Patterns of Success: What's Working In The Pushback On Data Centers

Plus: EPA is now considering regulating microplastics & Support the Nashville Zoo!

Photo by Arturo Añez on Unsplash

The numbers don’t lie. In the first two months of 2026, the data center industry spent more than $36 billion on new construction in the United States, according to an April report. That’s just in January and February. For context in those same two months in 2025, the industry spent $1.4 billion.

That’s a land rush with 67 percent of it is headed for rural America, for the communities with the fewest resources, the least regulatory protection, and the most to lose.

The worst part? Most people don’t know they’re coming until it’s too late.

These massive facilities consume as much electricity as 80,000 homes each, drain hundreds of millions of gallons of water annually, run diesel backup generators that pump toxic pollution into the air, and drive up utility bills.

In many communities, they can be (and have been) approved without a single public hearing, without a single elected official casting a vote, and without anyone living in the community getting a say.

As more people understand the bigger picture on data centers, more communities are showing up and using their voices. Here’s what we’re seeing right now.

First, the push for state moratoriums is struggling.

The statewide moratorium movement sits with New York’s Governor Kathy Hochul right now. Earlier this month, the New York State Legislature passed the Responsible Data Center Development Act, a one-year moratorium on data center permits for any facility drawing more than 20 megawatts of peak power.

If Governor Hochul signs it, New York would become the first state in the nation to enact such a freeze.

The bill also requires a local public hearing before construction and a statewide environmental impact report within 18 months. It’s a direct response to what’s been happening on the ground with data centers proposed across upstate communities from Niagara County to the Hudson Valley, local planning boards overwhelmed by developers and their lawyers, and residents having nowhere to turn.

“The burden of rigorous analysis and defense against billionaires and their white-shoe law firms should not be put on volunteer planning board appointees,” Gay Nicholson of Sustainable Finger Lakes said at a press conference. “We need state-level intervention.”

The New York bill didn’t happen in a vacuum. It was built on years of exactly the kind of local organizing I’ve been advocating for. Towns like Oneonta passing their own 12-month moratoriums after residents showed up to planning meetings and town halls. New York shows what’s possible when local momentum reaches critical mass.

Now, the state needs to follow.

Meanwhile, Maine's veto override failed. State lawmakers failed to override a veto from Governor Janet Mills on a bill that would have made Maine the first state in the nation to impose a temporary ban on data center development.

In Mills’ veto message, she acknowledged concerns about data centers but said the pause would block the redevelopment of a former paper mill, a $550 million project its developer claimed would create more than 100 permanent jobs. House Democrats and a few Republicans voted to override, arguing the veto left Mainers vulnerable to developers and big corporations. It wasn't enough.

Minnesota's bills have died. A bill to impose a statewide moratorium until Minnesota had a regulatory framework in place was widely and heatedly discussed but never put to a vote. An NDA bill that would have banned local elected officials from signing non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) with developers passed the Senate with bipartisan support but was blocked in the tied House. A water protection bill requiring large industrial water users to obtain their own DNR permits advanced in both chambers but couldn't cross the finish line.

Vermont’s veto override fell six votes short despite tripartisan supermajorities.

Vermont Governor Philip Scott issued a statement saying, “I understand the potential impacts of data centers, but this bill creates an unacceptable precedent which will have much broader consequences for economic opportunity and long-term competitiveness in Vermont. We cannot afford policies that risk driving current or future jobs and investment to other states, when we already have regulations and policies in place to address our concerns about data centers.”

Smaller, more nimble governments are moving faster.

Cities and counties are outpacing states by a wide margin, and they are finding new tools beyond the moratorium.

The most significant development came from Monterey Park, California, a city in the Los Angeles region, where residents became the first in the country to vote on a permanent ban on data centers through a ballot initiative. The result was a landslide.

More than 86 percent of votes counted (in early returns) were in favor of the ban. The city council had already passed an indefinite moratorium in April after growing community anger toward a developer pushing to build a facility covering nearly 250,000 square feet.

Organizers had just two months to run a campaign. They printed 10,000 flyers and turned out thousands of voters.

The ballot initiative is a key consideration for other cities and towns.

A vote of the people carries far more legal and political weight than an ordinance passed by city council members, and the developer in California apparently knew it. After threatening to sue over the moratorium, they backed down once the ballot measure passed.

In Charlotte, North Carolina, the city council voted unanimously this month to implement a 150-day moratorium on new data centers after months of community pressure, including thousands of petition signatures to block a proposed facility near the Reedy Creek Nature Preserve.

Supporters in the council chambers broke into applause and chants of “a people united will never be divided.”

“This is not a partisan issue when it comes to protecting our neighborhoods,” at-large Councilmember Dimple Ajmera said. “This is not a blue or red issue. This is about quality of life. This is about clean air, clean water.”

Charlotte joins Durham, Apex, Canton, Chatham County, and Gates County, which have recently passed their own moratoriums in North Carolina. That’s a cluster, and clusters are worth noting.

Minneapolis, Denver, Baltimore, Reno, and more than a dozen Michigan townships have all gotten something done. Local governments can act on shorter timelines with far less lobbying pressure than state legislatures face.

Narrower, more defensible framing is winning.

The bills that are getting signed such as Florida’s SB 484, Oklahoma’s HB 2992, Washington’s SB 5982, aren’t moratoriums.

They are ratepayer protection and cost-allocation laws. Framing the issue as “data centers shouldn’t pass their costs onto residents and small businesses” is proving more politically durable than broader bans. Concrete harm to identifiable people is more actionable than abstract environmental concern.

Water and utility costs are the stickiest arguments. Florida’s law specifically tightened aquifer permitting alongside the ratepayer rules. Both water resource protection and electricity cost allocation give legislators and local councils the most defensible ground to stand on.

Momentum is contagious at the local level.

The pace of new pauses quickened through late May and into June, according to research. Once a few neighboring jurisdictions act, others follow.

Michigan has cluster of more than 20 local moratoriums. In Illinois, the twin cities of Bloomington and Normal are debating data centers together. Though we’ve heard from locals that the mayor of Bloomington is ignoring community members. Not a good look!

Coalition-building between adjacent communities can be a real accelerant.

Monterey Park’s ballot initiative is already being watched by communities in Port Washington, Wisconsin, Janesville, Wisconsin, and Augusta Township, Michigan, all of which have their own ballot measures in the pipeline.

A national Gallup poll released in May found that seven in 10 Americans oppose the construction of AI data centers in their local areas. This movement is not fringe. You are the majority.

What’s losing.

Broad constitutional amendments like the one in Ohio is far short of the signatures needed for its proposed amendment to ban data centers over 25 MW. Outright statewide bans have stalled in governor’s offices.

Editor’s note: Live in Ohio and want to join the effort? Go here.

Any measure that gives developers a clean legal target is vulnerable. The Hill County, Texas lawsuit is a warning sign about how quickly a local ordinance can land in court.

The through-line is clear. Protect the ratepayer and the aquifer, not the abstract principle, and work locally until the state-level window reopens.

What to Watch Out For

Don’t let them define “data center” broadly. Some developers try to fold gas turbines or other onsite fossil fuel power generation into the definition of “data center” so it gets approved alongside the facility. Your zoning ordinance’s definition should be specific to computer systems and directly associated components.

Don’t let them postpone public hearings without scrutiny. Developers sometimes ask to delay scheduled hearings because they want more time to lobby the governing body. Know your local rules about when and how hearings can be removed from the agenda and watch for procedural maneuvering.

Don’t let the tax revenue argument go unchallenged. Developers will always lead with job numbers and tax projections. Ask them to show you the full cost picture: infrastructure upgrades, utility rate impacts, water system strain, emergency services, road damage from construction traffic. Those numbers belong in the conversation too.

Credibility is everything. In a public process, your word is your most valuable asset. Verify every factual claim before you make it. Inaccurate statements can undercut your credibility and, in some cases, expose you to legal liability. Stick to what you can prove.

Additional Resources

• Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC): selc.org

• Coalition for Responsible Data Center Development: www.datacenterresponsibility.com

• Better Data Center Project: betterdatacenterproject.com

• Halt the Harm Network: datacenters.halttheharm.net

• FracTracker Alliance: fractracker.org

• Data Center Moratoriums: www.datacenterbans.com

• Ban Secret Deals: bansecretdeals.org

---

Help the Nashville Zoo!

Learn more here: Why Nashville Zoo is fighting a proposed data center next door

How can you help?

Zoo leaders are speaking regularly with city leaders, they are also asking the community and anyone interested in supporting our fight to sign our petition declaring that you oppose the data center being built near the Zoo and our surrounding community.

After signing the petition, please contact the Metro Nashville Council Members and Nashville’s Mayor, sharing your support for the Zoo and encourage them to pass the Metro Nashville Government Legislation SB2026-1391.

Lastly, please plan to attend the Planning Commission Public Hearing on Thursday, June 11 at 4:00 p.m., located at 700 President Ronald Reagan Way, Nashville, TN 37210.

Parking is FREE. At the planning commission, they will call out a series of bills. You need to let them know you are there to speak in support of council member Rollin Horton’s legislation BL2026-1391. Each person will be given two minutes to speak.

---

We've Been Swallowing This Long Enough. The EPA Needs to Act on Microplastics.

For the first time, microplastics have made the U.S. EPA’s official list of unregulated contaminants being considered for future drinking water regulation.

We’ve written about microplastics here:

The draft Sixth Contaminant Candidate List (CCL 6) includes 75 chemicals, four chemical groups: disinfection byproducts (DBPs), microplastics, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), and pharmaceuticals, along with nine microbes.

Starting June 15, and continuing through the summer, an EPA Science Advisory Board committee will hold five public meetings to discuss which contaminants on that list move forward toward rules.

These meetings matter. But so does the fact that the EPA has published five lists before, and not a single contaminant from list 5 has been regulated.

Public pressure isn’t optional. The first meeting is on June 15 at 12 p.m. E.T.
Show up. Stay engaged. Make noise.

Tell them the people drinking this water are watching.

The more you know: What is the drinking water CCL?

The drinking water CCL is a list of contaminants that are currently not subject to any proposed national primary drinking water regulations but are known or anticipated to occur in public water systems.

Contaminants listed on the CCL may require future regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). SDWA requires EPA to publish the CCL every five years.

SDWA directs the agency to consider the health effects and occurrence information for unregulated contaminants and further specifies that the agency place those contaminants on the list that present the greatest public health concern related to exposure from drinking water.

EPA uses the CCL to identify priority contaminants for regulatory decision making and information collection.

---

What’s happening in your community? Let us know in the comments below. Remember: this is a community space to share information and strategies or ask questions.