🔍 Read the full analysis: A Local Vote-by-Vote Look At Data Center Decisions 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 November 3 ballot in 10 states. As of November 5, unofficial results showed the restrictive side winning or leading in 46; the measures ranged from outright bans to advisory questions, and six counts were still underway.
Voters backed or were leading toward restrictions in 46 of 47 local data center measures on November 3, according to the public tracker Data Centers on the Ballot. The results, which remain unofficial, span 10 states and cover sharply different proposals—from citywide bans to temporary pauses and advisory questions—so the tally does not represent one uniform vote against every data center project.
The tracker, maintained by polling and data firm Redbud Consulting, showed all 47 measures with results by 12:30 p.m. Eastern on November 5. It classified 46 outcomes as favoring restrictions and one, in Harwood, North Dakota, as favoring the measure’s allowance side. Six results were still being counted; 41 were listed as complete for election night. The tracker said its results were not certified.
The tracker’s combined count was 260,177 votes, with 72.8% on the restrictive side. That figure aggregates questions with different wording and effects; it is not a single statewide or national referendum. A separate election-day count by Ballotpedia listed 41 measures, while the tracker later added two measures and counted more measures in Maine, Kansas and New Jersey. Those differing totals reflect scope and counting choices, not necessarily a dispute over results.
The source report said its author checked seven results against official county or state election sites, and all seven matched the tracker. Examples include Hubbard, Ohio, where an unofficial count showed 2,622 votes for a ban and 802 against, and Boulder City, Nevada, where voters rejected a question to allow data centers on city-owned desert land, 4,947 to 2,064. The report relied on the tracker and local reporting for the other results, including Ohio races it did not independently verify.
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 Plans
The results matter because local governments and voters can affect where data center projects may be built and what approvals they need. Some measures would bar facilities outright; others set size limits, temporary moratoriums or public-vote requirements. In places where a restriction passes, a developer may face a different permitting path or be unable to pursue a project covered by the measure.
The votes also put local concerns about infrastructure and economic benefits directly on ballots. The source report says opponents commonly cite water and electricity use, while supporters point to jobs and tax revenue. Those issues are reflected in some ballot language, which specifies facility capacity in megawatts or water use in gallons per day. The election totals establish how voters answered each question; by themselves, they do not establish the effects a particular project would have.
For companies considering sites, the results indicate that local consent and election rules can be material project risks. The source report notes that many measures address future development rather than campuses already under construction. The effect on any existing project, planned investment or local budget will depend on the specific measure and its legal status.
Popular right now
Ninja Mega Kitchen System Blender and Food Processor, 1500W, 72-oz Pitcher, 8-Cup Bowl, Black (BL770)
iRobot Roomba 105 Combo Robot Vacuum and Mop
Ninja Flip Toaster Oven & Air Fryer, 8-in-1, Stainless Steel, SP151
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Why Measure Counts Differ
The headline figure of 45 measures came from the tracker on the morning after the election. At 6:16 a.m. Eastern on November 4, it listed 45 measures, 40 with results. The tracker later added a non-binding question in Belvidere, New Jersey, and a charter amendment in Piqua, Ohio, bringing its total to 47. The source report says contemporaneous coverage by Tom’s Hardware and Engadget reflected the earlier count.
Counts also vary because organizations define the set of relevant races differently. Ballotpedia listed 41 measures in 10 states before the vote, with different totals in Maine, Kansas and New Jersey than the tracker. The tracker includes ballot questions about data centers such as bans, zoning referendums, developer agreements, voter-approval rules and advisory questions. It maps each result to “Restrict” or “Allow” to compare differently worded measures. Another report’s “40+ races across 13 states” included recalls and candidate races as well as data center questions.
That classification is useful for summarizing a scattered set of local votes, but it can obscure important differences. The source report counts 37 binding measures and 10 advisory questions. Binding proposals include outright bans, often-cited 25-megawatt caps, temporary moratoriums and requirements for another public vote. An advisory result expresses voter preference but does not itself change local law.
Certification and Local Effects
The reported results were unofficial as of November 5; certification had not occurred. Six counts were still in progress, and the source report says it independently checked only seven results against election authorities. For the rest, it relied on the tracker’s linked sources and local reporting. Final totals could change as counting and certification proceed.
It is also not yet clear how each adopted measure will affect specific proposed or existing projects. That depends on the ballot text, local implementation and any relevant legal proceedings. The tracker’s combined “Restrict” label describes the direction it assigns a vote, not the precise legal consequence in each community. Advisory measures, in particular, do not automatically amend local rules.
Final Counts and Local Implementation
Election officials are expected to complete the remaining counts and certify results through their usual processes. Until then, the 46-of-47 figure remains an unofficial tracker tally, and the six outstanding counts may move.
After certification, communities will need to apply binding measures according to their wording and local procedures. That may mean updating zoning or permitting rules, observing a moratorium, or requiring a future public vote. The source material does not specify a single implementation timetable across the affected cities and towns. Developers, residents and local officials will need to look to each jurisdiction’s final result and subsequent actions rather than treating the aggregate count as a uniform policy change.
Key Questions
What does the 46-of-47 result mean?
It means the tracker classified the restrictive side as winning or leading in 46 of 47 local measures as of November 5. The measures had different wording and legal effects, and the results were unofficial.
Were all 47 votes binding?
No. The source report counted 37 binding measures and 10 advisory questions. An advisory vote records voter preference but does not, by itself, change local law.
Why did some reports say 45 measures or 41?
The tracker showed 45 measures on the morning of November 4 and later added two. Ballotpedia counted 41 before the vote using different totals for some states. The organizations used different inclusion and counting methods.
Which measure was the exception?
The tracker identified Harwood, North Dakota, as the exception to the restrictive trend. Its unofficial result showed 105 votes for the review-rule measure and 325 against, which the tracker classified on the Allow side.
Are the results final?
No. The tracker stated that results were not certified as of November 5, and six measures were still being counted. Final totals and the local effects of binding measures remain to be confirmed.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
