By Miquéla V Thornton Voters in dozens of US counties and cities will soon have the chance to help enact policies that would slow down the development of data centers.

Municipalities from Nevada to Georgia are giving residents an opportunity to vote for policies that would tax, regulate or even ban artificial intelligence infrastructure. That potentially puts hundreds of billions of dollars of investment at stake and could create headaches for so-called hyperscalers like Meta Platforms Inc. and developers such as Applied Digital Corp.

A Bloomberg analysis of Ballotpedia data shows there will be more than 40 data center-related measures to vote on in the midterm elections on Nov. 3.

Voters will be considering the proposals as opposition to new data centers surges across the US, highlighting how AI has emerged as a key issue in the midterm election. A Quinnipiac poll in September found that 72% of voters would oppose a new data center in their community, up from 65% when the question was posed in a March poll.

While data centers power ubiquitous AI tools like ChatGPT or Claude, people who learn that one is coming to their neighborhood often fret about air and noise pollution and higher utility bills. They also worry about local officials offering tax incentives to developers andg nondisclosure agreements to speak with private interests, leaving their constituents in the dark.

But in some cases, activists have successfully blocked data center construction. At least 45 projects worth $68 billion were disrupted by local opposition in the second quarter, according to a report from Data Center Watch. Now, the AI-related referenda gives voters a new way to express their opposition.

“Local ballot measures are a tool that people can access and use at a time when people are feeling helpless about some of these broader forces shaping our futures,” said Megan Mullin, an environmental political scientist at the University of California at Los Angeles.

Some measures threaten to ban data centers outright. That’s possible in Alhambra, a Los Angeles suburb that could follow in the footsteps of neighboring Monterey Park. In Ohio, about a dozen communities will vote on a ban, with most measures focused on larger facilities.

One of those places is Piqua, where Meta is trying to build a data center. Voters there will also decide whether to recall the mayor and two city commissioners, who have supported AI infrastructure being built in the roughly 20,000-person city.

Another recall effort is in Yukon, Oklahoma, where residents will determine the fate of Mayor Brian Pillmore. Some of his constituents want him to resign because he supports a proposed $1 billion Beltline Energy data center along Route 66.

Pillmore said he welcomes engagement on matters of local development, but he sees the project as a rare source of long-term investment for the small city, estimating that it could boost revenue by as much as 75%. “Cities like Yukon have to consider every card that they play,” he said.

Yukon is one of many small towns across the US looking for an economic boost. Data centers could be the answer, delivering investment and high-wage jobs that don’t require a college degree, according to Dan Diorio, executive vice president of state policy & government affairs at the Data Center Coalition, a group that advocates for the industry.

The facilities generate “significant” tax revenue that helps fund schools, transportation and public safety, Diorio said. “Ballot measures to restrict or prohibit data center development would send a signal that the area is closed for business” and “deprive local communities of the opportunity to compete for investment and jobs.”Some communities aren’t necessarily against data centers, but they do want a bigger say in the planning process. In Harwood, North Dakota, the revelation that a $3 billion project was underway drove resident Michael Swartz to try to overhaul how the city handles industrial development.

He drafted a charter amendment that pushes for more transparency and community input in decision-making after Harwood’s mayor signed a NDA with Applied Digital, which is building a facility nearby.

Residents raised a plethora of concerns when plans for the massive 280-megawatt project became public in September 2025, but construction began less than a month later.

“A $3 billion decision coming into a community of 800 people shouldn’t have took three weeks to do,” Swartz said in an interview.

The goal of his Article X, as the measure is called, is to require disclosure, independent review and public participation for large projects.

Similar measures could give residents in other localities more sway. Grove City, Ohio’s electorate could amend its charter to require a referendum on developments that exceed certain thresholds for size, water and energy use. If passed, a ballot initiative in Janesville, Wisconsin will give citizens a vote on projects with costs exceeding $450 million at a long-abandoned General Motors site.

The proliferation of such measures is “a sign that Americans recognize they’ve been shut out from negotiations in many communities that have a real impact on their futures,” UCLA’s Mullin said.

Another set of measures has the power to restrict where data centers are built. In Wilmington, Ohio, voters will weigh in on the rezoning of land around a proposed Amazon.com Inc. data center.

However, a situation in Boulder City, Nevada, shows the limits of such initiatives. Earlier this year, activists successfully fought a proposal for a $3 billion data center that would have been built on a city-owned tortoise preserve.

But before long, the developer won approval at a neighboring site controlled by the federal Bureau of Land Management.

While Boulder City residents will soon decide on allowing data centers on the preserve, the episode underscores a limit to the ballot wave: voters can rewrite local development rules, but the legislation doesn’t cross jurisdictional boundaries.

Local restrictions could simply shift development to places with less political power and fewer resources to organize, Mullin said. Plus, “these kinds of measures bind the hands of future leadership in these localities, for better or worse,” she added.

Still, the push to restrict development via the ballot will extend beyond Nov. 3. In December, voters in Clarksville, Arkansas will decide whether to approve $55 billion in bond ordinances for a ServerFarm data center after residents successfully challenged the city council’s approval.

And last month, residents in Coweta County, Georgia, filed a petition with more than 14,000 signatures to overturn the approval of a sprawling $17 billion campus and ban future data centers in the area. Pending a judge’s decision, the referendum could land on a ballot in January.