Archive
(749 Total Articles)Page 15 of 30.
Lebanon is considering using revenue tied to a data center to offset property taxes. The piece is about how project-related money could affect local taxpayers, but the excerpt does not say which project, what agreement is in place, or whether the plan is approved.
A local data center study group in Walker County is discussing likely community impacts tied to a proposed project, including lighting, noise, and water use. The piece points to early public review rather than a built facility, and it does not say what final commitments, if any, the project will make on power, water, tax, or land.
The filing appears to focus on local siting and community impacts around a proposed data center in Dauphin County. The headline points to road work and noise monitoring, which suggests the project would place some infrastructure burden on the host area, but the excerpt does not say what power, water, tax, or land deal terms were actually committed.
Texas is trying to use state enforcement tools against data center water use, and the headline says the case shows where current law runs out. The piece appears to focus on how much leverage Texas has over a project’s water and cooling demands, and what regulators can and cannot force operators to do.
The county has moved ahead with a deal for a proposed Meta data center on a large tract of land. The filing points to siting and tax treatment, but it does not say what power supply, water use, or other utility commitments come with the project.
Meta is named as a partner in a proposed 2,000-acre data center project in Maysville, Kentucky, and the piece frames it as controversial. The excerpt does not say what power, water, tax, or land terms the project includes, or what commitments Meta has actually made.
Stafford County delayed a hearing on a proposed data center project after county staff recommended denial. The filing points to siting, local review, and resident opposition, but it does not say the project was approved or give a final decision.
The piece is about a proposed data center project in Cass County and the developer's pitch on local economic benefits and environmental safeguards. It appears to concern siting and local approval issues, with a water and environmental angle, but it does not say the project has been approved or built.
The piece concerns an Oklahoma attorney general moving to intervene in a citizens’ lawsuit tied to a proposed data center in Sand Springs. It is about local opposition and the legal fight around whether the project can move ahead, not about the project’s power, water, or tax terms.
Van Buren Township is facing a decision on a proposed Google data center, with the story centered on local approval and opposition. The piece does not say the project’s water use, power commitments, tax package, or land terms in the excerpt provided.
Hood County turned down a proposed settlement tied to the Comanche Circle data center and also rejected the permit appeal. The piece is about local land-use and legal conflict over whether the project can move ahead in Hood County, Texas, and it does not say what new water, power, tax, or land terms, if any, were on the table beyond the dispute itself.
Two groups have sued Franklin County over approvals tied to data center projects and are asking the court to stop permits from moving forward. The filing puts local opposition and the county’s siting process at the center of the dispute; it does not say what specific power, water, tax, or land commitments the projects include.
A lawsuit over Project Tango says Palm Beach County unfairly rejected the proposed data center and that a county commissioner should have stepped aside because of a conflict claim. The filing concerns the county’s land-use decision and the legal process around it, but it does not say the project has been approved or built.
The piece is about backlash to data center development and how that anger has escalated into criminal threats. It fits the community beat because it concerns organized opposition and the local consequences of siting projects.
QTS and Lancium say they will fund infrastructure tied to a proposed project in Turkey, Texas. The filing excerpt does not say what specific infrastructure is covered, how the money will be spent, or whether the commitment changes land, power, water, or tax terms for the site.
A court ruling on a Sangamon County data center case is still pending. The filing points to a legal dispute tied to local opposition or a moratorium process, but it does not say how the case will come out or what project terms are at issue.
Spokane residents rallied against proposed AI data centers over concerns about water use and power demand. The piece is about local opposition to a data center buildout and the community questions around resource strain, not a corporate product or earnings story.
The piece appears to explain how data centers use water and correct common assumptions about where that water comes from or how it is used. It fits the water beat and points to Georgia as the local frame, but the excerpt does not identify a specific project or site.
The piece says proposed AI data centers on federal land have become a campaign issue in Nevada’s governor’s race. It points to land use and political conflict, but the excerpt does not say which sites are involved, what power or water commitments are tied to them, or whether any approvals have been made.
The piece is about Minnesota Democrats pushing new state rules for data centers. On the face of the headline and source label, it centers on regulation and tax treatment rather than a specific project commitment, and it does not say which project, site, or utility agreement is affected.
The piece says Hut 8 made a political donation to Governor Landry's PAC before a Louisiana data center groundbreaking. That points to the money and transparency around a proposed project, but the excerpt does not say what incentives, land deal, power supply, or water terms the project commits the host to.
Data center opponents are expected to bring their case to Hubbard Township trustees at a public meeting. The piece is about local opposition and the township’s role in hearing it, not about a project approval or a technical filing.
The piece is about a public discussion of data center policy in Lowndes County, with a focus on local opposition and possible limits on future projects. It concerns how the county may handle siting and regulation of data centers, but the excerpt does not say a specific project was approved or denied.
The piece frames New Jersey data centers as a community issue and points to resident pushback. It appears to focus on why local opposition has grown, not on a single project filing or incentive package.
Residents in Downeast Maine are objecting to a proposed underwater AI data center. The filing, as described here, points to a local siting fight and community opposition, but does not spell out the project’s power source, water use, tax terms, or land deal.