Archive

The Kentucky legislature is holding a listening session on data centers, which puts the issue in the public record but does not itself approve or deny a project. The excerpt does not say whether any specific site, utility deal, zoning action, or tax package is on the table.

Brighton residents are opposing a proposed large data center complex near homes. The filing as described is about local resistance and land-use conflict; it does not state any power, water, tax, or land-assembly commitments by the developer.

The piece appears to focus on how data center growth is affecting local water use and cooling needs. It points to questions about resource pressure on the community rather than a specific project approval or financing deal.

A rural Oklahoma town is trying to resist a proposed data center, but the piece says local opposition may not be enough to stop it. The filing, as described, centers on siting and community conflict rather than any firm commitment on power, water, tax, or land terms.

Palm Beach County neighbors near Mar-a-Lago voted for a local ban that would block or limit a data center project the White House opposes. The filing does not say whether the proposal is for a specific site, how much land or power it would use, or what the developer has committed on water, taxes, or other local terms.

The piece is about local opposition and zoning discussion around a proposed data center in Plymouth Township. It centers on community reaction at a township meeting and does not say the project was approved or built.

East Whiteland officials adopted a new data center ordinance after residents pushed back against the project already under construction there. The filing is about local land-use control and community opposition; it does not say what the project will draw in power or water, or what tax terms, if any, are attached.

Residents are suing over noise tied to a proposed Southaven data center, which puts the local project’s community impacts and legal fight in view. The excerpt does not say what the filing seeks beyond the noise complaint or what project commitments, if any, were made on power, water, tax, or land.

The piece is about a local ballot fight over Butte’s proposed data center initiative and the state court action that put it back before voters. It concerns community opposition and the legal process around whether the initiative stays on the ballot.

The headline points to a Senate fight over AI data-center policy, with Democrats split over how to handle it. The excerpt does not say what concrete project, site, utility commitment, or local approval is at issue.

The story is about how past votes on data center projects are now part of Wisconsin legislative campaigns. It centers on the political fallout for candidates and the public record around local incentives and approvals.

The piece is about a professor’s view of the health concerns tied to data centers, based on a Hartford Courant discussion of the controversy. It signals a local debate around community impacts, but the excerpt does not say whether the article adds project-specific facts about siting, power, water, or permits.

Residents in Monongahela Township are asking for more chances to weigh in on a proposed data center project. The piece is about local opposition and the public process around siting, not about power, water, or incentives.

Southeast Minnesota residents and lawmakers are discussing possible rules around data center development. The piece is about local regulation and community response, not a specific project commitment.

Selma’s local code changes and the delay on data center rules point to a pending zoning and regulatory process, not an approved project commitment. The piece appears to concern how the town is handling future data center development and what rules will govern it.

Residents in Dinwiddie County are objecting to a proposed data center near their homes because they fear impacts on wildlife, water, and daily life. The filing shown here points to a local siting fight and community concern, but it does not say what power source, water commitment, tax deal, or land assembly terms the project would use.

The forum is about how data centers in Nebraska affect electricity use and water demand. It points to a community discussion of project impacts rather than a specific build decision or financing deal.

This piece appears to be about a proposed OpenAI data center near Belmont Glen in Effingham County, Georgia, and the local concerns that come with a new facility next door. The excerpt points to water and cooling as the immediate issue, with the broader project likely affecting nearby residents through land use and community impacts, though the filing details are not provided here.

Spanish Fork changed its zoning to allow a data center in Spanish Fork Canyon, which clears a local land-use step for a proposed project near the existing wind turbines. The filing does not say that the center is approved to build, only that the city opened the door for the request to move forward.

Marion County is weighing a data center proposal and the dispute is about how large the project should be and how much power it would draw. The piece centers on local siting and load concerns, with Virginia used as the comparison point.

The piece is about a defamation dispute tied to opposition to a proposed large data center in Utah. It centers on the public fight around the project, not on the facility’s power, water, tax, or land terms.

Ohio residents are pushing back against data center development, and pro-AI groups are trying to soften that opposition. The piece is about local community resistance and the public campaign around future data center siting in Ohio, not about a specific new project filing or utility commitment.