🔍 Read the full analysis: Local Voters Took On Data Center Plans In 47 Ballot Votes on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get business pricing on monitors, keyboards and dev gear
- Business-only prices and quantity discounts
- Tax-exempt purchasing
- Multiple users, one account, clear invoices
TL;DR
A public tracker listed 47 local ballot measures concerning data centers across 10 states on Nov. 3, with the side seeking restrictions winning or leading in 46, according to unofficial results as of Nov. 5. The measures varied widely, from outright bans to advisory questions, and results were not yet certified.
Voters in 10 states considered 47 local measures concerning data centers on Nov. 3, and the side seeking to restrict them won or led in 46 of the 47, according to a public tracker’s unofficial results as of Nov. 5. The votes addressed different proposals—including bans, zoning changes and temporary pauses—and none of the results had been certified at the time of the report.
The tracker, Data Centers on the Ballot, is maintained by Redbud Consulting, a polling and data firm. It groups measures according to whether their outcome restricts or allows data-center development, even when ballot wording differs. At 12:30 p.m. Eastern on Nov. 5, the tracker showed results for all 47 measures: Restrict was ahead in 46, including 41 counts marked complete and six still being counted. The measures recorded a combined 260,177 votes, of which 72.8% were on the Restrict side, according to the tracker.
The total changed after election night. At 6:16 a.m. Eastern on Nov. 4, the tracker showed 45 measures, with results posted for 40. It later added a nonbinding question in Belvidere, New Jersey, and a charter amendment in Piqua, Ohio. Different organizations used different counting rules: Ballotpedia listed 41 measures before the election, while another report counted more than 40 races across 13 states by including recalls and candidate contests.
Examples show the range of outcomes and proposals. In Hubbard, Ohio, the unofficial count was 2,622 votes for a ban and 802 against, or 76.6% in favor. In Boulder City, Nevada, voters rejected a question allowing data centers on city-owned desert land, 4,947 to 2,064, according to Clark County’s unofficial results. Harwood, North Dakota, was the tracker’s lone exception: its measure reviewing rules for large projects had 325 votes against and 105 for, leaving the Restrict side behind.
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 show that data-center development can face direct local political tests, not only negotiations between developers and public officials. Some measures could block projects or limit where they can be built; others require public approval before particular developments proceed. For companies selecting sites, the votes point to local rules and voter approval as potential project risks, although the precise effect depends on each measure’s wording and legal status.
The campaign debate also touches on competing local priorities. The source report cites Gallup polling in which opponents named water and energy use, while supporters cited jobs and tax revenue. The ballots themselves sometimes specified limits in megawatts or daily water use. The tally does not establish why voters chose as they did, or whether any single concern drove the results.
Nor does a count of 46 restrictive outcomes mean that 46 existing data-center campuses will close. The source says many votes concern future projects, and the measures range from binding rules to advisory questions. The immediate consequences therefore depend on which votes are binding, what they cover and whether they withstand any legal or administrative review.
Products Worth Considering
EcoFlow Delta 3 Portable Power Station – 1024 Wh, 1800 W
EcoFlow Delta 3 Max Portable Power Station – 2048 Wh LiFePO4 Battery, 2400 W Output (3400 W X‑Boost)
Bose SoundLink Flex Bluetooth Speaker (2nd Gen) – Portable Outdoor Speaker with Hi‑Fi Audio, Waterproof and Dustproof, USB‑C, Up to 12 Hours
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Why the Measure Count Changed
The headline count of 47 comes from a tracker that includes ballot questions directly concerning data centers, such as bans, capacity limits, zoning referendums, developer agreements, voter-approval requirements and advisory questions. It labels outcomes “Restrict” or “Allow” to summarize differently worded proposals. That method makes a broad tally possible, but it also means the 47 votes are not all equivalent decisions.
The tracker’s totals differ from Ballotpedia’s because the groups counted some local measures differently. The report says Ballotpedia listed four Maine measures and three in Kansas, while the tracker listed eight in Maine and four in Kansas; New Jersey was counted as one by Ballotpedia and two by the tracker. The tracker states that its information is not certified.
The report says its author independently checked seven results against official election sites in Kansas, Nevada, Florida and North Dakota, and that all seven matched the tracker. For other results, including Ohio, the author relied on the tracker’s links to county sources and local reporting. This distinction matters: some figures have been checked against official postings, but the full 47-measure tally was not independently verified in the report.
“Nothing on the page is certified.”
— Data Centers on the Ballot, the Redbud Consulting tracker
Certification and Legal Effects Remain
Certification was still pending for all results in the source report, and six counts were still being completed. The reported 46-to-1 split could change as counting and official review continue. The report gives a specific independent check for seven results, but says it could not verify all 47 measures itself.
The source material does not provide the full wording or legal analysis for every ballot question. It identifies 37 measures as binding and 10 as advisory, but does not list every measure’s practical effect in the supplied text. An advisory vote may express public preference without changing local law on its own; binding proposals may still depend on implementation or legal review. The tally also does not establish whether voters were responding mainly to concerns about water, electricity, jobs, tax revenue or other issues.
Official Counts and Local Implementation
The next step is for election officials to complete and certify the results. Until that process is finished, the tracker’s figures remain unofficial, especially for the six measures still being counted when its Nov. 5 snapshot was recorded.
After certification, local governments and affected parties will need to determine how each binding measure applies to proposed or future projects. That may involve updating zoning rules, applying new capacity limits, observing a temporary moratorium or requiring a public vote, depending on the ballot question. Advisory measures may have no direct legal effect, though officials could consider them in later decisions. The available source does not give a common implementation timetable across the 47 locations.
Key Questions
What does the 46-of-47 result mean?
It means the tracker classified the outcome as favoring restrictions in 46 of 47 measures on its Nov. 5, 2026, snapshot. Results were unofficial, and the measures covered different policies rather than one identical question.
Were all 47 measures bans?
No. The source describes bans, size caps, temporary moratoriums, zoning referendums, public-vote requirements and advisory questions. Some restricted development directly; others addressed a specific site or asked for public input.
Which location was the exception?
Harwood, North Dakota, was the tracker’s exception. Its measure on review rules for large projects had 105 votes for and 325 against in the unofficial count reported by the source.
Are the results final?
No. The tracker said its results were not certified as of Nov. 5. Six counts were still underway in the tracker’s snapshot, and official certification was pending.
Will the votes stop existing data centers?
The source says many measures target future projects, but it does not provide enough detail to determine the effect of every vote on existing facilities. The impact depends on each measure’s wording, whether it is binding and how local officials implement it.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
