{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"fa44f5df-b34b-4b32-b638-1220d1a76456","jurisdiction_id":"ca6d1e1e-59af-49ed-baa1-e14bcd79e9ce","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"02f2678b-13c9-4027-8f30-de36a5b7eff6","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Watermarked unsigned petition/draft, not accepted exact ballot or adopted law. Main base-value test projected to or exceeding10millionUSD versus strict project-cost exceedance and disjunctive exception not-exceeding language remain unresolved. WPR context does not override draft or establish current litigation/force. Source TimesCast4201 retained separately from TotalVotes4081; residual120 not blank/under/over. City distinct from town; no inferred precinct count. No final result certification is accepted; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["general","data_center"],"title":"Tax Incremental District Voter Approval Referendum","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Issue 17","election_id":"0be99dc2-d636-4e78-a563-2d84fda5aead","jurisdiction_id":"f4e8bed7-d4b1-4399-aee8-ef1511724f60","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"08764d5e-d79e-430d-bc6b-ae74d4520da5","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Official county CMS list identifies proposed Article IX Section9.06 and Issue17; full primary ballot remains unrecovered. Printed F/C dates retained without assuming result certification or effect. Source Yes, Winner is an election-night UI label, not accepted formal outcome or legal force. City in Butler County is distinct from Trenton Township in Delaware County. No final result certification is accepted; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Issue 17 — Prohibition of Construction of a Data Center","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"Issue 10","election_id":"56a3047e-717e-40c8-a875-42e67c76f699","jurisdiction_id":"c8f2abde-2b9e-4866-9c43-4294427fb960","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"098feb4e-170b-440b-b71a-67206e73e4cf","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Proposed Article XVI construction prohibition and >25 MW aggregate monthly demand/peak load definition reviewed, including parcel aggregation. Bindingness classifies the proposed charter norm, not current operative force. Self-executing clause is not an accepted effective date; adjacent statewide Issue 3 immediate-effect sentence does not apply. All results are unofficial; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Proposed Charter Amendment","wording":"Shall the Charter of the City of Conneaut be\r\namended to add Article XVI to read as follows:\r\nARTICLE XVI CONSERVATION OF\r\nNATURAL RESOURCES\r\nSection XVI-1. Prohibition of Construction\r\nof a Data Center\r\n(A)The construction of a data center is hereby\r\nprohibited. \r\n(B)As used in this Section, “construction” shall\r\nmean the erection of one or more buildings,\r\ninfrastructure, facilities, and related activities,\r\nwhich include preparations and modifications\r\nfor same, for a common purpose. \r\n(C)As used in this Section, “data center” shall\r\nmean one or more buildings or physical\r\nfacilities or infrastructure, located on a single\r\nreal property parcel or on contiguous, adjacent,\r\nor otherwise aggregated real property parcels\r\nthat (1) Are used primarily or exclusively for\r\ndigital information services such as the\r\nmanagement, storage, processing, and\r\ndissemination of electronic data and\r\ninformation through the use of computer\r\nsystems, servers, networking equipment, and\r\nrelated components, including equipment\r\ncooling systems; and (2) Has an aggregate\r\nmonthly demand or peak load of greater than\r\ntwenty five (25) megawatts, however derived\r\nfrom any energy source, or a combination\r\nthereof. \r\n(D) This Section is self-executing. \r\nShall the proposed charter amendment be\r\nadopted?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"Issue 25","election_id":"27806119-8541-4d3b-a121-c21626c159e3","jurisdiction_id":"efe3244a-d416-43b1-a2c1-b14f574ce430","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"0d55b934-caa7-4a56-a282-70ea50ad938a","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Proposed Article XIII Section 8 construction prohibition; monthly demand or peak load greater than 25 MW, aggregated parcels and any energy source. Self-executing proposed text does not establish actual effect date. All results are unofficial; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Issue 25 — Prohibition of Construction of a Data Center","wording":"Shall the Charter of the City of Oregon be amended to add Section 8 to Article XIII to read as follows?\n\nArticle XIII, Section 8; Prohibition of Construction of a Data Center.\n\n(A) The construction of a data center is hereby prohibited.\n\n(B) As used in this Section, \"construction\" shall mean the erection of one or more buildings, infrastructure, facilities, and related activities, which include preparations and modifications for same, for a common purpose.\n\n(C) As used in this Section, \"data center\" shall mean one or more buildings or physical facilities or infrastructure, located on a single real property parcel or on contiguous, adjacent, or otherwise aggregated real property parcels that:\n\n(1) Are used primarily or exclusively for digital information services such as the management, storage, processing, and dissemination of electronic data and information through the use of computer systems, servers, networking equipment, and related components, including equipment cooling systems; and\n\n(2) Has an aggregate monthly demand or peak load of greater than twenty-five (25) megawatts, however derived from any energy source, or a combination thereof.\n\n(D) This Section is self-executing.","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Issue 16","election_id":"c6d4e9ae-d71e-48f3-aded-3a09af859299","jurisdiction_id":"f95c3af6-e9a2-411b-857b-0ab88c8831e3","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"13e74427-b2bf-4fbe-a49a-3edaa3b660fb","placement_method":"citizen_initiative","placement_source_term":"By Petition","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Fiscal Officer duties before village agreements with hyperscale data centers involving tax abatements, PILOT programs or special tax designation. Complete ordinance, hyperscale definition, financial guarantees and yes direction remain unresolved. Distinct from council Ordinance 2026-13 moratorium. All results are unofficial; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Issue 16 — Proposed Ordinance amending Chapter 133.01","wording":"The Proposed Ordinance amends Chapter 133.01 \"Established; Power and Duties\" of the Codified Ordinances of the Village of Perry regarding the duties of the Village Fiscal Officer before signing Village agreements with a hyperscale data center involving tax abatements, PILOT Programs, or any special tax designation.\n\nShall the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 133.01 \"Established; Power and Duties\" of the Codified Ordinances of the Village of Perry be adopted?","yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"Question 5","election_id":"d6f31abb-04c8-444e-be0c-13027a731a31","jurisdiction_id":"e096b8df-fdd7-449e-87c5-7673ca814d68","lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"17ff85b1-a03b-400f-8d45-c6bc022ac8fb","placement_method":"governing_body_referral","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Question/proposed mechanism and signed result return reviewed. Proposed term is 180 days from effectiveness, subject to earlier repeal, modification or permanent standards. Paragraph 5 refers both to voter enactment and seven days after adoption. Exact operative interval, later implementation and measure/instrument link remain unresolved; this record does not add an in-force legacy moratorium.","sectors":["data_center","cryptocurrency_mining"],"title":"Data Center Moratorium","wording":"Shall an ordinance entitled \"Town of Eliot Data Center Moratorium Ordinance\" be enacted and furthermore direct the appropriate staff, boards and committees to prepare permanent land-use standards for data centers during the moratorium period.","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Question 1","election_id":"ab87c5b6-1665-4da9-8b6b-28e9aebd2151","jurisdiction_id":"940d4c01-85c4-447f-ae82-80193944cfd2","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"1e4bf504-8c03-4232-b7de-59b9670551aa","placement_method":"governing_body_referral","placement_source_term":"City states council approved February24questions","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Official city wording/digest and county unofficial Question1returns. Digest describes Charter144voter use-approval gate: yes permits council potentially entering leases, does not require approval of any facility; land outside transfer area unaffected. Digest also says no addition/change/repeal of existing law; retain both statements pending independent charter review. Not ordinary advisory sentiment or citywide ban. City schedules November13canvass, not certification. Actual implementation and later force histories unresolved; no project or operative restriction link accepted.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Data Center Land-Use Approval in Eldorado Valley Transfer Area","wording":"Should data center facilities be an approved land use within the Eldorado Valley Transfer Area outside of the Multi-species Habitat Conservation Easement?","yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Article 3","election_id":"93be2e24-1efe-47ce-adb5-e6557ea2092b","jurisdiction_id":"9282285d-5643-4828-9553-8ea3a1cabda5","lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"25984627-a01d-4f92-a9ab-b8852f9c54b9","placement_method":"unknown","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Question/tally transcribed from public town-office-named account photograph; account affiliation and result certification not independently authenticated. Official town-linked draft has adoption/applicability blanks and no operative expiry clause. Preamble study need is not a duration. Passage rule/outcome, bindingness and current legal interval unresolved.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Data Center Moratorium Ordinance for the Town of Freedom","wording":"To see if the voters of the Town of Freedom will vote to adopt the Data Center Moratorium Ordinance for the Town of Freedom.","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"e1272f47-bfcb-47f3-90e3-76966b2e5964","jurisdiction_id":"e6a54703-febb-4d25-9b69-8a68819db034","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"26cd5ac0-e3b7-4f1f-95e5-92288b2ca508","placement_method":"citizen_initiative","placement_source_term":"Residents circulated petitions; council procedural placement described in August17 minutes","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Official named charter contest establishes data-center topic. August17 minutes describe petition origin, BOE signature certification and council procedural placement, not endorsement. Printed placement ordinance85-14 retained literally. Full primary ballot and independent underlying qualification instruments unresolved. No inferred2503 ballots from2461 votes plus42 undervotes. No final result certification is accepted; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Charter Amendment Prohibition of a Data Center","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"c30c151f-ac60-4746-a3fb-b32d02799e0e","jurisdiction_id":"9e9ebc0c-38a8-4a73-a4df-d9d8963ba7b3","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"2793ee67-f6d5-4d36-b97a-2be4aa41ce71","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"unresolved","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Mixed-sector city notice cites Resolution 313. Complete ordinance, thresholds, duration, qualification history and current force unresolved; Emporia definitions are not imported into Americus. Certification, formal reported/calculated outcome and operative restrictions remain unaccepted.","sectors":["data_center","battery_storage"],"title":null,"wording":"Shall the following be adopted?\n\n\"An Ordinance of the City of Americus, Kansas prohibiting the installation and operation of\nHigh Impact Data Centers and Tier 2 and Tier 3 battery energy storage systems to protect\nthe health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Americus, Kansas.\"","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"advisory","designation":"DATA CENTER CONSTRUCTION","election_id":"f8421e66-523a-496f-a18e-fb3cc2d24fba","jurisdiction_id":"f3c9ec93-af6d-470a-a56d-a0c44623dcb6","legal_basis":"60 ILCS 1/30-205, as cited in Resolution 2026-08","lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"2b8a9b61-1b1a-4b78-a917-1bda9e3d6582","placement_method":"other","placement_source_term":"Electors approved at annual township meeting; Supervisor/Board authorized submission by Resolution 2026-08","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Township advisory permission question addresses the separate Joliet City Council. Signed Resolution 2026-08 and county-clerk notice establish advisory submission; electors annual-meeting approval is recited by the resolution. Actual transmittal and complete petition history unresolved. Five-ballot source arithmetic discrepancy retained, with no forced category assignment. No result certification, formal outcome or operative restriction accepted.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":null,"wording":"Should the Joliet City Council approve construction of AI data centers?","yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"f39a438f-3021-4223-bd55-6b4854add7ef","jurisdiction_id":"168152e3-a230-4741-8737-e5c21be2b83e","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"3523d800-bd26-4897-8046-fb1f6d7aec06","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Village Section 10.12 filed summary and county result reviewed. The short filed description is not substituted for the full official ballot/charter text; reported 25 MW threshold, placement, duration and current force unresolved. Village A/B/C are distinct from the nearby township greenspace levy electorate. All results are unofficial; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Charter Amendment - Data Centers","wording":null,"yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"eec307f5-a262-48bb-8fa4-29a7faf73b25","jurisdiction_id":"3876c1f2-205f-4378-aeb0-c6384027db19","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"3f73bd25-a8d2-43ee-ac60-e73d8bf70565","placement_method":"citizen_referendum","placement_source_term":"By Petition","referendum_yes_effect":"upholds","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Official proof asks approval of the EdgeConneX Development and Supply Agreement Term Summary, not a citywide ban. By Petition route and yes-upholds polarity reviewed. Full Exhibit A, executed resolution/number, final agreement and post-referendum effect unresolved; no project cancellation inferred. All results are unofficial; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Referendum on Resolution","wording":"Shall the resolution enacting approval of a development and supply agreement term summary with EdgeConneX be approved?","yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"50c74b1d-a461-4586-bded-7934b570cc44","jurisdiction_id":"6c94e4d4-cf98-4a44-9137-9b6577a85581","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"41e0e550-2b59-496b-832f-3bea57d9017c","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Official named data-center charter contest establishes topic and electorate. Full primary question, proposal text, placement and yes direction remain unresolved. Recall contests are separate political events. All results are unofficial; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Charter Amendment — Data Centers","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Measure DB","election_id":"efa91d6a-1ad6-4e7a-8a97-7572b65da68b","jurisdiction_id":"1e1693ef-5444-4001-83e6-4b17bb9629d1","legal_basis":"California Elections Code section 9222","lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"4271387f-ad51-4d1b-a551-d27a09170c60","placement_method":"governing_body_referral","placement_source_term":"City Council submission","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"The July 27 council referral is distinct from the June 22 council ban. The unsigned DOCX contains proposed text, not certified voter enactment. The November 4, 5 and 6 county count observations are retained in sequence; November 6 is the latest retained source snapshot, not proof of final counts or certification. Reporting completeness, formal outcome and current legal force remain unresolved.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Data Centers Prohibited","wording":"Data Centers Prohibited. Shall an ordinance be adopted affirming the Council adopted ban on \"Data Centers\" by amending the Alhambra Municipal Code to again define \"Data Centers\" and prohibit them in all zones of the City?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"Article 3","election_id":"0da911ec-6d37-41b6-8f5f-ecf8e23ec2de","jurisdiction_id":"e8f7a146-af20-42b7-bf08-23ca98b881a4","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"441e2e2d-d00a-4d3a-b0e9-9b32b0ce2a99","placement_method":"town_meeting_article","placement_source_term":"Special Town Meeting warrant Article 3","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Article 3 is the pre-vote warrant question. The Sun Journal reports approval at the October 15 meeting; correspondence to Article 3 is inferred from the town, date, subject and accompanying $150,000 wastewater transfer. The report provides no exact tally or certified result. The warrant-attached proposed ordinance (PDF pages 4–5) and a separate town-posted version differ on the adopting body; the final motion, enacted text, effective date and legal force are unverified.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Data Center Moratorium Ordinance","wording":"Shall an ordinance entitled Data Center Moratorium Ordinance be enacted?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"Charter Amendment No. 4","election_id":"67c6ed54-add9-4922-b591-a6a685111b3d","jurisdiction_id":"e1ac7be1-1c98-4858-8a07-d22051e45436","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"450c4dec-de9f-4c00-9952-ede353e8f906","placement_method":"governing_body_referral","placement_source_term":"CityCouncil referral Ordinance2026-O-18passedAugust3perofficialLegistar","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Binding describes proposed charter prohibition, not actual operative force. Official county published title/summary/question agrees with city proposal; printed/cast ballot and final adopted charter text uninspected. CountyDOM/JSONreport7884yes2328no,explicitlyunofficial. Proposed amendment effect requires certification; referral ordinance adoptionAugust3is distinct. Proposal1.01(m)differsfromstaffsummary(l); final lettering unresolved. Other charter amendments/recycling excluded. No current prohibition, effect interval or project-policy link accepted.","sectors":["data_center","cryptocurrency_mining"],"title":"Prohibition on New Data Centers","wording":"PROHIBITION ON NEW DATA CENTERS\n\nAmends the Charter to prohibit the approval, construction, expansion, or operation of new data centers within the City; prohibits the City from issuing development approvals or permits authorizing such facilities; defines “data center”; and requires voter approval before the Charter prohibition may be amended or repealed.\n\nShould the City Charter prohibit new data centers within the City?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"advisory","designation":null,"election_id":"ea3359c1-bf42-4c0f-83ee-d23fcaafda13","jurisdiction_id":"ed52a42a-7be9-471b-8509-49b6a934473a","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"47406a81-c6fe-4869-81c6-72b8673f89e1","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"The official sheet labels this township permission question advisory. A yes vote favors permission, not a moratorium. Earlier/current CSV snapshots are retained; full precinct reporting does not establish certification or complete ballot accounting. Qualification and later legal actions remain unreviewed.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":null,"wording":"Shall the construction and operation of new data centers be permitted in Chouteau Township?","yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"27a54536-3907-436e-81e1-346ec8b8cb5b","jurisdiction_id":"1a42c407-061d-422e-bec7-326428277efd","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"4aae7426-c37b-4423-bfec-72bb811c3658","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Official county charter contest and counts reviewed. September 1 council agenda schedules first reading of a Section 1.12 referral, not its adoption. Exact ballot/definition, placement-route conflict and binding effect unresolved; older six-month council moratorium is distinct. All results are unofficial; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Proposed Charter Amendment - Prohibition of a Data Center","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Question 2","election_id":"41b87a8d-4564-4f99-baf2-cd0904c999a0","jurisdiction_id":"a24664c9-5ede-4f7e-995c-680d939a7191","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"549b3830-0ded-4c17-995c-b2d78eb6e128","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"unresolved","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Question 2 is distinct from the battery question. Resolution 3799 expressly conditions publication/enactment after a yes majority on a court validity determination or further order. Current court disposition and legal force unresolved. Certification, formal reported/calculated outcome and operative restrictions remain unaccepted.","sectors":["data_center","cryptocurrency_mining"],"title":null,"wording":"Shall the following ordinance be adopted?\n\nAn Ordinance of the City of Emporia, Kansas Prohibiting the Installation and Operation of High Impact Data Centers","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Article 4","election_id":"dd0da449-1c45-4017-9ae7-859ff9ceddcf","jurisdiction_id":"5a7dc369-67fa-408d-b1f5-c6737198e116","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"5c04c593-949a-430b-88c0-c8e93b4618fd","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Question proposes permanent all-zone prohibition; counts visually reviewed. Referral, bindingness, passage rule, certification and operative legal effect remain unresolved.","sectors":["data_center","cryptocurrency_mining"],"title":null,"wording":"Are you in favor of amending the Town of Canterbury Zoning Ordinance to ban data centers?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"advisory","designation":"Public Question","election_id":"fdb20165-cce9-4786-ad0b-7e019f3859e1","jurisdiction_id":"8f2ca54e-9010-44bb-b06d-a08242ba0b30","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"6b8fad47-5a06-4041-a343-00951df4acd4","placement_method":"governing_body_referral","placement_source_term":"R-111-2026 committee referral following earlier citizen petition described in R-99-2026","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"County official sample and R-111 attachment gauge sentiment; no means opposition, not automatic ban. July R-99 recites earlier binding initiative/petition; independent sufficiency and legal basis applicability unresolved. Separate Ordinance2026-04 adoption reported October19, before November3vote, so not enacted by vote. Earlier ordinance packet has unresolved operative text; no force date/link accepted. Result62yes425no from secondary NJ.com only; official canvass and certification unresolved.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Data Centers Advisory Question","wording":"Do you support data centers in the Township of Downe.","yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"advisory","designation":null,"election_id":"354de043-83f0-4188-a3c2-bedf20c8ece4","jurisdiction_id":"41d6931e-6dfe-49e5-85d5-e3c92e0d7eea","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"78c343c7-42b3-430e-852e-8050fe366ed4","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"The official sheet labels this township permission question advisory. A yes vote favors permission, not a moratorium. Earlier/current CSV snapshots are retained; full precinct reporting does not establish certification or complete ballot accounting. Qualification and later legal actions remain unreviewed.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":null,"wording":"Shall the construction and operation of new data centers be permitted in Nameoki Township?","yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"2ab8bf56-7807-44c9-9211-a83615da41dc","jurisdiction_id":"cd29fee5-e92e-4cac-b724-c0cd70eb451c","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"7a69751b-85d5-4086-a305-acd411d80b29","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Official named city charter contest establishes topic and counts; full primary wording, placement, yes policy direction and operative effect remain unaccepted. Local newspaper reports conjunctive wholly-owned single-enterprise <7.5MW exception, not a general size definition or imported25MW threshold. Code overview local cutoffJuly21 predates election. Recall remains distinct. No final result certification is accepted; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Urbana City Charter Amendment - Data Centers","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"b536f8ea-2a8c-440a-9a68-702167e2ef17","jurisdiction_id":"af47f0c0-d579-43cf-8702-2f988b99d615","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"7f50b873-303f-4428-9b54-0ed235160aa7","placement_method":"citizen_initiative","placement_source_term":"Clerk reports direct-legislation petition and signature certification","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Unsigned FileOrdinance2026-926 proposal and clerk memo, not accepted final ballot/adopted ordinance. Rule exceeding450millionUSD versus exception under450million leaves equality interpretation unresolved. Adjacent cohesive campuses and phased costs included; routine changes after approval and new proposals after rejection distinct. Qualifying3927signatures differ from submitted signatures. Industry association account opposed referendum; city and town distinct. Exact final wording, yes polarity and current force unresolved. No final result certification is accepted; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["general","data_center"],"title":"Development Referendum — GM/JATCO Site","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"O-26-04","election_id":"d9ec705b-cc42-4127-9ec1-8baa301781c6","jurisdiction_id":"a678d929-6944-4bf2-bd60-ef0c3a3ebe98","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"812715e9-2216-4bbf-8b69-a9d6cbd8e7ec","placement_method":"citizen_referendum","placement_source_term":"By Petition","referendum_yes_effect":"upholds","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"By-petition referendum onO-26-04, 119.373acres at/onSR730; yes approves/no rejects general parcel rezoning. Acreage is parcel identity, not regulatory threshold. Data-center association is source-qualified local reporting: nearby AWS campus and prospective standalone Ardent proposal are distinct. No accepted project identity/approval/coverage or citywide data-center prohibition. Original ordinance and current zoning implementation remain unreviewed. Separate proposed Chapter1161 initiative was refused placement, not voted here. No final result certification is accepted; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["general","data_center"],"title":"Wilmington Referendum Ordinance O-26-04","wording":"Shall Ordinance No. O-26-04 proposing to change the zoning of real property located on SR 730 (119.373 Acres) in the City of Wilmington, Ohio, be approved?","yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"0fc8eb30-44cf-4eb9-ba29-17d11f81f9b4","jurisdiction_id":"140c1ffb-32a1-4ecc-98d3-571e16ed705c","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"scheduled","measure_id":"83ff84da-8ba3-4484-9ba2-22d2107f7eec","placement_method":"citizen_referendum","placement_source_term":"referendum petition","referendum_yes_effect":"unresolved","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Resolution 26-1146 calls submission of Ordinance 26-1008 to qualified city electors. The shared intended election link is provisional; actual joint administration, final date and final ballot are unknown. Scheduled means a future election was called, not that ballot appearance is established. The petition exhibit proposes FOR as approval and AGAINST as rejection; final ballot identity and result are unknown. No operative force is inferred.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"SF ARK1, LLC Ordinance 26-1008 referendum","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"Data Center Moratorium","election_id":"46c34593-3708-486c-badb-d59073cce907","jurisdiction_id":"9e7bde0b-52ba-415f-9c36-e132bbd8068a","lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"87476c3d-5ab8-4005-9efe-1bd1b3ddd69e","placement_method":"unknown","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Official sample ballot asks enactment and describes a nominal May 2, 2027 endpoint (180 days), unless municipal officers extend or repeal. Signed return and secondary reported approval reviewed. Operative ordinance, applicability/effective dates, exemptions, passage rule and legal-force interval remain unresolved; no in-force legacy moratorium is added.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Temporary Moratorium on Data Centers in the Town of Sabattus, Maine","wording":"Shall an ordinance entitled 'Temporary Moratorium on Data Centers in the Town of Sabattus, Maine' be enacted? If enacted, the Moratorium would remain in effect until May 2, 2027 (180 days), unless extended or repealed by the municipal officers.","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"Issue 28","election_id":"8cc6ecf9-bf0c-4b88-bea6-6265a2127255","jurisdiction_id":"1ad6161f-2212-4c8d-a6cc-f4645d280bc9","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"8d5e74e3-2f82-43b2-98c9-fc844a630bf3","placement_method":"citizen_initiative","placement_source_term":"by petition / as proposed by initiative","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Proposed binding charter voter-approval requirement, not an accepted operative restriction. Initial alternative tests are >=50 contiguous acres, >20 MW peak power, or >500000 gallons daily water, with aggregation rules. Full proposal uses cumulative >10% expansion tests while city FAQ says >=10%; notice calls Article XI while full proposal retains Article [X]. Preserve versions. Future-project 50%+1 vote, 24-month reapplication bar and 180/90-day existing-facility windows are not the charter amendment passage rule, duration or effective date. Return is labelled Franklin County Only; cross-county reconciliation not attempted. All results are unofficial; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Exact final printed wording is not asserted from summaries/notices.","sectors":["data_center","general"],"title":"Community Consent Amendment","wording":null,"yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"9fa689a0-e3da-4403-9314-6acb525f2922","jurisdiction_id":"63b0ba3f-f334-4cf9-bfd2-369c02224362","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"93e829d2-607c-43fb-b42c-fb768d6f222a","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"unresolved","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"General land-use plan for the unincorporated township, describing higher-impact development and infrastructure and service burdens. Empty sectors means unknown. For means approval of the plan; development-relative direction, legal effect, complete plan, implementation and current force are unresolved. Unofficial contest votes are distinct from Times Cast 646 / 1,156.","sectors":[],"title":"Proposed Zoning Plan","wording":"Proposed Zoning Plan\nTownship of Sprigg\nA majority affirmative vote is necessary for passage.\n\nA Resolution enacted under Section 519 of the Ohio Revised Code, titled \"Sprigg Township Zoning Resolution\", governing the unincorporated area of Sprigg Township, Adams County, Ohio, to preserve the rural and agricultural character of the Township, protect public health, safety, and general welfare, allow reasonable use of property with minimal unnecessary regulation, provide a predictable process for review of higher-impact development, ensure that uses with potentially significant impacts are evaluated and reasonably mitigated, and to promote orderly and compatible land use consistent with Township infrastructure and services.\n\nPursuant to the authority conferred by Section 519 of the Ohio Revised Code, and for the purpose of protecting agricultural, residential, and small-scale uses; preventing unreasonable burdens on roads, infrastructure, and public services; providing uniform and objective standards for land use review; and to carry out zoning authority in a manner consistent with Ohio law.\n\nShall the zoning plan for the unincorporated area of the Township of Sprigg as adopted by the Township of Sprigg be approved?\n\nFor the Zoning Resolution\nAgainst the Zoning Resolution","yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"01dad953-5ece-48f6-8d9a-7a3b0c5708d0","jurisdiction_id":"0ef13278-49a7-44b2-a99a-3e59d6289c1d","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"9423728f-58da-4777-8382-85b8ced2c024","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"unresolved","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Official notice describes ten years; linked unsigned petition/proposal has no ten-year expiration clause. Preserve both versions; proposed classification/duration and operative effect unresolved. BESS classification is not reduced to a simple >80 kWh test. Certification, formal reported/calculated outcome and operative restrictions remain unaccepted.","sectors":["data_center","battery_storage","cryptocurrency_mining"],"title":"City of El Dorado Question","wording":"Shall the following be adopted:\n\n“An Ordinance of the City of El Dorado, Kansas, prohibiting the installation and operation of High Impact Data Centers (defined as data centers with a peak electrical load exceeding ten (10) megawatts, or a daily water draw exceeding one hundred thousand (100,000) gallons) and Tier 2 and Tier 3 battery energy storage systems (defined as systems with an aggregate energy capacity greater than 80kWh). If adopted, this Ordinance shall remain in effect for ten (10) years and may not be repealed or amended during that period except by a vote of the electors.”","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"Initiated City Measure No. 1","election_id":"4996f03f-b9bb-49e2-afdc-317e8864c414","jurisdiction_id":"b6090961-1e68-487b-8f94-23a3a707f009","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"scheduled","measure_id":"9c3fc4c8-b492-452f-894a-142b317c3c8f","placement_method":"citizen_initiative","placement_source_term":"City describes citizen-initiated petition","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"City schedules December15 special election. Approved summary says25MW or more, with capacity/demand and territorial qualifiers. Publication date/online-location fields are blank. Proposed prohibition is not an adopted restriction. Both capacity and demand must be below25MW for below-threshold provision; no entitlement to approval. Objective aggregation, lawful existing operation and vested-right limits retained. No fixed duration or actual legal effect date accepted. Mandan is distinct from MortonCounty and its separate moratorium. Approved-summary wording is a reviewed source version, not proof completed publication or final election-ready printing. No current operative restriction is accepted.","sectors":["data_center","cryptocurrency_mining"],"title":"Large-Scale and Multiple Data Centers Initiated Ordinance","wording":"Shall the Mandan Code of Ordinances be amended to prohibit large-scale and multiple data centers with a designed, contracted, requested, or reasonably anticipated electrical capacity or aggregate electrical demand of 25 MW or more within the City of Mandan and within certain territory subject to the City of Mandan zoning authority?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":null,"election_id":"82178328-b9e1-4c2c-9dd9-41212f360f9b","jurisdiction_id":"5345c3a3-8974-4129-9f0a-aed97486bd2a","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"9dcca4b9-b901-488b-aa23-3aaa3d1c6f4d","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Proposed Article XI Section11.05 construction prohibition; aggregate monthly demand or peak load >25MW, any source or combination, aggregated parcels, digital services including cooling. Self-executing proposal; no actual effective date accepted. Nearby statewide Issue3 immediate-effect language is not part of this question. No final result certification is accepted; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Prohibition of Construction of a Data Center","wording":"The proposed amendment would amend the Charter of the City of Sunbury to add Section 11.05 to Article XI to read as follows:\nArticle XI, Section 11.05: Prohibition of Construction of a Data Center.\n(A) The construction of a data center is hereby prohibited.\n(B) As used in this Section, \"construction\" shall mean the erection of one or more buildings, infrastructure, facilities, and related activities, which include preparations and modifications for same, for a common purpose.\n(C) As used in this Section, \"data center\" shall mean one or more buildings or physical facilities or infrastructure, located on a single real property parcel or on contiguous, adjacent, or otherwise aggregated real property parcels that:\n(1) Are used primarily or exclusively for digital information services such as the management, storage, processing, and dissemination of electronic data and information through the use of computer systems, servers, networking equipment, and related components, including equipment cooling systems; and\n(2) Has an aggregate monthly demand or peak load of greater than twenty-five (25) megawatts, however derived from any energy source, or a combination thereof.\n(D) This Section is self-executing.\nShall Article XI, Section 11.05 of the Charter of the City of Sunbury be adopted?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Measure NDC","election_id":"e89cc849-89f4-4d18-896d-bd871e9a9f51","jurisdiction_id":"fb3537c8-7c3d-45a1-812e-533ae20d4440","legal_basis":"California Elections Code section 9222","lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"ad8b3baf-cf43-4a4c-9cc5-c49be0c5547b","placement_method":"governing_body_referral","placement_source_term":"City Council submission","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"June 2 Measure NDC is distinct from council Ordinance 2278 and prior moratoria 2272/2274. County certification on June 26, city-clerk certification on June 30, council declaration on July 1 and signed Ordinance 2280 dated July 2 remain separate. Operative date and current legal force are unresolved.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Proposition to Prohibit Data Centers in Monterey Park","wording":"Proposition to Prohibit Data Centers in Monterey Park. Shall the ordinance amending the City of Monterey Park General Plan to prohibit data centers citywide to protect air quality, drinking water resources and public health; prevent impacts to electricity and water rates; with the prohibition of data centers continuing until ended by voters, be adopted?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Article 5","election_id":"1dd3daaa-7102-4912-9cf3-bb9121010f88","jurisdiction_id":"cafcd714-bd42-40fb-9fd1-95c96b7dd933","lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"b206b112-17bd-49ce-94c8-70d39807e53f","placement_method":"unknown","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Warrant Article 5 incorporates Appendix 1 proposed moratorium. Certified counts reviewed; submitted terms use 100000-square-foot aggregate definition and 180 days from June16applicability, not November vote. Bindingness, passage rule/outcome, enacted execution and current legal interval unresolved.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"An Ordinance to Establish a Retroactive Moratorium on Data Centers","wording":"Shall an ordinance entitled, \"An Ordinance to Establish a Retroactive Moratorium on Data Centers\" be enacted?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":null,"election_id":"56feed87-cdf8-41a5-81ae-0d4eba2d8a4a","jurisdiction_id":"57da8165-10cd-495d-aa10-c71a3132f3b0","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"b675cb6e-29ec-4123-8a92-5df91339725f","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Proposed Article XI Section 11.09 construction prohibition; monthly demand or peak load greater than 25 MW, aggregated parcels and any energy source. Adoption question says effective immediately; actual legal effect remains unaccepted. All results are unofficial; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Prohibiting of a Data Center","wording":"Article XI, Section 11.09. Prohibiting of a Data Center.\n\n(A) The construction of a data center is hereby prohibited.\n\n(B) As used in this Section, \"construction\" shall mean the erection of one or more buildings, infrastructure, facilities, and related activities, which include preparations and modifications for same, for a common purpose.\n\n(C) As used in this Section, \"data center\" shall mean one or more buildings or physical facilities or infrastructure, located on a single real property parcel or on contiguous, adjacent, or otherwise aggregated real property parcels that:\n\n(1) Are used primarily or exclusively for digital information services such as the management, storage, processing, and dissemination of electronic data and information through the use of computer systems, servers, networking equipment, and related components, including equipment cooling systems; and\n\n(2) Has an aggregate monthly demand or peak load of greater than twenty-five (25) megawatts, however derived from any energy source, or combination thereof.\n\n(D) This Section is self-executing.\n\nShall Article XI of the City of Pataskala Charter be amended to add Section 11.09 (Prohibition of a Data Center), thereby prohibiting the construction of a data center within the City limits, effective immediately?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"advisory","designation":null,"election_id":"b6f80382-ee23-4061-8b2d-eb98375dfd26","jurisdiction_id":"f18c1cf6-0ee3-4b22-baee-8494db6a56a9","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"be604a3b-dbb9-4603-b93f-d95993bb6f05","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"The official sheet labels this township permission question advisory. A yes vote favors permission, not a moratorium. Earlier/current CSV snapshots are retained; full precinct reporting does not establish certification or complete ballot accounting. Qualification and later legal actions remain unreviewed.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":null,"wording":"Shall the construction and operation of new data centers be permitted in Granite City Township?","yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Article 1","election_id":"eba90a50-d4d4-4e0d-bc6e-10d0bced9063","jurisdiction_id":"b3385b53-fd4b-4058-a4c8-693257489fde","lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"beabeb87-13d4-4453-893e-bf8939c3ade7","placement_method":"unknown","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Signed warrant Article1 asks approval of a temporary data-center moratorium; official tally labels Question1. Proposed 5000-square-foot aggregate threshold and literal less-than power wording retained without legal interpretation. Duration runs from September16applicability. Bindingness, passage rule/outcome, certification and operative legal interval unresolved.","sectors":["data_center","cryptocurrency_mining"],"title":"Temporary Moratorium on Data Centers","wording":"Will the Town approve the Town of Brownfield Ordinance to establish a temporary moratorium on data centers?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"6a6bae7a-0289-4e4b-ba73-4ad15fd4216d","jurisdiction_id":"140c2ebb-52f0-4404-adcd-6d877077edb9","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"c090f5d2-9808-47f2-a893-2cfb434abd20","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"City-hosted proposed ArticleX requires enhanced procedures for qualified industrial development requiring discretionary municipal approval. ANY ONE major threshold OR AT LEAST TWO moderate thresholds, plus applicability gate; not blanket prohibition, usage cap or future-project voter-approval requirement. Ministerial permit alone insufficient. Common-plan aggregation, independent review/public participation/written findings and retained municipal authority apply as proposed. Exact official ballot, qualification, certification, adopted text, actual effect and legal disposition unresolved. Separate sales/use-tax question and Horace fireworks contest excluded. Approved-summary wording is a reviewed source version, not proof completed publication or final election-ready printing. No current operative restriction is accepted.","sectors":["general","data_center"],"title":"Home Rule Charter Amendment — Article X Public Protection and Responsible Municipal Decision-Making","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Question 2","election_id":"a43ffc55-180f-4913-8906-7640b27b1ce6","jurisdiction_id":"de11937c-4ee7-4aac-965f-74f859f1b729","lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"c4ce2dde-f35c-462c-b2b3-d787aab94fa0","placement_method":"unknown","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Question 2 on sample ballot corresponds to warrant Article 4. Proposed temporary permitting pause; unofficial counts reviewed. Passage rule, outcome, certification, bindingness and operative legal interval remain unresolved. Broader election total is not accepted as question-specific ballots cast.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Data Center Moratorium","wording":"Shall an ordinance entitled Article X Miscellaneous, X-19 Data Center Moratorium be enacted?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Question 2","election_id":"bc43239e-0fbd-4bdf-a483-cf344d83920b","jurisdiction_id":"ae660fb3-5e56-43e4-ad63-2de37695e1db","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"cd8eb762-7802-4e75-8052-fd8c6610b916","placement_method":"governing_body_referral","placement_source_term":"Select Board approved ballot questions","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Enactment question for proposed permanent all-district prohibition subject to cumulative computing-use and aggregate-area definition. Select Board ballot approval and clerk-certified counts reviewed. Bindingness, passage rule/calculated outcome, adopted text and operative legal interval unresolved. URL November-4 slug does not override printed November 3 ballot date.","sectors":["data_center","cryptocurrency_mining"],"title":"Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Define and Prohibit Data Centers","wording":"Shall an Ordinance entitled \"Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Define and Prohibit Data Centers\" be enacted?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"advisory","designation":null,"election_id":"de671fe9-8379-42f4-9bb0-823b3a20308f","jurisdiction_id":"c1da6b54-13d9-459c-8bb9-44e43fd90ecd","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"d3007aed-4bb9-47c7-a959-97ccc9d6004e","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Township advisory question asks the City of Bloomington to implement a moratorium. Primary agenda identifies intended township electorate; specimen and election return confirm question/counts. Original placement disposition and boundary reference unresolved. No municipality-township identity merge, certification, formal outcome or operative moratorium accepted.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"ADVISORY DATA CENTER MORATORIUM","wording":"Should the City of Bloomington implement a moratorium on the creation of any large-scale data centers?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Article 2","election_id":"1362ad74-e994-4339-9be0-62c4f21da549","jurisdiction_id":"15e404ff-94e2-466e-a23f-49387468e3d8","lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"d4890c43-19ab-42e2-97bb-f2b35bcb66cc","placement_method":"unknown","referendum_yes_effect":"unresolved","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Town-hosted native results image identifies Article2 Data Center Moratorium and counts. Proposed title/terms reviewed; exact ballot wording remains unknown. September14Selectboard signatures do not establish November passage. Certification, placement, bindingness, passage rule/outcome and operative dates remain unresolved. Separate Total Voters774 is not a question denominator.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Temporary Moratorium of the Development and Permitting of Data Centers","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"advisory","designation":null,"election_id":"a111d6f1-bed7-4190-bfbb-1f9a5caa2a43","jurisdiction_id":"9c03efae-6c90-4aba-8eed-efe3608e4789","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"d52c3020-6210-4816-8d68-104f2eea6f16","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Signed resolution reproduction schedules August11, correcting frozen August8 lead. Proposed question says substantially as follows; exact final ballot remains unknown and secondary version omits large-scale. Advisory result does not itself authorize contracts, spending, zoning approval, development agreements or utility extensions. Separate Brown/Outagamie result observations are county parts, not whole village. Displayed source percentages use ContestTotals including undervotes. Mixed post-canvass/unofficial versions not a certified aggregate; original resolution/publication and village certification date unresolved. No final result certification is accepted; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Municipal Infrastructure and Data-Center Development Advisory Referendum","wording":null,"yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"advisory","designation":null,"election_id":"a47fbc48-6476-4711-8353-8f8c688f81c8","jurisdiction_id":"36933a75-0b86-4fd4-9f63-166910e5454b","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"d67367b9-bfc1-4d37-91d1-1129f1c61a75","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Official filed-issues list and return classify village question as advisory. Exact final ballot and adopted referral remain unrecovered; yes polarity remains unresolved. Source Total449, registered760 and rounded turnout59.61% are separate quantities; no ballots count or residual is inferred. Advisory result is not an enacted prohibition. All results are unofficial; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Exact final printed wording is not asserted from summaries/notices.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Data Center Advisory Question","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"0fc8eb30-44cf-4eb9-ba29-17d11f81f9b4","jurisdiction_id":"140c1ffb-32a1-4ecc-98d3-571e16ed705c","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"scheduled","measure_id":"d7faccbd-2d75-4999-bcc5-bdaebae1150c","placement_method":"citizen_referendum","placement_source_term":"referendum petition","referendum_yes_effect":"unresolved","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Resolution 26-1147 calls submission of Ordinance 26-1007 to qualified city electors. The shared intended election link is provisional; actual joint administration, final date and final ballot are unknown. Scheduled means a future election was called, not that ballot appearance is established. The petition exhibit proposes FOR as approval and AGAINST as rejection; final ballot identity and result are unknown. No operative force is inferred.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Hatchbo LLC Ordinance 26-1007 referendum","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"d9ec705b-cc42-4127-9ec1-8baa301781c6","jurisdiction_id":"a678d929-6944-4bf2-bd60-ef0c3a3ebe98","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"litigated","measure_id":"db2486d3-7256-42ab-811f-f96e7c776877","placement_method":"citizen_initiative","placement_source_term":"initiative petition","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"The September 18, 2026 Ohio Supreme Court slip opinion reports that the board refused certification for the intended November 3, 2026 election on August 12 and reaffirmed its decision on August 26; the court denied mandamus on September 18. This is a dated litigation history; later and current status are unknown. The original petition, ordinance and administrative instruments, later case and election history, and legal force were not independently reviewed.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Proposed Wilmington Zoning Code Chapter 1161 initiative","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"9c80f8ec-810c-4195-a6fb-c7d8e0cb9498","jurisdiction_id":"13a39261-e79f-40d6-8981-daccdcae1eb8","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"dd8c41b5-b10d-419c-afa7-91840eae1c2f","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"unresolved","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"General land-use plan for the unincorporated township, describing higher-impact development and infrastructure and service burdens. Empty sectors means unknown. For means approval of the plan; development-relative direction, legal effect, complete plan, implementation and current force are unresolved. Monroe 08/1 and 08/2 sample styles describe one question. Unofficial contest votes are distinct from Times Cast 255 / 401.","sectors":[],"title":"Proposed Zoning Plan","wording":"Proposed Zoning Plan\nTownship of Monroe\nA majority affirmative vote is necessary for passage.\n\nA Resolution enacted under Section 519 of the Ohio Revised Code, titled \"Monroe Township Zoning Resolution\", governing the unincorporated area of Monroe Township, Adams County, Ohio, to preserve the rural and agricultural character of the Township, protect public health, safety, and general welfare, allow reasonable use of property with minimal unnecessary regulation, provide a predictable process for review of higher-impact development, ensure that uses with potentially significant impacts are evaluated and reasonably mitigated, and to promote orderly and compatible land use consistent with Township infrastructure and services.\n\nPursuant to the authority conferred by Section 519 of the Ohio Revised Code, and for the purpose of protecting agricultural, residential, and small-scale uses; preventing unreasonable burdens on roads, infrastructure, and public services; providing uniform and objective standards for land use review; and to carry out zoning authority in a manner consistent with Ohio law.\n\nShall the zoning plan for the unincorporated area of the Township of Monroe as adopted by the Township of Monroe be approved?\n\nFor the Zoning Resolution\nAgainst the Zoning Resolution","yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"b931e55b-5dbf-4ffc-83af-5f596b5cedb8","jurisdiction_id":"91c2055d-8ba0-4b58-b340-bcf86882c8e6","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"unknown","measure_id":"ec540c52-3709-4f4b-8f2f-f4dac115d003","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"unresolved","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Notice title for intended primary election; final wording, placement, result, ordinance identity and sector are unestablished. Empty sectors means unknown, not no sector.","sectors":[],"title":"General Industrial Zoning Ordinance Ballot Proposal","wording":null,"yes_direction":"unresolved"}
{"bindingness":"advisory","designation":null,"election_id":"e833492f-352f-441b-a0ef-3b3c5f019208","jurisdiction_id":"49eda206-0ba0-4bf1-94dc-13f4ba6e732e","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"ec55a788-7d4c-4113-b57a-220a0b9fb8aa","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"The official sheet labels this township permission question advisory. A yes vote favors permission, not a moratorium. Earlier/current CSV snapshots are retained; full precinct reporting does not establish certification or complete ballot accounting. Qualification and later legal actions remain unreviewed.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":null,"wording":"Shall the construction and operation of new data centers be permitted in Venice Township?","yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Ballot Question","election_id":"86cb2cb7-eb33-48ce-8d46-7c3117c162f5","jurisdiction_id":"19bd8bad-2613-49e1-b428-bc3b0b1c0180","legal_basis":"RSA 674:23","lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"f03cb5ab-72d5-46cc-a493-81f0f8279b43","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Question proposes a twelve-month permitting pause. Town-posted marked SAMPLE BALLOT counts visually reviewed. Planning Board signatures support proposal only. Referral, bindingness, passage rule, certification and operative legal effect remain unresolved.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":null,"wording":"Shall the Town of Nottingham adopt a Temporary Moratorium on Data Centers Ordinance pursuant to RSA 674:23, which would prohibit the acceptance, processing, approval, or issuance of permits or approvals for the establishment, construction, expansion, or operation of data centers within the Town for a period of twelve (12) months, to allow the Town time to study potential impacts and develop appropriate zoning regulations?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"O-26-06","election_id":"d9ec705b-cc42-4127-9ec1-8baa301781c6","jurisdiction_id":"a678d929-6944-4bf2-bd60-ef0c3a3ebe98","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"f447f7d9-53fe-49bf-ac3a-dec05cd3a7a0","placement_method":"citizen_referendum","placement_source_term":"By Petition","referendum_yes_effect":"upholds","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"By-petition referendum onO-26-06, 191.12acres at/onMcGuinn Road; yes approves/no rejects general parcel rezoning. Acreage is parcel identity, not regulatory threshold. Data-center association is source-qualified local reporting: nearby AWS campus and prospective standalone Ardent proposal are distinct. No accepted project identity/approval/coverage or citywide data-center prohibition. Original ordinance and current zoning implementation remain unreviewed. Separate proposed Chapter1161 initiative was refused placement, not voted here. No final result certification is accepted; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["general","data_center"],"title":"Wilmington Referendum Ordinance O-26-06","wording":"Shall ordinance No. O-26-06 proposing to change the zoning of 191.12 acres of real property on McGuinn Road in Wilmington, Ohio, be approved?","yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":null,"election_id":"38c97aa5-1174-48fa-93ec-127029b0ee0e","jurisdiction_id":"cb8a11bd-8671-4f1f-9fd6-2b7eea5cf547","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"fa3817b8-b2d7-48d5-abc3-ac179fad4632","placement_method":"citizen_initiative","placement_source_term":"residents initiated ballot initiative","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"City petition notice establishes initiative origin and announces intended July 16 certification, not actual final qualification. County options explicitly approve/reject the data-center ban. Complete ordinance, precise scope/exceptions, adopted/referral records, certification and post-vote effect unresolved. Hubbard City is distinct from Hubbard Township. All results are unofficial; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Exact final printed wording is not asserted from summaries/notices.","sectors":["data_center"],"title":"Proposed Ordinance Data Centers","wording":null,"yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"Article 3","election_id":"110f0f1a-868c-4842-9bbc-3c839388def7","jurisdiction_id":"9f7d2aa0-2fdf-467a-a225-e26e2586a085","legal_basis":"Warrant question cites 30-A M.R.S. section 4356; statutory validity/applicability not independently accepted","lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"fb48b72d-58bc-4b3d-a635-3117192ff57b","placement_method":"governing_body_referral","placement_source_term":"Petition-origin proposal placed by signed September 14 warrant; minutes approve November 3 warrant articles 5-0-0. Independent petition sufficiency unverified.","referendum_yes_effect":"not_applicable","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Binding describes proposed adoption question, not verified operative law. Full signed/attested warrant image establishes wording; normalized line wraps, including visually read signature-overlaid tail. Petition plural ordinances/standards and applicable wording differs from warrant singular terms; preserve versions. Secondary newspaper reports unofficial1464yes/723no. Official/cast ballot, primary return/certification, formal passage rule/outcome, enrolled text, town-established effective date and later force remain unresolved. No legacy moratorium, project join or causal effect accepted.","sectors":["solar"],"title":"Commercial ground-mounted solar moratorium","wording":"Shall the Town of Jay adopt a 180-day moratorium, pursuant to 30-A M.R.S. § 4356, on the acceptance, processing, approval, issuance, or commencement of new commercial ground-mounted solar energy facilities within the Town of Jay, while the Town reviews and considers its comprehensive plan, land-use ordinance, permitting standard, siting requirements, environmental safeguards, decommissioning requirements, financial-assurance requirements, and other municipal regulations concerning such facilities?","yes_direction":"restricts"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"O-26-07","election_id":"d9ec705b-cc42-4127-9ec1-8baa301781c6","jurisdiction_id":"a678d929-6944-4bf2-bd60-ef0c3a3ebe98","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"fd0aaef5-9562-4deb-855c-540eec59c62a","placement_method":"citizen_referendum","placement_source_term":"By Petition","referendum_yes_effect":"upholds","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"By-petition referendum onO-26-07, 170.11acres at/onUS68South; yes approves/no rejects general parcel rezoning. Acreage is parcel identity, not regulatory threshold. Data-center association is source-qualified local reporting: nearby AWS campus and prospective standalone Ardent proposal are distinct. No accepted project identity/approval/coverage or citywide data-center prohibition. Original ordinance and current zoning implementation remain unreviewed. Separate proposed Chapter1161 initiative was refused placement, not voted here. No final result certification is accepted; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["general","data_center"],"title":"Wilmington Referendum Ordinance O-26-07","wording":"Shall Ordinance No. O-26-07 proposing to change the zoning of 170.11 acres of real property on US 68 South in Wilmington, Ohio, be approved?","yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"binding","designation":"O-26-05","election_id":"d9ec705b-cc42-4127-9ec1-8baa301781c6","jurisdiction_id":"a678d929-6944-4bf2-bd60-ef0c3a3ebe98","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"febb373a-2ff7-42e5-940a-30c76ed19266","placement_method":"citizen_referendum","placement_source_term":"By Petition","referendum_yes_effect":"upholds","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"By-petition referendum onO-26-05, 65.29acres at/on1957SR730; yes approves/no rejects general parcel rezoning. Acreage is parcel identity, not regulatory threshold. Data-center association is source-qualified local reporting: nearby AWS campus and prospective standalone Ardent proposal are distinct. No accepted project identity/approval/coverage or citywide data-center prohibition. Original ordinance and current zoning implementation remain unreviewed. Separate proposed Chapter1161 initiative was refused placement, not voted here. No final result certification is accepted; formal outcomes, operative restrictions and current force remain unaccepted. Printed wording is accepted only where the primary ballot was reviewed; otherwise it remains unknown.","sectors":["general","data_center"],"title":"Wilmington Referendum Ordinance O-26-05","wording":"Shall Ordinance No. O-26-05 proposing to change the zoning of real property located at 1957 SR 730 (65.29 acres) in the City of Wilmington, Ohio, be approved?","yes_direction":"facilitates"}
{"bindingness":"unresolved","designation":"Question 3","election_id":"41b87a8d-4564-4f99-baf2-cd0904c999a0","jurisdiction_id":"a24664c9-5ede-4f7e-995c-680d939a7191","legal_basis":null,"lifecycle":"voted","measure_id":"ff4589e6-f043-4067-a547-7711ecd79ed2","placement_method":"unknown","placement_source_term":null,"referendum_yes_effect":"unresolved","schema_version":"1.0.0","scope_note":"Question 3 is a separate battery measure, sharing the city/election identity with Q2. Resolution 3800 reserves judicial remedies and is not copied as Q2 prior-court enactment condition. The complete proposed ordinance appears as Exhibit A to Resolution 3800; complete-exemption and later legal review remain unresolved. Final issued-ballot wording remains unconfirmed. Certification, formal reported/calculated outcome and operative restrictions remain unaccepted.","sectors":["battery_storage"],"title":null,"wording":"Shall the following ordinance be adopted?\n\nAn Ordinance of the City of Emporia, Kansas Prohibiting the Installation and Operation of Type 2 and Type 3 Battery Energy Storage Systems","yes_direction":"restricts"}