After two days on Grove City, a look at the wider map.
Ohio's data center backlash is no longer a local squabble. Voters in 18 communities face data center measures on Nov. 3, according to the Ohio Capital Journal. Well over 125 communities have moratoriums, and at least 23 have effectively banned data centers. Nine of the November measures mirror a statewide ban that Conserve Ohio missed the deadline to put on this year's ballot. The group says it is organizing more communities.
Let's be fair. Residents have real grievances. Three in four Ohioans oppose construction in their own communities, according to a Bowling Green State University poll, and power bills are climbing. In Grove City, the campaign says residents learned of the 310-acre proposal more than a year after city talks with the developer began. Those complaints deserve real answers.
Some of these measures are explicit. Hubbard's is a straight ban. Urbana's targets anything over 7.5 megawatts. Nobody there will be surprised when data centers stay away. In those towns, that's the whole point.
Grove City is different. Issue 28 says it's not a ban. Its most visible spokesperson, Jen Belt, told the Capital Journal a statewide ban "would be awesome," but organizers skipped a local one over litigation worries. So they wrote a broad, industry-neutral rule instead. The campaign's own FAQ says it "wrote it that way on purpose."
That's how a data center fix can end up reaching a hospital, churches and the city's biggest employers. Call it a design choice. Fine. But calling it unintended is less than forthright.
The consequences are predictable, too. A Capital University economist says developers now hunt for "de-risked land," and warns that if moratoriums become bans, "you'll see many of the developers will move out of Ohio." Then come the civil suits and the legal costs. Thor Equities says it spent $19.6 million preparing a $1 billion project in Urbana before the council changed course, and it sued the city in federal court. Lordstown and Commercial Point are being sued, too. Taxpayers could pay those bills.
Here's the part the lawn sign slogans miss. A developer can leave. A hospital, a church, and a distribution center already in town can't. The mobile money walks, and the anchors stay behind, living under the rules and possibly skipping expansions. In Grove City, that's Mount Carmel, Walmart, FedEx Ground, and congregations on 50-plus-acre campuses.
The sky isn't falling statewide. The same economist says data center development is still growing despite the pushback. But a town that writes the broadest rule gets the biggest bill.
Unintended consequences are simply mistakes. Foreseeable ones are actual choices. Read the text before you vote. Early voting starts next Tuesday.
Comments and letters to the editor are welcome: [email protected]