Ohioans begin collecting signatures to ban large data centers, as Columbus expands data center market

Ohioans opposed to data centers have started collecting signatures to ban large data centers in the state, as its capital city, Columbus, doubles its data center growth.

While Colliers, a Toronto-based global real estate firm with locations across Ohio, praises the Columbus area in its new report for doubling its data center growth, those who oppose data centers in the Buckeye State are now able to gather signatures after the Ohio Ballot Board unanimously signed off on the “Prohibition of Construction of a Data Center” amendment on Thursday.

To qualify for the November ballot, opponents of the data centers must collect 413,487 valid signatures, including a minimum number from voters in 44 Ohio counties. The amendment supporters must collect all signatures before a July 1 deadline.

“We have, and will continue to investigate, request, and evaluate any institutional support that we can get,” Austin Baurichter, a lawyer working with the group, said, according to Signal Ohio. “But we also believe in ourselves.”

According to the amendment, any data center requiring more than 25 megawatts of power would be banned.

State Sen. Bill DeMora, D-Columbus, a member of the Ohio Ballot Board, who opposes a statewide ban on data centers because they provide union jobs, told The Blade that he doesn’t think that the activists will be able to collect enough signatures before the deadline.

“I would bet my mortgage that there’s no way they get enough signatures by July 1,” he said. “There’s absolutely no way… The Democratic Party as a whole could not get [that many] valid signatures by July 1, when today is April 2. It’s just not going to happen.”

State Sen. Theresa Gavarone, R-Bowling Green, also questioned the amendment, asking how it would apply to data centers currently being built and noting that some Ohioans want data centers in their state, according to The Blade.

Matt Szollosi, executive director of Affiliated Construction Trades Ohio, also told The Blade that the proposed amendment is a “jobs killer” and a “blatant attack on blue-collar workers and their families.”

Greg Lawson, senior research fellow at the Buckeye Institute, also told The Blade that he doesn’t think that the amendment is a good idea.

“AI is critical for the future of jobs, health-care innovation, reindustrialization, and national security,” he said. “Should this issue make the ballot and pass, it will harm all of that and effectively be the China First Act.”

Lyn Cox, one of the activists working to collect signatures, told The Blade that she understands why so many people question whether she and others like-minded can collect enough signatures, but added that they should not underestimate the group and that she has “no doubt” they will succeed.

“I think the petition drive will be extremely successful,” she told the publication. “I think anybody who underestimates this movement is doing it at their own peril.”