TL;DR
Get everyday essentials 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 lists 47 local measures about data centers on the November 3, 2026, ballot in 10 states. As of November 5, the side seeking restrictions had won or was leading in 46, but the results remain unofficial and the measures range from binding bans to advisory questions.
Voters in 46 of 47 local data center measures on November 3 either approved restrictions or were backing them in unofficial counts, according to a tracker maintained by Redbud Consulting. The measures span 10 states, but they do not all impose bans: some limit project size, pause development, change zoning or ask advisory questions, and none of the listed results has been certified.
The tracker, called Data Centers on the Ballot, counted 47 measures as of 12:30 p.m. Eastern on November 5. It classified each outcome as either “Restrict” or “Allow,” bringing unlike ballot questions into a single tally. The Restrict side was ahead in 46 measures; Harwood, North Dakota, was the exception. Of the 47 counts, 41 were complete for election night and six were still being counted. The tracker reported 260,177 votes across the measures, with 72.8% cast for outcomes it classified as Restrict.
The number of measures changed after election day. At 6:16 a.m. Eastern on November 4, the tracker listed 45 measures, with results posted for 40. It later added a non-binding question in Belvidere, New Jersey, and a charter amendment in Piqua, Ohio. Ballotpedia had listed 41 measures before the vote, using a different count. Differences include the number of Maine, Kansas and New Jersey measures each source included.
Seven results checked against official election sites in Kansas, Nevada, Florida and North Dakota matched the tracker, according to the source article. They include Hubbard, Ohio, where the unofficial count was 2,622 votes for a citywide ban and 802 against; Edgewater, Florida, where a charter ban on new data centers received 7,875 votes in favor and 2,328 against; and Boulder City, Nevada, where voters rejected a question allowing data centers on city-owned desert land, 4,947 to 2,064. The article says it could not independently verify all 47 results and relies on the tracker and local reporting for the rest.
Data center ballot votes signal local resistance
A public tracker grouped 47 local measures across 10 states. Most favored restrictions, but results were unofficial and the measures had different legal effects.
One tally, varied rules
The tracker grouped unlike questions under “Restrict” or “Allow.”
37 binding measures
Actions included bans, size caps, pauses, zoning changes and public approval rules.
10 advisory questions
These asked voters for guidance and do not carry the same effect as binding rules.
Local details matter
Thresholds and terms varied even among nearby communities.
| Community | Measure described |
|---|---|
| Emporia, Kansas | Limits for centers over 10 megawatts |
| Ottawa, Kansas | Limits for centers over 25 megawatts |
| El Dorado, Kansas | Proposed ten-year ban |
Why residents and businesses care
Local votes can shape whether projects proceed and what review they face.
- Water use
- Energy demand
- Jobs
- Tax revenue
What happens next
Counts and local implementation remain open questions.
Six measures were still being counted in the tracker’s November 5 update.
All listed results were unofficial; certification could change totals or leads.
Each community must interpret its measure under local law.
Local Votes Shape Data Center Plans
The results signal that local approval can be a major site risk for data center developers, especially where ballot measures give voters a direct role in future projects. Restrictions may affect whether a project can be built, how large it can be, or what review and approval steps it must meet. The tracker’s broad tally, however, should not be read as 46 identical bans: the legal effect depends on each measure’s wording and status.
The ballot texts address concrete questions such as megawatt limits and water use. The source article reports that Gallup polling found opponents cite water and energy concerns, while supporters point to jobs and tax revenue. Those competing concerns help explain why local decisions matter to residents as well as to companies considering new sites. The measures themselves do not establish the scale of any future economic or environmental effects.
Products Worth Considering
Logitech MX Keys Combo for Business Keyboard and Mouse – Graphite
Apple Watch SE 3 GPS Smartwatch, 40mm
Sony WH-1000XM4C (M4 2nd Gen) Wireless Noise-Cancelling Headphones, Black
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
A Patchwork of Local Rules
The measures covered different types of local action. The source article counts 37 binding measures and 10 advisory questions. Among them were outright bans, caps often set at 25 megawatts, temporary moratoriums, zoning referendums, rules requiring a public vote and questions about development agreements. Because ballot questions were worded differently, the tracker grouped outcomes by whether they favored restriction or development.
Some votes concern proposed or future projects rather than data centers already under construction, according to the source article. For example, Kansas communities considered limits with different thresholds and durations: Emporia’s question addressed centers over 10 megawatts, Ottawa’s addressed centers over 25 megawatts, and El Dorado’s proposed a ten-year ban. These examples show why a statewide summary cannot replace checking the specific local measure.
Earlier coverage used different totals. Tom’s Hardware and Engadget reported 45 measures on November 4, matching the tracker’s count at that time; Ballotpedia listed 41 before the election. The source article says another outlet’s “40+ races across 13 states” also included recalls and candidate races, which are outside the tracker’s measure count.
“The page says its results are not certified.”
— Data Centers on the Ballot tracker
Counts and Legal Effects Remain Open
All results remain unofficial, and six measures were still being counted in the tracker’s November 5 update. The article’s independent check covered seven results, not all 47, so the remainder relies on the tracker’s linked sources and local reporting. Certification could alter totals or leads.
The combined 46-of-47 figure also reflects the tracker’s classification, not a single legal outcome. Some measures are advisory, and others set different rules or affect particular sites. The precise effect of each vote depends on the official result, the measure’s text and any steps needed to put it into effect. The available source material does not establish how every locality will implement its result or what will happen to individual proposed projects.
Certification and Local Implementation
Election officials still need to complete counts and certify results. Once final tallies are available, the next step for each community is to apply its measure according to local law. That may mean enforcing a ban or limit, observing a temporary pause, or treating an advisory result as guidance for officials.
Developers and residents will be watching for local decisions on proposed projects and any required public review. The source material gives no single timetable for those steps, so the effect on specific sites will become clearer as communities publish certified results and explain how their measures apply.
Key Questions
How many local data center measures were on the November 3 ballot?
The Data Centers on the Ballot tracker listed 47 measures in 10 states as of November 5. Earlier counts differed because sources included different measures or updated their lists at different times.
Did voters approve 46 data center bans?
No. The tracker says the restriction side won or was leading in 46 measures, but the measures include bans, size limits, moratoriums, zoning votes, public approval rules and advisory questions.
Are the results final?
No. The results were unofficial as of November 5, 2026. The tracker reported that six counts were still in progress, and the results had not been certified.
Where did the reported total of 45 measures come from?
The tracker listed 45 measures on the morning of November 4, then added a Belvidere, New Jersey, advisory question and a Piqua, Ohio, charter amendment. Ballotpedia’s pre-election count was 41, reflecting a different scope.
What was the one measure where the restriction side was not ahead?
Harwood, North Dakota, was the exception in the tracker’s November 5 tally. Its question concerned review rules for large projects; the unofficial count was 105 yes votes to 325 no votes.
Source: Thorsten Meyer AI
