersey, will vote on an advisory question about support for data center development, while Harwood, North Dakota, will consider additional industrial development review requirements. Wisconsin also has a measure addressing data center restrictions.
Ohio's proposals could affect a planned $2 billion Amazon data center project in Sunbury, according to Reuters. More broadly, the results may influence where technology companies build facilities and what conditions local governments impose before approving them.
Data centers require substantial amounts of electricity and water to run servers and cooling systems continuously. A June 2026 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory report estimated that data centers could account for 11.8% of total U.S. electricity consumption by 2030, with possible outcomes ranging from 9.5% to 15.3%.
Electricity prices have also become part of the debate. Reuters reported that residential electricity prices have risen more than 10% nationally since 2024, with increases exceeding 20% in Ohio. Data centers are not responsible for every increase, since fuel costs, aging infrastructure and other factors also affect bills. However, growing demand has raised questions about how utilities and regulators distribute the costs of new infrastructure between large commercial customers and households.
The potential effect of local votes on electricity bills is not straightforward. Regional power markets mean that demand in one community can influence costs across a wider area. In the PJM market, which includes New Jersey and Ohio among other states, the independent market monitor has identified data centers as a major factor behind higher capacity-market prices. Its estimates indicate that data center demand will add billions of dollars in capacity-market charges over the current and following delivery years.
Blocking a project would not necessarily eliminate broader market pressures, since demand could move to another location and existing infrastructure costs would remain. Conversely, approving a facility would not automatically raise household bills. The outcome would partly depend on whether utilities and regulators require developers to pay for the infrastructure their projects require.
Supporters of data center development point to construction jobs, tax revenue, investment and the digital services these facilities support. They also warn that restrictions could push projects toward communities with more favorable policies. Opponents cite electricity and water consumption, noise, land use and the possibility that households could subsidize infrastructure primarily serving large technology companies.
The ballot measures vary from outright bans to limits on the largest facilities, temporary pauses and additional approval requirements. Together, they reflect growing efforts by local communities to have a greater role in determining how AI-related infrastructure is built and financed.
Sources: Tom's Guide.