🔍 Read the full analysis: Why Data Center Ballot Votes Are About More Than AI on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get hardware and tech essentials delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
TL;DR
A public tracker counted 47 local data center measures across 10 states on Nov. 3, with the restrictive side leading or winning in 46, according to unofficial results as of Nov. 5. The measures addressed water, power, land use and local approval as well as data center growth linked to AI; they ranged from binding bans to advisory questions.
Voters in 10 states considered 47 local measures about data centers on Nov. 3, and the restrictive side was leading or had won in 46, according to the public tracker Data Centers on the Ballot. The unofficial tally points to broad local resistance to some proposed projects, but it does not amount to a single vote against AI: the measures covered bans, zoning changes, temporary pauses and public-approval rules, among other issues.
As of 12:30 p.m. Eastern on Nov. 5, the tracker listed results for all 47 measures. It said 41 counts were complete for election night and six were still being counted. Across the measures, it reported 260,177 votes, with 72.8% on the side it labels “Restrict.” The tracker states that its results are not certified.
The tracker’s earlier count helps explain reports citing 45 measures. At 6:16 a.m. Eastern on Nov. 4, it listed 45 measures, with results for 40. It added two later: an advisory question in Belvidere, New Jersey, and a charter amendment in Piqua, Ohio. Ballotpedia counted 41 measures before the vote, using a different scope. These totals are not directly interchangeable because the sources included different sets of questions.
Some results were checked against election authorities. The source report says seven results were compared with official election sites in Kansas, Nevada, Florida and North Dakota, and matched the tracker. Those figures were still unofficial. For other locations, including Ohio, the report relied on the tracker’s links to county results and local coverage. Hubbard’s ban, for example, was reported by the Tribune Chronicle as passing 76% to 24%.
Infographic 01 · Data centers on the ballot
Where “45 measures” comes from
One public tracker did the counting. Its numbers grew as results and late additions came in. We checked seven results against official election sites.
local ballot measures on data centers went against them on unofficial counts, 5 Nov 2026, 12:30 p.m. ET. The one exception: Harwood, North Dakota.
- 3 NovBallotpedia: 41 measuresListed before the vote · 10 states
- 4 Nov, 6:16 a.m.Tracker: 45 measures40 with results · 39 against data centers, 1 for
- 4 NovHeadlines: “45 measures”33 won, 6 leading, 1 lost, 5 not reported
- 5 Nov, 12:30 p.m.Tracker: 47 measuresAll with results · 46 against, 1 for · 6 still counting
- Emporia, KSban over 10 MW · Lyon County4,346 : 2,891
- Americus, KSban · Lyon County274 : 127
- El Dorado, KSten-year ban · Butler County2,972 : 1,183
- Ottawa, KSban over 25 MW · Franklin County2,882 : 1,129
- Edgewater, FLcharter ban · Volusia County7,875 : 2,328
- Boulder City, NVallow data centers? · Clark County2,064 : 4,947
- Harwood, NDreview rules · ND Secretary of State105 : 325
Yes : No, unofficial. All seven match the tracker to the vote.
- Ballotpedia lists 4 Maine measures, the tracker 8; Kansas 3 vs 4; New Jersey 1 vs 2. That is the gap from 41 to 47.
- The tracker added Belvidere (NJ) and Piqua (OH) after the first reports, so 45 became 47.
- 404 Media’s “40+ races in 13 states” also counts recalls and candidate races.
- Wilmington, Ohio alone accounts for 4 measures: one vote per rezoned parcel.
Sources: Data Centers on the Ballot (Redbud Consulting), 5 Nov 2026, 12:30 p.m. ET · Ballotpedia, 3 Nov 2026 · official results of Lyon, Butler and Franklin County (KS), Volusia County (FL), Clark County (NV), North Dakota Secretary of State. Nothing is certified yet.
Powered by Thorsten Meyer AI
Local Votes Shape Data Center Siting
The results matter because local governments and voters can influence whether proposed facilities may be built, where they can go and what rules apply. For developers, the ballot measures create a local consent and permitting risk alongside the familiar questions of land, electricity and infrastructure. The source report says many votes concerned future projects rather than campuses already under construction; it does not establish that the results halt existing construction.
The disputes also reach beyond the technology’s connection to artificial intelligence. The source describes ballot language tied to facility size, measured in megawatts, and water use, measured in gallons per day. It reports that opponents in Gallup polling cited water and energy, while supporters pointed to jobs and tax revenue. The votes therefore reflect arguments about local resources and economic gains, not simply attitudes toward AI.
For residents, the measures set different levels of direct control. Some proposed binding restrictions; others asked for an advisory opinion or changed zoning for particular land. A high “Restrict” share across the tracker does not mean every community enacted the same policy, or that every voter opposed every kind of data center.
Products Worth Considering
LG UltraGear 34GX90SA-W 34-inch WQHD Curved OLED Gaming Monitor
LG UltraGear 27G640A-B 27-Inch QHD IPS Gaming Monitor, 300Hz, 1ms, G-SYNC Compatible, FreeSync Premium, DisplayHDR 400
LG UltraGear 45GX900A-B 45-Inch Curved OLED Gaming Monitor
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
What the Ballots Actually Covered
The Redbud Consulting tracker groups measures by their effect: “Restrict” for the outcome it classifies as limiting data centers and “Allow” for the alternative. That makes it possible to summarize differently worded questions, but the overall tally combines distinct legal and policy choices. According to the source report, 37 measures were binding and 10 were advisory.
The questions included outright bans, size limits—often 25 megawatts—temporary moratoriums, referendums on rezoning and rules requiring a public vote before approval. In Boulder City, Nevada, voters rejected a question that would have allowed data centers on city-owned desert land. In Wilmington, Ohio, voters overturned four council decisions that had rezoned rural land for data centers. Hubbard, Ohio, asked whether to ban data centers of any size.
The tracker’s count is not the only published total. Ballotpedia listed 41 measures, while the tracker listed 47, including different numbers of town questions in Maine, Kansas and New Jersey. Another report counted “40+ races across 13 states” using a broader category that included recalls and candidate races. The headline number depends on what is counted as a data center ballot measure.
“The tracker labels the two sides “Restrict” and “Allow.””
— Data Centers on the Ballot tracker, built by Redbud Consulting
Certification and Local Effects Remain Open
The results are unofficial and not certified. Six counts were still underway in the tracker’s Nov. 5 update, and final totals could change. The source report independently checked seven results, not all 47; for the remaining measures, it relied on the tracker and available local reporting.
The combined tally also cannot show how many votes were cast on each policy type, or establish that voters opposed AI specifically. Because advisory questions, zoning referendums and binding rules have different effects, the overall percentage should not be treated as a measure of support for one uniform ban. The material provided does not detail how every measure will be implemented or whether any outcome will face legal or administrative challenges.
Final Counts and Local Implementation
Election authorities must complete and certify the results. Until then, the tracker’s figures remain provisional. Once certified, cities and counties will need to apply each outcome according to the wording and legal status of its measure—whether that means enforcing a ban, changing zoning, honoring a moratorium or considering an advisory result.
For proposed projects, the next steps will depend on the local measure and any approvals still required. The Nov. 3 results indicate that public votes may play a larger part in data center siting in some communities, but the available information does not establish which projects will be delayed, rejected or proceed under existing approvals.
Key Questions
What does the 46-of-47 result mean?
It means the tracker classified the restrictive side as having won or leading in 46 of 47 local measures, based on unofficial results as of Nov. 5. It does not mean 46 communities passed identical bans.
Were all the measures binding?
No. The source report says 37 were binding and 10 were advisory. The measures included bans, zoning votes, temporary pauses and public-approval requirements, so their effects differ.
Why did reports give different numbers of measures?
Trackers used different counting rules and included different questions. The Redbud Consulting tracker rose from 45 to 47 after adding two measures, while Ballotpedia listed 41 before the vote. Some broader counts also included races beyond data center ballot questions.
Were the results certified?
No. The tracker said its results were not certified as of its Nov. 5 update. Six counts were still underway, and election authorities’ final results may differ.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
