Data center development is becoming an election-year test for candidates across the country, as community opposition grows over the facilities’ electricity use, environmental impacts and the public subsidies offered to attract them. Voters in 39 communities across eight states are set to decide data center-related ballot measures in November, according to Ballotpedia. The measures include proposals to block projects, change zoning rules or require voter approval. Ohio alone has 21 measures on the ballot. The political shift comes as the industry expands to meet demand for computing power, including for artificial intelligence. A University of Massachusetts Amherst poll published last month found that 65% of respondents opposed building an AI data center in their community, while 11% supported one. A separate Maryland poll has also found that a majority of voters oppose data center construction in the state. Opponents cite potential strains on the electrical grid and energy costs, along with concerns about water consumption, pollution, noise and the loss of farmland or open space. Some developers are building private natural-gas plants to supply power directly to data centers, adding to concerns about emissions and public health. These impacts can vary by project, but disputes over who pays for infrastructure and environmental safeguards have become central to local fights. The backlash is crossing party lines. In Ohio, attorney Nick Owens, a Republican who became involved after a data center was proposed near his rural Brown County community, said residents who disagree on other issues have joined forces to challenge development. Ohio has 154 operating data centers and 84 more in development, according to the figures cited in the report. In Ottawa, Kansas, residents organized against a proposed project after city commissioners announced a development negotiated without public input, according to Michael Lewis of Ottawa United. Lewis, a Democrat running for the state Legislature, said his effort has received support from local Republicans, including his GOP opponent, state Rep. Rebecca Schmoe. The issue is also shaping higher-profile races. In Ohio’s U.S. Senate contest, Democrat Sherrod Brown has criticized Republican Sen. Jon Husted over tax incentives for data centers that Husted supported as lieutenant governor. Husted has since proposed requiring state utility regulators to consider whether data centers should pay for the electrical infrastructure they need. Senate Democrats blocked the bill, describing it as inadequate. Candidates elsewhere have also shifted their positions. In Pennsylvania, both gubernatorial candidates have distanced themselves from earlier support for data centers. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican who had backed the industry, recently imposed a pause on new data center permits amid political attacks from his Democratic opponent. The rapid growth of the projects is giving that political pressure scale. Data centers in the United States currently use about 49 gigawatts of electricity, while projects planned or under construction amount to nearly 350 gigawatts—roughly a quarter of the country’s current generating capacity. Planned projects may not all be completed, but the figures underscore why grid costs and energy supply are becoming flashpoints. Industry supporters argue that data centers can bring construction jobs and property-tax revenue, and that artificial intelligence infrastructure is important to U.S. economic competitiveness. Josh Vlasto, co-leader of the tech-backed political group Leading the Future, said communities should be able to decide whether to host projects and argued that development with safeguards can benefit local economies. Critics, meanwhile, object to tax breaks and negotiations conducted without public scrutiny. The conflict puts elected officials between residents demanding stronger protections and technology companies seeking room to build. With ballot questions and competitive races ahead, candidates will have to say not only whether they support data centers, but who should bear their costs and how communities can control what is built nearby.