Archive
(749 Total Articles)Page 17 of 18.
The piece appears to examine a bipartisan bill aimed at data centers and what it would do for local ratepayers and project costs. From the headline and excerpt alone, the filing does not specify a project site, a host community, or the exact terms of any land, water, tax, or power commitment.
The piece is about congressional pressure on data centers as political pushback builds ahead of the midterms. It points to the community and policy side of data center siting rather than a specific project, utility deal, or construction plan.
The piece appears to summarize how county-level opposition to data centers varies by technology and place. It is about siting and community response, with the legal and local-government angle tied to where projects may face moratoriums or approval fights.
This is about a Colorado data center bill and the pushback it is drawing over how ratepayer protections would work. The excerpt does not say which project or site is affected, or whether the bill changes land, water, taxes, or only utility costs.
The piece appears to be about Ohio lawmakers and data center tax policy, with the focus on incentives and the political trouble around them. It points to a project-level money story in the Midwest and does not say anything about a specific site, utility deal, water use, or construction plan.
Harmony is advancing a revised proposed ordinance for data centers. The filing does not say what power, water, tax, or land commitments any specific project would bring, only that local rules are being updated before any siting decision.
Residents in Jim Hogg County are objecting to a proposed large data center. The filing only shows local concern around the project and does not say what land, power, water, tax, or approval commitments the proposal would require.
The piece is framed as a Q&A about data centers in Mississippi, so it appears to explain what they mean for the state and the people living near them. The excerpt does not say whether it covers a specific project, a power deal, water use, tax breaks, or local approvals.
Virginia has passed a new data center law, and this piece examines what the law covers and what it leaves out. It appears to be about the state rules that will shape future siting and utility impacts for data centers in Virginia, not about a single project.
Officials in Walls, Mississippi are considering rezoning about 1,000 acres for a proposed data center. The filing, as presented here, says the project is at the land-use stage and does not say what power, water, tax, or community terms would come with it.
The piece is about Indiana weighing how data center growth would affect its energy system and the local deal-making around hosting those projects. The headline and excerpt point to policy and incentive questions, but they do not say which project is involved or what specific commitments were made.
Microsoft’s data center proposal is back in front of Cherry Valley, so the local siting debate is still active. The excerpt does not say what land use changes, utility commitments, water supply terms, or tax package are on the table, if any.
Residents are suing over noise from a data center tied to Elon Musk. The piece centers on community opposition and a local quality-of-life dispute, not on the project’s power, water, tax, or land terms.
A new lawsuit has been filed against a data center construction project in Spartanburg County. The filing points to another round of local opposition over whether the project should proceed as planned.
Tucson is preparing changes aimed at large water users, which puts the city’s water rules and local development costs in focus. The excerpt says advocates think the proposed changes do not go far enough, but it does not say which projects or users would be covered, or what standards would change.
The piece is about an Upper Burrell data center plan and the rule that the project must bring its own gas-fired power. That puts the focus on project siting and power, with local opposition and moratorium politics in the background.
A county in southern Virginia rejected a proposed buildout that paired 12 data centers with a large gas plant. The filing says residents organized against it and the county board voted it down; it does not say the project won any land, water, tax, or power approvals.
The piece is about a proposed data center in Trenton and the public concern that the project is not being disclosed clearly enough. It points to a community-facing siting issue and likely a local approval process, but the excerpt does not say what utilities, tax terms, or land commitments the project includes.
The state commission rejected a legal challenge to a proposed data center project in Spartanburg County. The filing does not say what the project will use for power, water, tax treatment, or land commitments.
Effingham County is considering tighter rules on where and how data centers can be built. The piece is about local siting limits and the county’s response to proposed development, not about a specific project filing or utility deal.
Leavenworth County is holding a special meeting so nearby residents can weigh in on a proposed 1,000-acre data center site. The filing says this is about local opposition and neighbor input; it does not say the project has been approved, nor does it give details on power, water, tax terms, or land commitments beyond the acreage mentioned.
The council declined to revisit a data center agreement, which keeps the deal in place for now. The excerpt does not say what project terms were under review, what concessions were attached, or whether the decision involved land, power, water, or tax treatment.
New York is considering a community investment requirement tied to data center size, with the burden framed as dollars per megawatt. The excerpt does not say whether this is a passed rule, a proposal, or how it would be enforced.
A Florida county has changed its zoning rules to allow a data center, which is a siting decision that opens the door to a possible project but does not mean one is committed yet. The excerpt does not say whether a developer has filed plans, what site is involved, or what power, water, tax, or land terms would come with any project.
West Virginia lawmakers were told that data centers could factor into efforts to improve the state’s water situation. The excerpt points to a water and cooling angle, but it does not say what project was discussed, what commitments were made, or whether any site, utility, or developer is already involved.