What the Anti-Data-Center Movement Could Mean for Data Center Builds

Everyone knows what a data center is (or at least has a general idea). This very fact is a result of a seismic shift in public engagement with the network infrastructure market.

Years ago, people generally had the vague notion that our data lives in a cloud somewhere, and now, in last week's U.S. midterm elections, data storage facilities seemed about as popular as power lines. A CNBC headline summed it up: “Voters rebuff data centers in every ballot measure except one.”

So what does growing anti-data-center sentiment mean for the future of data centers? Will data center construction in the U.S. grind to a halt?

We matched the related election results to each planned and pre-construction site in TeleGeography’s Data Center and Interconnection Research Service. As it turns out, the effect may be less than the news headlines indicate—well, except for in Texas. We’ll get to that in a minute.

First, by way of background, two levels of governance most directly affect U.S. data center development—the state and the local level. States shape environmental permitting, tax incentives for investment, and access to the power grid. Governors (of whom 36 were elected last week) guide this direction along with state legislators. The next level is local government. This involves both county and city-level jurisdiction. Counties, cities, towns, and townships generally govern specific zoning regulations.

Data centers in state midterm elections

Let’s look at what happened on the state level first. Take a look at the accompanying table.

What Changes at the State Level

Notes: Results unofficial as of Nov 10, 2026. Governors-elect take office in January (Maine Jan 6; Ohio and Georgia Jan 11; Texas Jan 19). Sources: Texas Tribune; Fortune; CNBC; Maine Public; Kansas Secretary of State via local reporting; MultiState.

The biggest story by far is Texas, which, by our estimates, accounts for more than 15% of all planned data centers in the U.S. The recent claim that grid access requests in Texas exceeded ERCOT capacity by five times was enough to put a freeze on new site development pending a utility audit. The newly elected administration there has pledged to go even further, extending a moratorium until new legislative controls are passed. In Ohio, where about 7% of the U.S. data center pipeline is concentrated, the new administration has pledged to push for a conditional moratorium, exempting developers who agree to pursue brownfield rather than greenfield development along with other criteria.

A couple of key takeaways here shed light on the effect of state elections on data center development.

• Pledges are not law. New governors in Texas, Ohio, Georgia, and elsewhere will face at least one legislative chamber that may push back on their platform and hamper them from fulfilling their pledges.
• Individual policy directions differ. While moratoria would certainly delay development plans in some places, other states are pushing for legislation that allows development to continue apace with the addition of consumer protections.
  

Data center defeats in local midterm elections

Now let’s take a look at local voting results on data centers.

Local Restrictions Approved on November 3

Notes: Results unofficial as of Nov 10, 2026. Seven advisory (non-binding) votes in Illinois, one in New Jersey and one in Monroeville, Ohio also went against data centers. Brownfield, Eliot, Freedom and Sabattus (Maine) are reported by Maine media but are not in Ballotpedia's count of 41 measures. Sources: Ballotpedia; GridSight; The Ohio Newsroom; Maine Public; local reporting.

Ballotpedia indicates that 41 data center measures made the local ballot in 10 states, and voters opposed data centers in 40 of those measures. That sure sounds like an overwhelming result. But is it? Indeed, several of these votes were a direct rebuke of significant projects, particularly in Piqua, Ashville, and Wilmington—all in Ohio. But only about 30% of the votes were in response to a specific named project. And more crucially, local bans stop within city limits. This exempts a vast majority of developments from restrictions.

How will the midterms impact data center development?

So let’s bring this back to the big question: How much will last week’s midterms affect the U.S. data center development timeline?

Bringing TeleGeography’s U.S. site data to bear in the accompanying map, we include nearly 900 U.S. sites that are either in the near-term pipeline or in some further stage of pre-construction. Levels of development restriction are shown at a state level according to the categories in the legend.

What does this show? Around 55% of sites are in places with no existing or pending restrictions. Another 15% could be affected by ratepayer protection policies but not development pauses. This leaves 30% of sites in jurisdictions with an existing or pledged pause. And there’s even a caveat there. Projects underway are far less likely to be affected by new or recent moratoria. New approvals will be much harder hit. And what about local voting results? Yes, there will be high-profile cases where ballot initiatives pause or completely shut down local projects, but these will be isolated responses.

What we’re seeing now in the U.S. is already quite familiar to our readers in Europe and Asia. Some of the highest-profile markets in the world, like Singapore, Amsterdam, and Frankfurt, have moved from concerns about the sustainability of the pace of data center development, to moratoria, to new policies. Here are a few ways this has played out.

• Zoning restrictions are imposed. In these cases, new data center development spills to nearby locations that aren’t restricted. For example, Singapore’s new limited licensing regime has directly contributed to massive growth in Johor Bahru, Kuala Lumpur, and Jakarta over the past five years.
• New sustainability and cost-covering measures are imposed. In these cases, operators comply and continue to develop. Critically, this is true specifically of markets that are in high demand. For example, even with the recent implementation of Germany’s Energy Efficiency Act, we estimate that Berlin will be one of the fastest growing major markets in the world, with over 30% compound annual growth in new data center capacity through 2029.

We can expect similar patterns of adaptation between government authorities and data center developers in the U.S. Here’s what we expect to play out in the near term:

• The majority of planned U.S. data centers will move forward without pause. Around 70% of planned sites are in locations with no existing or pledged moratorium.
• Data centers will have to buffer constituents from development impact. Bring Your Own Power and Ratepayer Protection policies will become increasingly popular as ways to both encourage continued development and protect consumers from the impact of increased utility scarcity in the face of large-scale data center demand.
• Projects in the works may not be affected. If power, zoning, and development are already approved, a project is far less likely to be stopped by new regulations. Projects that are either currently in the approval queue or have not yet applied for development are far more likely to be disrupted.
• Individual projects will be targeted. Local zoning wars will be highly impactful on a project-level basis. We’ll continue to monitor where grass-roots reaction leads to disruption in local developments.
• Texas could see widespread disruption. Sites that have already been approved will likely maintain development schedules, but any projects that are in the site or utility application queue could expect long waits. The governor cannot impose a formal state-wide moratorium on data center development without legislative approval, but she could continue the current trajectory of directing state agencies and utilities to freeze permits and interconnections for data centers until the legislature implements policies controlling development.

Get more data center analysis

Get industry-leading data on the global data center market with our Data Center and Interconnection Research Service. We track nearly 7,000 operating data centers in 116 countries, plus more than 1,700 sites that are planned or in pre-construction. We collect and analyze the telecom industry's most comprehensive intelligence on data center capacity, service providers, pricing trends, and more.