🔍 Read the full analysis: Breaking Down 47 Local Votes On Data Center Proposals on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get smart everyday buys 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 the Nov. 3, 2026, ballot across 10 states. As of Nov. 5, the side favoring restrictions won or led in 46, but the measures ranged from binding bans to advisory questions, and six counts were still underway.
A public tracker lists 47 local measures concerning data centers on the Nov. 3 ballot in 10 states, with voters favoring restrictions in 46 of them on unofficial results as of Nov. 5. The votes covered different proposals—including bans, temporary pauses, zoning decisions and advisory questions—so the tally does not mean voters in 46 places adopted identical restrictions.
The tracker, Data Centers on the Ballot, is maintained by Redbud Consulting, a polling and data firm. It groups differently worded measures by whether the result would restrict or allow data centers. At 12:30 p.m. Eastern on Nov. 5, the tracker showed results for all 47 measures: 41 counts were complete and six were still being counted. The restriction side led in 46. The results remain unofficial and have not been certified.
The tracker’s total changed after election night. At 6:16 a.m. Eastern on Nov. 4, it listed 45 measures, 40 of them with results. It later added a non-binding question in Belvidere, New Jersey, and a charter amendment in Piqua, Ohio. Ballotpedia listed 41 measures before the election, using a different count that included fewer measures in Maine, Kansas and New Jersey. The different totals reflect different decisions about which ballot questions to include.
Among the outcomes reported were Hubbard, Ohio’s proposed ban on data centers of any size, which received 2,622 yes votes and 802 no votes in the unofficial count, according to the source report. In Boulder City, Nevada, voters rejected a proposal to allow data centers on city-owned desert land, with 2,064 yes votes and 4,947 no votes, according to Clark County results cited by the report. The exception was Harwood, North Dakota, where the tracker classified the result as favoring allowance; the question concerned review rules for large projects, not a simple authorization of a specific facility.
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 Reshape Project Decisions
The results matter to developers and residents because local ballot measures can affect whether and how projects proceed. The source report says many votes concern future proposals rather than data center campuses already under construction. Depending on the measure, a restriction-side result may bar projects, limit their size, pause approvals, change zoning or require voters to approve a proposal.
The questions also put local concerns about infrastructure and economic benefits into direct political decisions. The source report cites Gallup polling in which opponents name water and energy use, while supporters point to jobs and tax revenue. Some ballot texts set limits in megawatts or gallons per day, making resource use part of the rules voters considered. Those concerns are not measured identically across the 47 ballots, and the combined tally cannot establish why each voter chose a side.
For companies weighing potential sites, the pattern is a sign that local consent may be a project risk. It does not show that all communities oppose data centers or that every measure blocks construction. The legal and practical effect depends on each ballot’s wording, whether the measure is binding, and how local officials apply it.
Products Worth Considering
Apple MacBook Air 15-inch with M5 chip, 24GB RAM, 512GB SSD, Midnight
Samsung Odyssey G4 25-inch FHD Gaming Monitor
Logitech MX Keys Combo for Business Keyboard and Mouse – Graphite
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Why the Count Reached 47
The headline figure of 45 came from the same tracker on the morning after the election, when two additional measures had not yet been added. The tracker’s stated method includes measures directly about data centers, such as bans, megawatt caps, zoning referendums, developer agreements, voter-approval requirements and advisory questions. It maps the options into “Restrict” and “Allow” categories so the varied results can be summarized together.
Ballotpedia’s pre-election total was 41 measures in 10 states. Its state counts differed from the tracker’s in Maine, Kansas and New Jersey, accounting for the six-measure gap. A separate report by 404 Media described more than 40 races across 13 states, but that count also included recalls and candidate races, according to the source material.
The source report says it independently checked seven results against official election sites in Kansas, Nevada, Florida and North Dakota; those results matched the tracker. For the remaining measures, including Ohio results, it relied on the tracker’s linked county sources and local reporting where available. It cited the Tribune Chronicle’s report that Hubbard’s ban passed 76% to 24%. These checks provide support for the figures reviewed, but do not amount to independent verification of all 47 contests.
“Nothing on the page is certified.”
— Data Centers on the Ballot tracker
Certification and Measure Effects
Final certified results are not yet available in the source material, and six counts were still underway as of 12:30 p.m. Eastern on Nov. 5. The tracker’s 46-to-one tally is therefore a snapshot of unofficial results, not a final certification of every contest.
The combined tally also compresses different kinds of decisions. The source report classifies 37 measures as binding and 10 as advisory. An advisory question may register voter sentiment without changing local law on its own. Other measures may have effects limited by their wording, scope or existing agreements. The supplied source text begins describing additional examples but is incomplete, so it does not establish the full terms of every ballot question or the legal effect of each outcome.
The report says it checked seven results directly and relied on the tracker and local reporting for the rest. It is not clear from the available material when every count will be certified, whether any result will be challenged, or how local authorities will implement measures that passed.
Certification and Local Implementation
The next steps are completion and certification of the remaining counts, followed by local officials’ application of the measures that pass. Readers should distinguish any updated, certified result from the tracker’s Nov. 5 snapshot and check the relevant county or state election office for final totals.
For measures that change local rules, the practical next milestone will depend on the ballot language: officials may need to update zoning or permitting processes, follow a temporary pause, or hold a public vote before taking further action. Advisory questions may instead inform later council decisions without directly changing the law. The source material does not provide a common implementation schedule or identify specific next votes across all 47 places.
Key Questions
Did voters reject data centers in 46 places?
Not in a single, uniform sense. The tracker classified 46 of 47 results as favoring restrictions, but measures ranged from bans and caps to pauses, zoning referendums and advisory questions. Six counts were still underway, and the results had not been certified as of Nov. 5.
Why did some reports say 45 measures while others said 41?
The tracker showed 45 measures on the morning of Nov. 4 and later added questions from Belvidere, New Jersey, and Piqua, Ohio, bringing its total to 47. Ballotpedia listed 41 before the election, with different counts in Maine, Kansas and New Jersey.
Were all 47 measures binding?
No. The source report classifies 37 as binding and 10 as advisory. An advisory result may express voter opinion without changing local law by itself; the effect of a binding measure depends on its wording.
Are the results final?
No. The tracker described the results as unofficial. As of 12:30 p.m. Eastern on Nov. 5, 41 counts were complete and six were still being counted; certification and any later changes were not reported in the source material.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
