Voters in at least 14 Ohio municipalities passed data center bans or restrictions on November 3, 2026, according to a Cincinnati Enquirer tally. Ohio had 18 municipalities with data center measures on the ballot, the most of any state. Ten towns passed outright bans, and Trenton's ban passed with almost 80% support. All counts are unofficial, and several towns had not reported overnight.
This is the first real result for a question we have followed for weeks. Our Ohio ballot guide explained what was on the ballot. Our election-night claimed-vs-verified post checked viral numbers while the count was still partial. This post uses published results from reporters who watched the local counts.
TL;DR: what Ohio voters decided
| Question | Answer (source) |
|---|---|
| How many Ohio towns restricted data centers? | At least 14 of 18 with measures (Cincinnati Enquirer via Yahoo) |
| Which passed outright bans? | Hubbard, Sunbury, Pataskala, Urbana, Defiance, Upper Sandusky, Piqua, Granville, Conneaut, Trenton |
| Biggest margin on a ban? | Trenton, almost 80% for Issue 17 |
| Did every measure pass? | The Enquirer lists no failures among reported towns, but Oregon (Lucas County), Monroe and Sprigg Townships, and Monroeville had no results yet |
| Is it final? | No. Counts are unofficial until county boards certify |
| Does it affect AI data center builds? | It blocks or slows projects inside those towns. Neighboring townships can still host them |
The town-by-town results
Outright bans (10 passed)
The Enquirer reports that voters in Hubbard, Sunbury, Pataskala, Urbana, Defiance, Upper Sandusky, Piqua, Granville, Conneaut and Trenton passed bans on data center construction. Eleven municipalities voted on outright bans, so the one left over is Oregon in Lucas County, whose board of elections had reported no results as of midnight on November 4.
A local report from Springfield News-Sun and Peak of Ohio on Urbana, surfaced in our search, gave about 77% in favor (2,978 yes to 877 no) in unofficial results for a charter amendment banning future data centers. We could not open that page directly, so treat the Urbana figure as secondary until the county certifies it. Another search summary gave Upper Sandusky at about 77%, which we also could not verify at the source.
Restrictions short of a ban (4 reported)
- Ashville. Almost 82% of voters moved to reverse the village council's agreement and negotiations with EdgeConneX to build two data centers.
- Grove City. About 55% approved a charter amendment requiring voter approval for future large developments, including data centers that use more than 20 megawatts of electricity or 500,000 gallons of water.
- Perry. Over 87% passed an ordinance requiring developers who seek tax abatements or financial incentives to offer the village financial guarantees.
- Wilmington. Through four separate referendums, around 80% of voters rejected rezoning of parcels for a data center project.
Monroe and Sprigg Townships in Adams County, and Monroeville, also had data center measures. Their results were not yet available when the Enquirer published at 05:15 UTC on November 4.
A ballot box taking a check card, standing for Ohio data center ballot results on election night
Trenton: the case study
Trenton is the clearest example because it combined every part of the fight. Journal-News reported that early-vote partial results showed the ban passing 77% to 23%, and the Enquirer later reported almost 80% for Issue 17. The measure bans data centers that need more than 25 megawatts of electricity inside city limits.
The road to the ballot was contested. Residents began pushing back after plans surfaced in October 2025, citing noise, light pollution, environmental effects, rising utility demand and a lack of transparency. A resident group collected signatures for a charter amendment. The city council voted in August not to certify the petition, and the Ohio Supreme Court then ruled that the council "disregarded" the law and ordered it to certify. Journal-News describes the court's September order as unanimous. The same report notes that Mayor Ryan Perry will resign effective January 1, 2027, and says he attributed it to job obligations.
What the ban does not do
This is the part that gets lost in headlines. Per Journal-News, the measure does not touch the four-building Amazon Web Services data center already under construction on 141 acres in Trenton. It could affect a proposed 18-building AWS project tied to 600 acres in Madison and St. Clair townships, but only if that land is annexed into the city. Trenton withdrew its annexation petition in September, though Journal-News says it could be refiled.
The Enquirer adds that because the ban applies only inside city limits, the project could still move forward if the land stays in the rural townships. However, the St. Clair Township Zoning Commission passed a resolution on October 13 to ban data centers in its zoning, and that goes to a Butler County hearing on November 10. So a second hurdle may exist at the township level.
The Enquirer also quoted voters on both sides. One resident who backed the ban said she wants her son to grow up in a small town without noise and air pollution. A 76-year-old resident said, "I think we need the data centers," citing jobs and revenue. A group opposing the ban, the Trenton Community Alliance, argued the charter change could stifle future business.
How the national picture looks
Ohio is only part of the count. Ballotpedia's September tally listed 38 local data center measures across 35 jurisdictions in 8 states, with 20 in Ohio, and said four earlier measures all backed tighter limits. Smart Cities Dive and later roundups put the November 3 total higher as courts and councils added questions. One roundup we found said restrictions were favored in 29 of the first 30 reported measures nationwide, and another placed the total at 44 measures in 10 states. We could not trace those two figures to a primary tally, so use them as early counts only. One regional report added that more than 61% of Janesville, Wisconsin voters backed a requirement for public approval of projects above $450 million.
Three cautions apply before anyone calls this a national verdict.
- Selection effect. Ballotpedia found that 31 of 38 measures came from citizen petitions, so supporters of a restriction wrote most of the questions.
- Mixed measure types. Nine measures were advisory only, and the rest range from charter bans to rezoning referendums. A yes on each means something different.
- Local scope. A town ban moves projects to the next town. It does not change national demand for AI compute.
For the wider political context, including the Texas governor's race, see our post on the data center backlash and the midterms and the report on Abbott staff's closed-door data center roundtable.
Why this matters for AI builders and buyers
AI training and inference run in physical buildings. When towns near cheap land, water and grid connections vote no, developers have fewer sites that clear local approval. That can push projects to townships, other counties and other states, lengthen timelines, and add power and permitting cost that eventually shows up in cloud pricing.
Other pieces of the same story show how wide the pressure is. A Chilean community tied a 25,000-prompt "human AI for a day" protest to drought and the Maipo basin. New York's mayor has talked about a pause on data centers, and Journal-News notes that New York is the only state with a statewide moratorium on large-scale development, while Ohio has none. For comparison, Japan's NTT Data is moving ahead with a 500 MW Osaka site tied to Anthropic.
Data center server blocks with airflow lines, representing the cooling and power demand at issue in local bans
What to watch next
- Certification. County boards will publish official totals. Expect small shifts, and watch the towns that had not reported.
- The November 10 Butler County hearing on St. Clair Township's zoning resolution, which could affect the planned AWS site.
- Annexation. If Trenton refiles the annexation petition, the new ban would apply to any land that joins the city.
- Legal challenges. Developers and landowners can contest charter bans. Trenton's own case already went to the Ohio Supreme Court once.
- State action. Ohio has no statewide ban, so lawmakers could answer the local wave with a bill. We found no confirmed proposal.
What is confirmed and what is not
Confirmed by named outlets: the 14-municipality count, the list of ten bans, the four restrictions, the Trenton details and the Grove City terms. Not confirmed by us: the nationwide win-rate figures, the Urbana and Upper Sandusky percentages from secondary pages, and any final total. If you cite numbers from election night, label them unofficial.
Results are unofficial election-night counts as of November 4, 2026. Official totals may differ after certification.
Related reading
- Ohio data center ballot measures on election day
- Data center election night: Texas 13.3 GW, a 56% exit poll and 10 ballot votes
- Data center backlash and the midterms
- Abbott staff's closed-door data center roundtable
- Quilicura, Chile: 25,000 prompts and data center water
- Mamdani on a data center pause
- Sources: Cincinnati Enquirer via Yahoo, Journal-News, Ballotpedia