🔍 Read the full analysis: What 47 Ballot Votes Reveal About Local Data Center Plans on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get the little things that make your day 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 lists 47 local data center measures on Nov. 3 ballots in 10 states. As of Nov. 5, the side classified as restricting data centers had won or led in 46; all results were unofficial, and the measures ranged from bans to advisory questions.
Voters in 10 states weighed in on 47 local measures about data centers on Nov. 3, and the restriction side had won or was leading in 46, according to the Data Centers on the Ballot tracker. The results remain unofficial; six counts were still underway as of Nov. 5, and the measures differed widely, from outright bans to advisory questions.
The tracker, built by polling and data firm Redbud Consulting, had shown 45 measures on the morning after the election. It later added a non-binding question in Belvidere, New Jersey, and a charter amendment in Piqua, Ohio. As of 12:30 p.m. Eastern on Nov. 5, it listed 47 measures, all with results posted: 41 counts were complete for election night and six were still being counted. The tracker said the restriction side had 72.8% of the combined 260,177 votes.
The total depends on what is counted. Ballotpedia listed 41 measures on Election Day, while the tracker included additional measures in Maine, Kansas and New Jersey. A separate report by 404 Media described “40+ races across 13 states,” a broader tally that also included recalls and candidate races. These figures are not directly interchangeable because the sources used different definitions.
Seven results checked against official state or county election sources matched the tracker, according to the source report. Examples include Hubbard, Ohio, where a ban on data centers of any size received 2,622 yes votes and 802 no votes on the unofficial count, and Boulder City, Nevada, where voters rejected a proposal to open city-owned desert land to data centers, 4,947 to 2,064. The tracker identifies Harwood, North Dakota, as the one measure where the allow side won or led; its review-rules question had 325 yes votes and 105 no votes, unofficially.
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 point to a growing local approval risk for data center developers, but they do not amount to a single, uniform rejection of the industry. The votes covered different proposals and legal mechanisms. Some could directly bar projects or restrict their size; others change zoning, pause decisions temporarily, or ask residents for an advisory view.
That distinction matters for both residents and companies. A binding ban or voter-approval requirement can change whether a future project is permitted and how it proceeds. An advisory question, by contrast, does not itself create the same legal restriction. The source material says 37 measures were binding and 10 were advisory, though the specific effect of each measure depends on its text and local law.
The debate also reaches beyond technology policy. The source report says opponents in Gallup polling most often cited water and energy use, while supporters pointed to jobs and tax revenue. Ballot language in some communities set limits using megawatts or gallons per day, bringing resource demands directly into local decisions. The election shows that proposed facilities can face political hurdles well before construction, even as the effects of each vote vary.
Products Worth Considering
Samsung 65-Inch The Frame Pro Neo QLED 4K TV (2026) Bundle with Modern Brown Bezel, HDMI Cables, and Home Theater Guide
Dyson Cyclone V10 Origin Cordless Vacuum
eufy Security Essential 7-Piece Alarm System
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Why the Measure Count Changed
The “45 measures” figure reported the day after the election came from Redbud Consulting’s Data Centers on the Ballot tracker. At 6:16 a.m. Eastern on Nov. 4, it listed 45 measures, with results available for 40. The tracker later added two questions, bringing the total to 47. Its methodology groups differently worded outcomes into “Restrict” and “Allow,” so results can be summarized across bans, caps, rezoning votes, agreements, voter-approval rules and advisory questions.
Other sources produced different totals because they counted different ballot items. Ballotpedia’s election-day listing included 41 measures in 10 states. The tracker listed eight Maine measures rather than four, four Kansas measures rather than three, and two New Jersey measures rather than one. The source report says it independently checked seven results at official election sites; for the remaining results, it relied on the tracker’s links to county sources and local reporting.
Examples illustrate why a single headline can conceal important differences. Hubbard’s question asked about a ban on data centers of any size. Boulder City’s Question 1 asked whether city-owned desert land could be made available for data centers. Other communities considered limits such as a 10- or 25-megawatt threshold, a temporary moratorium, or changes to local zoning. The ballots therefore measured a range of local choices, not one national referendum on AI.
“Nothing on the page is certified.”
— Data Centers on the Ballot tracker
Counts and Legal Effects Still Pending
None of the results was certified in the source material, and six counts were still being tallied as of Nov. 5. The reported 46-of-47 result may change as election officials complete their work. The tracker’s combined vote share and its Restrict/Allow classifications are useful summaries, but they do not replace the final canvass or the wording of each ballot measure.
The source report says it checked seven measures against official election sites and that those results matched the tracker. It did not independently verify every result, citing access problems such as blocked election websites and scanned documents. For unverified races, it relied on the tracker’s linked sources and local reporting where available. It is also not clear from the supplied material how each measure will be implemented, whether any legal challenges will follow, or how existing projects are affected. Many votes concerned future projects rather than campuses already under construction.
Certification and Local Implementation
The next steps are completion of the remaining counts and certification by the relevant election authorities. Until then, the tracker’s results should be treated as unofficial leads or totals, not final outcomes. Once certified, each community will need to apply its own measure according to the ballot language and local rules.
Residents, developers and local officials will be watching whether a vote creates an immediate prohibition, changes a zoning process, requires another public vote, or simply records an advisory position. The source material does not specify a common implementation timetable across the 47 measures. Any project’s prospects will depend on its location, the legal status of the measure and whether it was already underway.
Key Questions
Did voters reject data centers in 46 of 47 places?
Not in one uniform sense. The tracker says the side it classifies as restricting data centers had won or led in 46 of 47 measures as of Nov. 5. Those measures included bans, caps, zoning questions and advisory ballots, and results were unofficial.
Why did reports cite 45, 47 or 41 measures?
The totals reflect different counting rules and timing. Redbud Consulting’s tracker listed 45 on the morning after the election, then added two measures. Ballotpedia listed 41, while another report used a broader count that included other types of races.
Were the election results final?
No. The source material says all results were unofficial as of Nov. 5, 2026, with six counts still underway. Certification was still pending.
What happened in Hubbard and Boulder City?
In Hubbard, Ohio, the unofficial tally was 2,622 votes for a ban on data centers of any size and 802 against. In Boulder City, Nevada, voters rejected opening city-owned desert land to data centers, 4,947 to 2,064, unofficially.
Do these votes stop projects already being built?
The source report says many measures targeted future projects, not campuses already under construction. The effect on any existing or proposed facility depends on the specific measure and local law; the supplied material does not give a single rule for all communities.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
