TL;DR
Get garden gear delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
A public tracker counted 47 local data center measures on November 3 ballots across 10 states. As of November 5, opponents won or led in 46, but results were unofficial and the measures ranged from bans to advisory questions. Harwood, North Dakota, was the lone measure where the tracker showed the side favoring data centers ahead.
The tracker, maintained by polling and data firm Redbud Consulting, listed 47 measures by midday Nov. 5. It grouped outcomes as “Restrict” or “Allow” to compare questions with different wording. The tracker showed Restrict ahead in 46 measures, with 41 counts complete and six still being counted. It reported a combined 260,177 votes, 72.8% of them on the Restrict side.
The total changed after election night. At 6:16 a.m. Eastern on Nov. 4, the tracker listed 45 measures, 40 of them with results. It later added an advisory question in Belvidere, New Jersey, and a charter amendment in Piqua, Ohio. Ballotpedia listed 41 measures before the election, using a narrower count in some places; differences included the number of Maine, Kansas and New Jersey measures counted.
Seven results checked against official county or state election sites in Kansas, Florida, Nevada and North Dakota matched the tracker, according to the source material. Those checks included Boulder City, Nevada, where voters rejected a question allowing data centers on city-owned desert land, and Harwood, North Dakota, where the tracker showed the measure’s “Allow” side ahead, 325 to 105. The source author said the other results, including Ohio’s, were not all independently checked and relied on the tracker and local reporting.
Voters said no to data centers What 47 local measures decided
A public tracker showed “Restrict” ahead in 46 of 47 local measures on November 3 ballots across 10 states. Results were unofficial as of November 5, and the measures covered different policies.
What the ballots covered
The tracker grouped different local policies under “Restrict” and “Allow.”
Prohibit facilities
Some measures proposed outright bans on data centers.
Cap size or pause projects
Other proposals set size caps or temporary moratoriums.
Change approvals and zoning
Measures also addressed zoning, developer agreements and public-vote requirements.
Ask for community input
Some questions were advisory, so their effect depends on local follow-up.
The lone Allow lead
Harwood, North Dakota, was the exception in the tracker’s snapshot.
- Allow was ahead, 325 to 105.
- The measure concerned review rules for large projects.
- The tracker’s categories compare measures with different wording.
- The aggregate tally does not show why individual voters chose a side.
Why businesses and residents should watch
Local consent can shape where a company builds and what approvals it needs.
Six measures were still being counted in the November 5 snapshot.
The reported totals could change before certification.
Local next steps depend on each measure, including whether it is binding or advisory.
Local Votes Shape Data Center Plans
The results point to local consent as a potential site risk for developers and companies seeking to build data centers. Some measures require a public vote before a project can proceed; others restrict where facilities can be built or how large they can be. The precise effect depends on each measure and its legal status.
The debate involves competing local priorities. The source material says polling by Gallup found opponents citing water and energy use, while supporters cited jobs and tax revenue. Ballot language in several communities put resource limits into specific terms, including megawatts and gallons of water per day. The vote count alone does not show why each voter chose a side.
Many measures concern future projects, rather than facilities already under construction. Even so, a binding ban, zoning change or public-vote requirement could affect where a company can develop and how it seeks approval. The results do not establish a single national policy shift: each decision applies locally, and some questions are advisory rather than binding.
Popular right now
Philips Café Aromis Automatic Espresso Machine with LatteGo Pro Milk System
Samsung 65-Inch The Frame Pro Neo QLED 4K TV (2026) Bundle with Modern Brown Bezel, HDMI Cables, and Home Theater Guide
Samsung 65 The Frame QLED 4K TV (2026) QN65LS03HEFXZA Bundle
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
What the Ballots Actually Covered
The phrase “47 local measures” comes from the Redbud Consulting tracker, which includes ballot questions directly about data centers. Its categories encompass bans, size caps, zoning referendums, developer agreements, voter-approval rules and advisory questions. Because the questions differ, the tracker’s combined Restrict-versus-Allow tally is a broad summary, not a count of identical policy decisions.
Of the 47 measures, the source material identifies 37 as binding and 10 as advisory. Some proposals would prohibit data centers outright; others set caps, often at 25 megawatts, or impose temporary moratoriums. In Wilmington, Ohio, voters overturned four council decisions that had rezoned rural land for data centers. In Hubbard, Ohio, an unofficial count showed 2,622 votes for a citywide ban and 802 against.
Counts in early coverage reflected when and how outlets compiled results. The 45-measure figure matched the tracker on the morning after the election, while Ballotpedia’s 41-measure total used a different approach. Another account cited “40+ races across 13 states,” but the source material says that figure also included recalls and candidate races, not only data center measures.
““Restrict” and “Allow””
— Data Centers on the Ballot, a tracker maintained by Redbud Consulting
Certification and Policy Effects Remain
No results were certified in the tracker’s Nov. 5 snapshot, and six counts were still ongoing. The reported 46-to-1 tally could change as election officials finish counting and certify results.
The source author independently checked seven results against official election sites and said they matched the tracker. The remaining results were not all independently verified in that review. The source material also does not provide final legal or implementation details for each measure, including how every binding vote will be carried out or what an advisory result will prompt local officials to do.
The aggregate tally cannot establish that every voter opposed every kind of data center, or identify the reasons behind individual votes. Measures varied in scope, and some addressed specific sites or proposed rules rather than data centers generally.
Counts and Local Decisions Ahead
Election officials must complete the remaining counts and certify results. Until then, the tracker’s figures remain unofficial and subject to change. Communities will then need to follow the procedures set out in each measure, which may involve applying a ban or cap, changing zoning, observing a moratorium or considering an advisory result.
For developers and residents, the next useful milestones are the certified totals and local decisions on implementation. The source material does not specify a shared deadline or a common next step across all 47 communities.
Key Questions
What does the 46-of-47 tally mean?
As of Nov. 5, the Data Centers on the Ballot tracker showed the side it labels “Restrict” winning or leading in 46 measures. The results were unofficial, and six counts were still underway.
Where was the exception?
The tracker showed the “Allow” side ahead in Harwood, North Dakota, on a measure concerning review rules for large projects. The unofficial count in the source material was 325 against the measure and 105 for it.
Did all 47 votes ban data centers?
No. The measures included bans, size limits, temporary moratoriums, zoning referendums, approval requirements and advisory questions. The tracker grouped their outcomes for comparison, but the policies were not all the same.
Are the results final?
No. The tracker described the results as unofficial as of Nov. 5, with six counts still ongoing. Election officials must finish counting and certify results.
Why do published totals differ?
Sources counted different numbers of measures and updated at different times. The tracker began election morning after the vote with 45 and later added two; Ballotpedia listed 41 before the election using a different count in some states.
Source: Thorsten Meyer AI
