Joy Powers: This is Swing State of the Union — a podcast all about Wisconsin and why it’s so important to U.S. politics. I'm Joy Powers.
Sam Woods: And I'm Sam Woods. Thank you so much for joining us. Nov. 3 is election day in Wisconsin. This cycle, races for governor, state legislature, Congress, along with referenda, will help determine the future of Wisconsin politics.
This season on Swing State of the Union, we’re exploring who has power. We’ll look at some of the biggest issues facing the state, and who can solve them — issues like education funding, our food systems and affordability in Wisconsin.
Powers: But we’ll start with an issue that crosses party lines in a unique way. Data centers have become a huge issue in the 2026 midterms, both in Wisconsin and nationwide. Communities have been grappling with the question of what to do when a data center comes calling. But who has the power to say yes or no to a project? To find out, we head to Sheboygan, Wisconsin, a city of about 50,000 people located about an hour north of Milwaukee.
A data center moratorium in Sheboygan
Woods: It’s July 14, 2026. It’s about 95 degrees outside, the hottest day of the year so far here. Inside the air-conditioned Sheboygan City Hall, the Plan Commission sits in front of a crowd of about 50 people. The first few agenda items are taken care of quickly. But three minutes after the pledge of allegiance, this afternoon’s main event begins.
Sheboygan Plan Commission Member: Next, we have a public hearing regarding the ordinance grading section 105-8 of the municipal code, establishing a temporary moratorium for the issues of zoning and building permit approvals for data centers greater than 10,000 square feet of the floor here today.
Woods: Today, Sheboygan’s City Plan Commission is considering a 12 month data center moratorium. If it passes the plan commission and common council, Sheboygan would pause consideration of new data center projects for a full year.
Powers: In theory, this would give the city time to assess whether a data center is a fit for their community, or on what conditions they’d ever allow one. For the next 30 minutes, residents line up one by one to comment either in favor of the moratorium.
Sheboygan Resident: Yes for the moratorium, and make it a really, really strong, plan because they're going to take every advantage they can of us.
Powers: Or also in favor, but arguing that it should be longer.
Sheboygan Resident: Data centers and other hyperscale uses are evolving rapidly. We need adequate time to understand our own existing power and water capacity, plus future demands. 18 months would be more realistic.
Powers: Residents like Daniel Kamakawa are here to share what they think makes Sheboygan special.
Daniel Kamakawa: We've got world-class small mouth fishing right here in the center of town. In the center of the town. You can't get better than that.
Powers: And how a data center might affect the natural landscape — and his utility bills.
Kamakawa: Unless they can get something into the building code where they have to pay for their usage, we’re going to have to subsidize it from my bill.
Woods: Here’s the thing: there’s no data center proposed in Sheboygan right now, but these fears are not unfounded. Residents like Kamakawa see a cautionary tale just 30 miles south in Port Washington, where an AI data center is under construction — despite the objections of many residents.
Kamakawa: Port Washington's data center, that's a two-mile scar along 43, and it goes as far back as you can see. That's how much land they're taking. That water's got to come from somewhere, and that's going to impact not just the native wildlife, but it's also going to impact the people that live there. And this is all part of the livability, and it's got to be livable. I'm not against development. But it's got to fit the community, and it's got to fit the needs of Mother Nature.
Woods: The 30 minutes of testimony from Kamakawa and others is unanimously in favor of a data center moratorium, and the Sheboygan Plan Commission is sympathetic. The debate is not about whether to enact the moratorium, but how long it should be.
Powers: On one hand, 18 months would buy them more time to get the plan right. But an 18-month moratorium might also attract lawsuits from companies like Microsoft and Meta, or middleman developers with deep pockets.
In less than one hour, a 12-month moratorium moves forward.
Plan Commission Member: Alright, it's been moved and seconded. Any other discussion, comments? Seeing none, we'll vote for a vote. All those in favor of approval of General Ordinance 1-2627, please say aye.
All: Aye.
Plan Commission Member: Anyone opposed? Chair votes aye. That is approved and will be sent to the city council.
Powers: Six days later, Sheboygan’s Common Council unanimously passed the moratorium, and it will now be incorporated into the city’s new zoning code.
Wisconsin's data center race
Woods: In November, you may see Sheboygan marked on election maps as a swing district in one of the “swingiest” states in the union. But on this abnormally hot July day, Sheboygan is hitting pause — not saying there will never be a data center there, but “we need time to figure out what’s right for us.”
Sheboygan is not the only local government grappling with this question about what to do if a data center comes to town.
Beaver Dam Resident: What's going to be the tax impact for the town? What's going to be the water discharge? What's the sewerage? All those things that are important to everybody.
Mt. Pleasant Resident: Business as usual is not going to fly any longer, when these tech companies and utilities are asking so much of the public.
Beloit Resident: I moved here because it’s a small town, and you guys should really reflect on who you’re representing here.
Woods: Sheboygan Alderwoman Alanza Grawien, who sponsored the moratorium there, is grappling with the same question that governments, companies, and voters will be asking this November: who has power in Wisconsin?
Alanza Grawien: As far as the state goes, we cannot ban a data center. That is unfortunate. I don't think it's something that fits in our community, but we don't write all the rules.
Tom Kertscher: Data centers have actually been around for years. There's at least several dozen around Wisconsin that probably most of us have never heard of or aware of.
Powers: That’s Tom Kertscher. He’s a reporter for Wisconsin Watch, who’s extensively covered data centers. Just a few years ago, the term “data center” would have referred to nondescript buildings filled with computers, used to store or transmit data.
For instance, when you save a family photo to the cloud instead of a hard drive, the data is physically located in a data center.
These types of data centers still exist. But larger, more expensive versions have entered the scene as well.
Kertscher: Now, we're talking about “hyperscale data centers” is one term, or AI data centers — so much, much larger, typically covering hundreds of acres in Wisconsin. The AI data centers have cost anywhere from $1 billion, like in Beaver Dam, to $20 million in Mount Pleasant.
Woods: AI has exploded in recent years, especially since the release of ChatGPT in 2022. And tech leaders like OpenAI's Sam Altman have big visions for the future.
Sam Altman: I think it would be approximately as bad of an idea to say “we're not going to have AI in our country” as it was to say “we're going to not have electricity in our country,” you know, back 100-plus years ago.
Woods: With big promises to be transformative, there is a lot of money to be made. Everyone is looking to build data centers quickly — whether it’s a company directly marketing AI tools like OpenAI or Anthropic, data management and chip companies like Oracle and Nvidia, or traditional tech giants like Meta and Microsoft.
Kertscher: It's a high stakes, multi-million-dollar race. And so these companies are trying to get ahead of each other, if you will, on a competitive level and get there before the land is gone or the access to water is more difficult. That sort of thing. That's why, if people feel like, “Where's all this coming from?” There's lots of money at stake. And if you get in the AI data center game before your competitor, you're going to be in a better position.
Woods: Hyperscale AI data centers are popping up all over the country, from Virginia to Oregon, all looking for the same things.
Kertscher: Access to power, to electricity, is crucial. So if you can find a place that has that, that's perhaps number one. You also need, as I indicated, typically hundreds of acres of space. And then water is a big concern as well. So if your looking for that combination, again, you want to find that desirable spot before your competitor does.
Choosing a data center site
Woods: So in a state like Wisconsin, where these resources are relatively plentiful, how do they pick a site?
Powers: First, you find a middleman.
Kertscher: Typically, it's a company that people haven't heard of. So it's not like Meta or Facebook comes knocking on the door. It's someone who is out there scouting sites. So there are businesses, there are companies doing that kind of on spec. You know, like, “Hey, let's look around Wisconsin. Where might there be a good location for a data center? If we find it and kind of get the ducks in a row, then we could sell that to Microsoft or Meta,” or whoever it is.
Powers: Once a spot is chosen, usually for its access to power and water, the company makes contact with the local government — usually a township government or City Plan Commission.
Kertscher: Can you tell us more about what is available in terms of land, what your rules are, that sort of thing?
Powers: The pitch to local governments usually touts modest job numbers.
Kertscher: 50 to 100 jobs at an AI data center, that might be fairly typical.
Powers: And lots of tax revenue.
Kertscher: “Hey, if you approve our data center request, we're going to be paying tons and tons of property taxes. They're going to help your city or your village or your town and your school districts.” Schools have been struggling for trying to find ways to get additional revenue. So that can be a bigger pitch, if you will, than jobs.
Powers: Though Kertscher says it’s too early to tell if these promises are based in reality.
Kertscher: I don't think there is hard evidence yet of just how much revenue, tax revenue, are they’re going to produce, just how many jobs, what is the salary. There are projections, of course, but we really don't know how that's all going to shake out yet.
Data centers and NDAs
Joy Powers: While these discussions between companies and local officials are happening, residents in the area typically have no idea. This kind of secrecy is not uncommon in economic development, as companies typically don’t want to telegraph to competitors what they are planning, or answer to public concern.
Until recently, data center developers were often secretive, until the last minute, having local governments sign NDAs, or non-disclosure agreements, to keep their plans quiet.
Kertscher: One example of a non-disclosure agreement was in Beaver Dam. That entity signed an NDA with what turned out to be Meta. For more than a year those details were kept secret from the public. We disclosed that the NDA existed and disclosed how much time had passed before the public was made aware.
Woods: Beaver Dam’s NDA with Meta went public in January after Kertscher’s reporting. By then, public opinion on data centers had soured. A Marquette Law poll at the time found 70% of respondents nationwide said the costs of data centers outweighed the benefits, and that number rose to 76% in July.
Here in Wisconsin, residents near data centers started to see their effect on the natural landscape. In part because of public backlash, Kertscher says most local governments are no longer signing NDAs for data center development projects.
Data centers and community benefit agreements
Powers: So what can you do when a data center developer comes to town? Who has the power to say yes or no to the project, or the power to define the terms of the deal?
In Wisconsin, those decisions have been left to local governments, at least for now. Another example is DeForest, a village near Madison. When it was considering a data center, it created a community benefit agreement — which would stipulate exactly what a data center developer would have to offer.
Kertscher: One thing was, essentially, a guaranteed amount of property tax revenue. So, regardless of what the data center ultimately was valued at, the village was guaranteed a certain level of property tax payments. But it went beyond that. There were tens of millions of dollars of payments for a variety of things. Some things you might think are obvious, like the data center developer would have had to pay for the infrastructure needed for water improvements, for street improvements, that sort of thing. But it also went to millions of dollars to preserve and improve the area of the Yajara River. And there was also millions of dollars for something that seems unrelated to a data center, and that being affordable housing. So I think that what that example showed was that there are a variety of things that a community that is considering a data center can negotiate for.
Powers: The company proposing the data center withdrew its proposal after DeForest introduced its community benefit agreement.
But elsewhere, this is being solved at the state level, as Wisconsinites watch.
Who decides?
Woods: On the same hot July day that Sheboygan debated its moratorium, New York state passed a statewide data center moratorium — pausing all data center construction for a year. Theoretically, this gives the state time to decide on what terms it would allow data center construction, instead of leaving it up to individual local governments to negotiate with tech giants like Meta and Microsoft.
And this moratorium was on the mind of Sheboygan residents.
Sheboygan Resident: The governor of New York today signed a moratorium statewide for New York. They are joining hundreds of other cities who are doing this. If New York State can put a halt on this for a little while, there is no reason why Sheboygan can’t.
Powers: But here in Wisconsin, there is no statewide data center moratorium or other regulations. So, local governments like Sheboygan and Beaver Dam are left with the power to decide. That’s one issue on voters’ minds in swing districts like Sheboygan: who gets elected to solve the question of what to do when a data center comes to town?
Powers: Sarah Arndt loves living in Sheboygan. She previously lived in Oshkosh, Green Bay and Chicago, but says Sheboygan’s natural beauty is a cut above the rest.
Sarah Arndt: It’s just so stunningly beautiful. I feel so lucky to live here. I have many pinch-me moments all the time that I get to live here. I have friends and family who visit here and say they don’t feel like they’re in Wisconsin, that it feels like another country because it’s just so beautiful.
Powers: Arndt attended that Sheboygan Plan Commission meeting in July, which we heard at the beginning of this episode. She was commenting in support of the data center moratorium. She says she’s never spoken in a public meeting before. But she sees what's happening across the state, and she couldn’t sit this one out.
Arndt: What brought me out here today is reading stories of communities across the country, especially locally in Wisconsin and Beaver Dam in particular, seeing the quality of the water, the noise pollution, and personally driving by the data center construct in Port Washington and quite literally feeling physically ill when I drive by, thinking that that could be in my city, Sheboygan.
Woods: But while Sarah knows where she stands, she’s less sure of whose say matters. Local governments across Wisconsin are individually answering the question of “what to do when a data center comes to town.”
And the answer isn’t always clear cut.
Arndt: There's so many different people in play here that have power — the plan commission, the council, state level, federal level. And so, I guess, yeah, it makes me nervous because I don't know for sure who has the power to make these decisions. And I think that that's really scary for the public in Wisconsin.
Data centers and the midterms
This November, Wisconsin voters are electing candidates across state government. That includes governor, attorney general and the state legislature.
As we mentioned earlier in this episode, data centers — especially AI data centers — are extremely unpopular and are on a lot of voters’ minds.
And unlike many other issues we’ll discuss in this season of Swing State of the Union, data center opposition isn’t partisan. Philip Rocco, chair of the political science department at Marquette University, explains how this could break typical coalitions we see come Nov. 3.
Philip Rocco: So, if you think about the last few decades of Wisconsin politics, it's really been dominated by the fact that Scott Walker, when he was elected governor and during his time in office, kind of consolidated the non-metropolitan area vote in Wisconsin behind the Republican party. The non-metro vote really prior to Walker had not been consolidated in favor of any one party. And so that split has really been an important factor in Wisconsin politics since the Walker years. And there are very few issues that pierce that veil. And data centers are one issue that pierces that partisan and geographical divide. If you ask Wisconsinites, the vast majority of Wisconsinites — Republican, Democratic and Independent — say that the costs of hyperscale data centers outweigh their benefits.
Powers: This means that a political candidate, especially a candidate for governor, could take a strong stance on data centers to re-orient traditional political lines in Wisconsin.
Rocco: And so, I think one of the really interesting things to see in this gubernatorial election is: how do the candidates kind of manage that valence issue? Neither of the candidates at this point has taken a very clear bright-line stand in favor of, for example, even a temporary statewide moratorium. But each, one could imagine, is going to try to claim the mantle of some level of opposition to data centers. What that actually translates to in terms of policy commitments is, in a way, anybody's guess.
Crowley vs. Tiffany on data centers
Woods: Wisconsin’s current Democratic governor, Tony Evers, isn’t running for reelection. That left a wide open field in the Democratic primary.
Democratic socialist Francesa Hong was one of the candidates. She ran on a platform that included a statewide data center moratorium — mirroring similar legislation in New York state. And it was essentially a statewide version of what the City of Sheboygan passed in July. But after the more moderate Democrat, David Crowley, narrowly defeated Hong in the August primary, he balked at this solution. Here’s Crowley in an interview with NBC News.
NBC Interviewer: Can you name one issue where you disagree most with her, one of the biggest issues?
David Crowley: Well, one of the biggest issues that we did have a disagreement on was related to the data centers. She wants to see a moratorium here in the state of Wisconsin, where I don't believe a moratorium would actually work, because you can't place a moratorium on buildings that are currently here.
Woods: For Republican gubernatorial nominee Tom Tiffany, this was an opening to differentiate himself from Crowley. He immediately ran ads to position Crowley as pro-data center.
Tom Tiffany Ad Narrator: “Data Center David” Crowley won't roll back data center tax incentives. Our lakes run dry. Family farms paved over.
Woods: Tiffany currently represents northwest Wisconsin in Congress. Last year, he voted in favor of a version of the Big Beautiful Bill that would have prohibited states and local governments from regulating AI for 10 years. Last December, he voted for the SPEED Act, which cuts environmental regulation to hasten construction of AI infrastructure — infrastructure like data centers.
Powers: Tiffany and Crowley’s stated positions are generally similar in that they see a place for data centers in Wisconsin, but with restrictions. Both want to ban the use of NDAs between local governments and companies, and both ultimately want individual communities to have the final say on whether a project moves forward.
Both candidates have acknowledged a need for guardrails. Tiffany’s guardrails are focused on keeping farmland away from data center development, and making data centers pay for their own energy and infrastructure costs. Here’s Tiffany talking to PBS Wisconsin about it.
PBS Wisconsin Interviewer: And what about data centers?
Tom Tiffany: Yes, so in regards to the data centers, exciting new technology. I think we need to make sure, on the energy side of it, that we do not harm existing rate payers — so residential rate payers and manufacturers. It would be unfair to existing manufacturers for them to pay much higher electricity rates just because a new industry came in.
Powers: Crowley’s proposed guardrails also include protections for utility upgrades and ratepayers. But unlike Tiffany, Crowley wants new developments to commit to using union labor for construction, and include community benefit agreements. Here’s Crowley in that same NBC interview.
Crowley: This is about how do we protect ourselves from the current infrastructure as it relates to our water, our air, and our land. And so, we can do all those things while also not preempting communities that have done their due diligence to allow for different types of economic development investments.
Woods: But if data centers are so unpopular, why wouldn’t a gubernatorial candidate seize the opportunity to come out more strongly against them?
As Philip Rocco explains, an unorganized majority can still lose to a well-organized minority, who ould benefit from data center construction.
Rocco: You can have a group of people who are really broadly diffused throughout the population that feel a particular way about that issue. They might care about it a lot, but they don't get up every morning and think about it. It's not their job. And you can contrast that with a group that's concentrated, a concentrated constituency, that might have a lobby. It might have a political action committee. It has people who are getting up thinking about this every day, because perhaps it relates to that constituency's ability to generate profits, or to get jobs for its members if it's a labor union. Whatever the case may be. And in general, in political science, when there is a conflict that pits a broadly diffuse constituency against a well-organized, concentrated one, the organized and concentrated one — the one that has political action committees and lobbies — tends to prevail.
Regulating data centers
Powers: So once a candidate is elected, what power do they have when it comes to data centers?
Wisconsin’s governor could influence data center regulation. They also have the power to appoint new members to the state’s Public Service Commission every two years. The commision can approve or deny energy rate increases for consumers caused by data centers.
But the state Legislature also has power.
Woods: New statewide regulation would be up to the legislature and governor, through the normal lawmaking process. Tom Kertscher, the reporter covering data centers for Wisconsin Watch, says the new legislature is likely to take this up. He notes that the current legislature has failed to take action on data center concerns.
Kertscher: This past year, there were maybe a half a dozen or so bills that would have regulated data centers, for example, forbidding non-disclosure agreements. None of those became law. I would say look for something to happen in the legislature when it reconvenes in January. Not to say it would be taken up immediately, but sometime during the next session it seems likely that there could be data center regulations put in place on a state level.
Woods: As part of the 2023-2025 state budget, Wisconsin began exempting sales tax on construction of new large projects, including data centers. This is likely to change after November’s election.
Kertscher: I think at the time when that law was passed, there was not a realization of just how big of a phenomenon data centers would be. Now people are seeing, “Gee, we could potentially have $2 billion in revenue. We need to rethink this.” And so, some states have done that. Some states have limited their sales tax exemptions. Some have gotten rid of them for data centers. So, that's another possibility when the legislature comes back in January is a review of that exemption
Woods: Beyond this, it’s hard to know exactly what Wisconsin’s state regulations of data centers will look like a year from now. But there is growing demand for the state to take action, rather than letting townships and city councils go toe-to-toe with corporate giants.
Kertscher: A lot of these data centers end up going into smaller communities that sort of, by definition, have fewer public employees, maybe less legal and financial expertise overall. And you're dealing with multi-billion dollar corporations. So, if it's left to sort of each community to try to figure out the best way to manage a data center proposal, maybe the view is that some of that should be covered at a state level and so that key questions are covered in that way, rather than piecemeal.
Powers: While guidance from the state government may come, once newly elected candidates take office in January. For now, local governments like Sheboygan have a lot of the power. And residents like Sarah Arndt want to know who will have the final say on data centers.
Arndt: I was so nervous coming to this tiny little meeting and to know that there's so many other people that were involved today that could have a say in this, that I don't even know who they are or what laws are written that support this or would make an impact on this type of decision. It's overwhelming, and it's scary to not know who's in charge and who has the ultimate say.
Powers: But despite the uncertainty, concerns over data centers are motivating people like Sarah. And this will not be her last time speaking out.
Arndt: I don't intend to stop today. This is my first step, and I intend to continue sharing my thoughts and feelings with whoever will listen.
Woods: Next episode, we’ll explore Wisconsin’s food system, and how federal dollars can determine which farms succeed, and which ones fail.
Small farms, big bills. Next time on Swing State of the Union. I’m Sam Woods.
Powers: And I’m Joy Powers. Swing State of the Union is produced by WUWM, Milwaukee’s NPR — a part of the NPR Network. Please subscribe to the Swing State of the Union podcast on the NPR app, or wherever you like to listen.
