Ohio activists are racing to collect 413,488 valid signatures by July 1 to qualify a statewide ballot measure that would ban data centers requiring 25 megawatts or more.1 The initiative is the sharpest example of a broader tactical shift: after governors in Maine and South Dakota blocked or diluted legislative moratoriums, opponents of data center expansion are bypassing statehouses entirely and taking their case directly to voters.1
The Legislative Moratorium Track Keeps Hitting Walls
Maine Governor Janet Mills vetoed ME LD 307, a bill that would have paused data center construction until November 2027.1 Mills had previously indicated a moratorium would be “appropriate,” but local economic pressure in the former paper mill region carried the day. South Dakota passed SB 135 to shift moratorium authority from the state to local governments rather than imposing a statewide ban.1
Virginia, which hosts more than 550 data centers,1 saw 27 bills introduced in 2025 but only one signed into law, a rate classification review.2 Governor Glenn Youngkin vetoed a separate bill that would have required sound and water impact assessments.2 The pattern is consistent across the country: 238 data center bills were considered across all 50 states in 2025,2 with more than 40 enacted in 21 states. Most addressed energy rates, tax incentives, or water use rather than construction pauses.2
The Ballot Measure Pivot
Ohio’s proposed 25MW threshold is significant because it would apply to AI training and inference facilities while sparing smaller colocation and enterprise sites. Activists need 413,488 valid signatures by July 1 to qualify for the November ballot.1
The tactic is spreading. Port Washington, Wisconsin voters approved a measure requiring voter approval for data center tax incentives by a 66% margin.1 Janesville, Wisconsin is considering a similar threshold for projects over $450 million.1 In Frederick County, Maryland, activists verified enough signatures to force a referendum overturning approval of 2,600 acres for data center development; the County Council must now choose between the November ballot or a special election.1 Boulder City, Nevada and Monterey Park, California1 will vote on construction bans this fall, and Monterey Park’s measure has already chilled development interest.1
The underlying sentiment is not limited to activists. A Heatmap poll found that only 44% of Americans would welcome a data center nearby, making the facilities less popular than gas plants, wind farms, battery storage, or nuclear plants.3
Why Ballot Measures Are Harder to Stop Than Bills
Twenty-three states allow citizen-initiated ballot measures,1 which means no governor’s veto is possible. Legislators face less political risk voting to place a measure on the ballot than voting to ban an industry outright. Ballot measures bypass the lobbying infrastructure that typically kills moratoriums in committee or through gubernatorial action.
What This Means for AI Infrastructure Planning
Virginia and Ohio rank among the top six states for data center concentration, with Virginia hosting more than 550 sites and Ohio roughly 200.1 AEP Ohio forecasts demand growing from 600MW in 2024 to 5GW by 2030,4 but the state’s pipeline has already been halved from 30GW to 13GW after policy shifts and local opposition.4 That contraction includes Lordstown’s unanimous village council vote in November 2025 to ban all data centers,4 a response to a proposed $3.6 billion, 1.65 million square foot facility.4
If Ohio’s statewide measure qualifies and passes, it becomes a template for the other 22 citizen-initiative states. Hyperscaler siting risk is shifting from scattered NIMBY fights to potential statewide bans enacted through direct democracy.
What to Watch
July 1 is the hard deadline for Ohio signature collection. November 2026 will see multiple local measures in Nevada, California, and Maryland, plus potentially Ohio’s statewide ban. The 2026 legislative sessions will test whether other states follow South Dakota’s model of devolving authority to localities rather than imposing statewide rules.
Frequently Asked Questions
How does Lordstown’s existing ban differ from the proposed statewide measure?
Lordstown’s village council unanimously banned all data center proposals regardless of size—a direct response to a specific $3.6 billion Bristolville 25 Developer project with reported Foxconn and Stargate ties. The statewide measure would only restrict facilities drawing 25MW or more, leaving smaller sites untouched, and would cover all of Ohio rather than a single municipality.
Are any states moving in the opposite direction and actively recruiting data centers?
Rural Western states and Republican-leaning states including Arizona, Texas, Nevada, and Georgia are competing for data center investment through tax incentives and streamlined permitting. This creates a growing geographic split: states with heavy existing concentrations face community pushback while others roll out welcome mats to capture displaced demand.
What share of the 238 state bills in 2025 addressed water versus energy?
Of the 238 bills, 126 focused on energy policy, 75 on tax incentives, and 39 specifically targeted water consumption. In drought-prone regions, water use has become a flashpoint independent of electricity demand, adding a resource-constraint dimension that pure power-grid discussions miss.
What kinds of facilities fall below the 25MW threshold the Ohio measure targets?
Enterprise colocation sites, edge computing nodes, and mid-tier cloud on-ramps typically draw well under 25MW. The threshold is calibrated to catch hyperscale AI training and inference clusters—facilities built by the largest cloud providers that routinely require hundreds of megawatts each—while sparing the long tail of smaller operators.