🔍 Read the full analysis: From AI Growth To Local Ballots: What Voters Decided On Data Centers on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
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
TL;DR
An open results tracker listed 47 local data center measures across 10 states on Nov. 3, 2026; as of Nov. 5, restrictions had won or were leading in 46, with results still unofficial. The measures ranged from outright bans to temporary pauses and advisory questions, so the tally does not mean voters made one uniform decision about data centers.
Voters in 10 states considered local measures affecting data centers on Nov. 3, and the anti-data-center outcome had won or was leading in 46 of 47 races listed by the Data Centers on the Ballot tracker as of Nov. 5. The unofficial tally points to broad support for restrictions, but the measures ranged from outright bans to temporary pauses and advisory questions, and none of the results had been certified.
The tracker, built by polling and data firm Redbud Consulting, groups differently worded ballot questions into two outcomes: “Restrict” and “Allow.” At 12:30 p.m. Eastern on Nov. 5, it listed 47 measures, with 41 counts complete and six still counting. Across the measures, it reported 260,177 votes, 72.8% on the Restrict side. That percentage combines unlike questions; it is not a single statewide or national vote on data centers.
The tracker had listed 45 measures on the morning after Election Day and added two later: an advisory question in Belvidere, New Jersey, and a charter amendment in Piqua, Ohio. Ballotpedia listed 41 measures before the vote, using a different inclusion count. The tracker’s final total includes more Maine, Kansas and New Jersey measures. A separate “40+ races across 13 states” count also included recalls and candidate races, according to the source report.
Several local results illustrate the range of decisions. In Hubbard, Ohio, the unofficial count was 2,622 for a citywide ban and 802 against, or 76.6% in favor. In Wilmington, Ohio, voters overturned four council decisions rezoning rural land for data centers. In Boulder City, Nevada, voters rejected a proposal to make city-owned desert land available for data centers: 2,064 voted yes and 4,947 no, according to the unofficial Clark County count.
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 Rules Shape Data Center Sites
The results matter because data centers depend on local land-use approvals and infrastructure, and the measures show that communities can put those decisions directly to voters. Some ballots sought to block projects; others would cap facility size, pause approvals, change zoning or require a public vote before a project proceeds. For developers, that creates a local approval risk that may differ from one town to the next.
The debate also touches practical concerns named in the source: opponents often cite water and energy use, while supporters point to jobs and tax revenue. Ballot wording in some places refers directly to megawatts or water use, reflecting how local rules can turn those concerns into specific limits. The election tally alone does not establish why individual voters chose a side or predict the outcome of projects already under construction.
Products Worth Considering
Bose QuietComfort Wireless Noise Cancelling Headphones, Black
Bose QuietComfort Headphones (2nd Gen), Wireless Over-Ear Noise-Cancelling Headphones, Black
Sony WH-1000XM4C (M4 2nd Gen) Wireless Noise-Cancelling Headphones, Black
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
One Tracker, Many Ballot Questions
The reported totals depend on how a measure is defined. Redbud’s tracker counts ballot questions specifically about data centers, including bans, size limits, zoning referendums, agreements with developers, voter-approval requirements and advisory questions. It translates each question into a Restrict or Allow result to make a combined tally possible. That approach is useful for tracking a broad pattern, but it does not make the measures legally or practically equivalent.
The tracker showed 45 measures at 6:16 a.m. Eastern on Nov. 4, with results posted for 40. At that point, Restrict was ahead in 39, Allow in one, and five had no posted results. The source report says it checked seven races against official election sites in Kansas, Nevada, Florida and North Dakota, and those figures matched the tracker. It relied on the tracker and local reporting for other results, including Ohio; the Tribune Chronicle reported Hubbard’s ban passing 76% to 24%.
The measures also differ in legal effect. The source counts 37 as binding and 10 as advisory. An advisory question records voter sentiment but does not itself enact a rule. Binding measures vary as well: a citywide prohibition is not the same as a temporary moratorium, a megawatt cap or a referendum reversing a zoning action.
““Restrict” and “Allow””
— Data Centers on the Ballot, a tracker built by Redbud Consulting
Certification and Legal Effects Remain
Certification is pending. The tracker labels its results unofficial, and six measures were still counting as of 12:30 p.m. Eastern on Nov. 5. The reported 46-of-47 result is therefore a snapshot, not a final certified count. The source report says it independently checked seven results; for the rest, it relied on the tracker’s linked election sources and available local reporting.
It is also not possible to treat all 46 Restrict outcomes as enacted bans. Some measures are advisory, while others impose particular limits or change a planning decision. The supplied material does not detail the implementation process or legal status of every measure. Nor does the tally establish how many projects will be stopped, delayed or altered, or whether existing construction is affected.
Official Counts and Local Implementation
Election offices must complete and certify the results before they are final. The tracker’s six outstanding counts could change, and the source report does not give a certification schedule for each jurisdiction. Readers should distinguish future official results from the current unofficial snapshot.
After certification, the practical next step will vary by ballot. Local governments may need to apply newly approved rules, revise zoning or determine how an advisory vote affects future decisions. Developers and residents will be watching whether projects require another public vote and how any adopted limits apply to proposals already under review or construction. The available source material does not identify a single next milestone covering all 47 measures.
Key Questions
What did voters decide about data centers?
They considered 47 different local measures across 10 states, including bans, size limits, temporary pauses, zoning referendums and advisory questions. The measures were not one uniform vote on whether data centers should exist.
Did restrictions win all 47 votes?
No. As of Nov. 5, the tracker said the Restrict outcome had won or was leading in 46 of 47 measures. Harwood, North Dakota, was the exception, and six counts were still underway.
Are the results official?
No. The reported results were unofficial and had not been certified as of Nov. 5. The tracker’s count may change as local election offices complete their work.
What does the 72.8% figure mean?
The tracker reported that 72.8% of the 260,177 votes it counted across the listed measures fell on the Restrict side. It combines different ballot questions and should not be read as a single electorate’s vote on a single policy.
Will the votes stop data center projects already underway?
The supplied information does not establish that. Many measures concern future projects, and their effect depends on each question’s wording and legal status. The tracker says some measures are advisory, while others are binding restrictions or changes to local approvals.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
