Reading Time: 9 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• Electrical line work pays a median salary of more than $95,000 and does not require a college degree. 
• The demand for electricity, driven by data centers, means line workers enjoy job security and union benefits in addition to their salaries. 
• However, the work can be dangerous, with line workers exposed to the elements, heights and thousands of volts of power. 
• Wisconsin Watch visited a pre-apprenticeship program at Northcentral Technical College in Wausau that trains 14 students annually to learn more about the work.

On a sunny morning in late August, a dozen teenagers wearing reflective vests and work boots stand on a hill overlooking the farm fields of their central Wisconsin college.

A few steps away is the classroom where they’ll learn how electricity works. Beside it, a handful of poles six stories tall mark the training yard where they’ll train to install and repair power lines, a skill that’s increasingly in need as Wisconsin’s infrastructure ages and data centers demand ever more energy. 

Today, they’ll try out some of the toughest physical parts of the job — while racing against the clock. 

The students have just 30 minutes to dig a hole 4 feet deep and 2 feet wide. Then they must walk two 100-pound wooden pole chunks down the school’s dirt road and haul a 70-pound piece of wood up a 65-foot pole twice, using only a pulley and their own strength. The student who finishes in the shortest time wins.

This is day three of the nine-month Electrical Power Distribution Program at Northcentral Technical College in Wausau, which prepares about 14 students each year for careers with electric utilities or power line construction companies. 

It’s one of seven such programs at the state’s tech colleges, which together enrolled 265 students in 2025. 

With a median salary of more than $95,000, electrical line work is one of the country’s most lucrative jobs for people without a college degree. It can also be dangerous and draining, as it often involves long days of manual labor, as well as exposure to the elements, heights and thousands of volts of power.

Most of the students in this class were still in high school just a few months ago. By the end of September, they’d begun scaling utility poles six stories tall. Within a year, they could land apprenticeships that pay more than $34 an hour and put them on track to earn union pensions.

It’s instructor Marc Cegielski’s job to make sure they’re ready.

“It is physically demanding. It is mentally demanding, and your work-life balance is probably not going to be very good — unless you want your work-life balance to be more work than not work,” said Cegielski, who spent four years doing line work before he started teaching. He still works as a lineman for several weeks each summer to keep his skill sharp. 

The field of electrical line work is thriving. The country is expected to add 13,600 line worker jobs between 2025 and 2035, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. That’s a jump of 10%, much faster than the average for all jobs. In Wisconsin, the ranks are expected to swell nearly 14% from 2024 to 2034, with about 240 job openings projected each year. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 2150, which represents line workers and a variety of other workers in Wisconsin, reports its membership is at an all-time high. 

View this post on Instagram

One reason for that growth: the explosion of artificial intelligence. 

While the data centers that provide the computing power for all that AI tend to employ relatively few people once they’re up and running, constructing them takes a lot of labor. And it’s not just the work of building the data centers themselves. Hyperscale data centers, designed to be able to scale up their computing power as needed, will need massive amounts of electricity to power their computers, and Wisconsin will need to expand and update its electrical grid to meet the demand. Wisconsin’s first hyperscale data center opened in Mount Pleasant this summer, and others are under construction in Beaver Dam and Port Washington. Proposals for additional centers are under review in other communities, including Kenosha and Wisconsin Rapids.

The new energy demand comes at a time when states finally have the money to strengthen and expand aging electric grids, thanks to the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill signed into law in 2021. Those funds could help Wisconsin’s electrical infrastructure accommodate more energy sources and rebound more quickly after storms, changes proponents say are needed whether or not the state adds more data centers.

Meanwhile, line workers, like many other tradespeople, have been in increasingly short supply as Wisconsin’s workforce shrinks.  

“There’s never been a better time to get involved in this trade, and the work outlook right here at home in Wisconsin looks awesome for the next 10-plus years,” said IBEW Local 2150 business manager Jim Meyer. 

Risk versus reward

Installing and maintaining power lines is rewarding work, Cegielski said, because workers can see the difference they’re making. Sometimes they turn the lights back on after a storm. And sometimes, they bring electricity to a place that’s never had it, as he and a few students do each spring on the Navajo Reservation. 

“Getting people’s electricity back feels really good,” Cegielski said.

But the job isn’t for everyone. 

Line work involves heavy exertion in all kinds of weather. Machines can handle the tough tasks some of the time, but Cegielski warns his students there are plenty of times when they’ll need to dig or lift by hand because no machine is available, or it’d be too hard to maneuver the machinery — say, in a residential backyard. Plus, if there are buried utilities within 18 inches, mechanical digging is prohibited. 

“You can’t always use a machine. Sometimes you’re the machine,” Cegielski tells his students as they race to dig their holes. He says he’s sometimes spent a whole day digging a single hole, with or without a machine to help.

The students wipe their brows. One slips off his gloves. Cegielski urges them on. “Come on, man. The customer needs their electricity back.” 

With four minutes left on the clock, Sam Volm, 18, unfolds a ruler to check his progress. 

“I’m only about 2 feet deep! This is so crazy,” he says. He’s not alone. None of the holes are nearly deep enough. 

It’s just one example of the challenges of the job. Some line workers work for contractors hired by utility companies to build or maintain their infrastructure. Those workers could be on the road, often out of state, for weeks or months at a time. Line workers employed by local utility companies generally work close to home. Still, many work 12- to 16-hour shifts, and they may need to be available to help on nights or weekends.

“Your phone rings a lot,” Cegielski said. “You’re going to be missing a lot of things that you’d rather be doing with your friends and your family to answer that phone call and get people’s power back on so that they can cook supper, so that they can go to work and earn money for their own families.”

And then there are the safety concerns. Cegielski said he’s never been seriously injured doing line work, but he knows the risks that come from working with high voltage and at high heights, sometimes on busy roads. Electrical power line installers and repairers had the 16th highest fatal injury rate of all U.S. jobs, with an annual rate of around 24 fatalities and 189 nonfatal injuries per 100,000 workers, according to a USA Today analysis of federal data from 2020 and 2021.

Despite the challenges of the job, the training program at Northcentral Technical College consistently has a waitlist. 

For Volm, who’s worked in construction since he was 14, spending his days outside was part of the appeal. 

“You’re not behind a computer or nothing. It’s real physical work, it’s what I’m used to,” Volm said. 

His dad, an electrician, encouraged him to consider line work. Bigger lines mean bigger money, he said, plus he’d get to travel. 

The morning drill didn’t deter him. He’s been wrestling since first grade, so he’s got lots of practice putting his body to the test. 

“It was pretty tough, but I muscled through it, obviously, and embraced the suck.”

College classes not required

Training programs like these are an optional extra step for those looking to enter the field. Line workers get most of their training through apprenticeships that last three to six years and require only a high school diploma. But doing a program like the one at Northcentral Tech first gives students a chance to try out the work before they commit. 

That’s how Pat Keegan, a business agent with IBEW Local 2150, got started in the industry 25 years ago. 

“I’m glad I did it because I got comfortable with climbing and I knew I wanted to do this career,” Keegan said, though plenty of line workers go straight into apprenticeships. 

“I’ve seen people right out of high school, skip the tech school part of it … and have no issues,” Keegan said.

Prospective line workers shouldn’t assume this training will help them get an apprenticeship faster, Meyer said. Instead, they should think of it as a chance to solidify their skills and learn more about things like electrical theory. 

For Cegielski, the Northcentral Tech program is also about teaching the all-important “soft skills” that employers are increasingly looking for, like how to solve problems and persevere through challenges.

Take the August morning’s drill. What the students don’t know is that Cegielski designed the digging portion to be nearly impossible within the time limit.

“I like to observe to see, once they figure out they’re running out of time, do they continue trying, or do they give up? It’s a really good marker of character,” Cegielski said. “Even if they don’t think they can complete the task, they should keep going at it.”

Six other Wisconsin tech colleges offer electrical power distribution programs, but capacity is limited. Graduates earn around $43,000 more a year than the median high school graduate, according to an analysis of earnings data from three of the programs, conducted by Open Campus and The HEA Group. Program cost varies by school but typically runs from $8,500 to $11,000. 

Despite the growing demand for line workers, Northcentral Technical College hasn’t expanded its small program. Cegielski says he hasn’t heard anything about plans to do so. 

“They need more people than I can provide,” Cegielski said, “and I don’t see that changing anytime in the near future … I don’t know if that’s a problem that the technical college system wants to handle or can even handle.”

Leaders at Northcentral Technical College did not respond to a request for comment. 

Kristina Haensgen, a spokesperson for Moraine Park Technical College, which also trains future line workers, noted the “strong and ongoing demand for skilled electrical line workers” but said the school has no immediate plans to grow its program.

Chippewa Valley Technical College, Milwaukee Area Technical College and Southwest Wisconsin Technical College did not offer comment on their line worker training programs. 

If colleges do want to expand these programs, the booming industry might actually make it tougher, said Katy Pettersen, a spokesperson for the Wisconsin Technical Colleges System.

“We have not heard much on this front, other than colleges may be having trouble finding qualified instructors because the companies building the data centers are paying so well.”

Jobs aplenty

Meyer of IBEW Local 2150 said the number of apprenticeships available through his union depends on how much local employers are hiring. In a good year, there could be room for around 170 new apprentices, he said, and it looks like Wisconsin is on track for some good years. Those waiting for an apprenticeship can get jobs as “groundmen” assisting line-working crews until a spot opens. 

Cegielski talks with many of his former students, and he doesn’t think any of them are struggling to find work.

That stands in contrast to many other fields, where AI has left many uncertain about the future. Recent college graduates with four-year degrees are having more trouble finding jobs. Across the country, office workers are wondering if they’ll be replaced by increasingly powerful AI agents, or if they’ll have the skills they’ll need to use ever-more-ubiquitous AI tools. 

“At the moment, it doesn’t seem like AI is knocking at our door to take our jobs,” Cegielski said with a laugh. ”(The work) is hands-on, and it doesn’t look like machines and robots are going to be able to take it in the future. Maybe someday.”

Natalie Yahr reports on pathways to success statewide for Wisconsin Watch, working in partnership with Open Campus. Email her at nyahr@wisconsinwatch.org.

As data centers test Wisconsin’s electrical grid, job opportunities flourish 60 feet in the air is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and a group of environmental organizations announced a settlement agreement Monday that would require stricter environmental impact assessments of future data center developments and initiate a statewide review of how data centers use the state’s resources. 

In June, the Sierra Club and Midwest Environmental Advocates sued the DNR in Ozaukee County court, arguing that the agency approved the permits for Vantage’s massive data center currently under construction in Port Washington without conducting a proper environmental impact statement. 

“AI data centers are massive, thirsty, energy hogs and have popped up all over Wisconsin,” Elizabeth Ward, director of the Wisconsin chapter of the Sierra Club, said in a statement. “They could completely change our landscape and use unprecedented amounts of water and energy. Wisconsinites and our regulators need to understand the impacts and opportunities to reduce harm before allowing data centers to move forward. Wisconsinites deserve an informed, transparent process for decisions that could shape their communities and environment for decades.

A report this summer by the state Public Service Commission found that the Port Washington data center and data centers being built by Microsoft in Mount Pleasant and Meta in Beaver Dam are set to be responsible for a 40% increase in statewide energy demand over the next six years. 

As part of the settlement agreement in the lawsuit, the DNR will conduct full environmental impact statements of individual data center proposals moving forward and complete a statewide strategic analysis of how data centers consume resources. 

State law and the DNR’s administrative rules allow the agency to conduct such an analysis when conflicts arise over resource demands for a  “complicated or complex issue; an issue that is new to the state; an issue or policy that will likely lead to future department actions that will require an environmental impact statement; issues for which there is a high potential for legislation or new department policy and the planning and development of controversial resource-oriented projects.”

“What started as a lawsuit over the environmental review of one data center has become an opportunity to address the data center issue on a much bigger scale,” MEA attorney Michael Greif said. “Looking at these impacts holistically is important because the impacts of data centers are statewide. State regulators will now have to examine the cumulative impacts of data center development across Wisconsin.”

Wisconsin will become one of a few states assessing the statewide impacts of data centers on their resources. In July, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed an executive order that initiated a similar analysis and last December, the Maryland Legislature enacted a law that requires a number of state agencies to study “the likely environmental, energy, and economic impacts of data center development.”

The sheer size of investment in data centers is drawing concern as it surpasses all other historical booms and crowds out other more job-creating ventures. 

Until now, no industry had driven the U.S. economy with such force since the railroad expansion of the late 1800s, when titans battled one another to lay the transcontinental tracks that would connect America from coast to coast.

Railroads in the 19th century consumed about $173 billion in today’s dollars and created more than 2% of the nation’s annual economic output (GDP) over 20 years. 

Today’s data center buildout will dwarf that amount, with $10 trillion in investment, and now have almost twice the economic impact — nearly 4% of GDP. That’s according to a report created by a Columbia Business School professor, Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh.

States are starting to feel left out of the windfall, many having granted tax exemptions before the boom. 

Years ago, before artificial intelligence prompted a tsunami of building, states typically welcomed data centers supporting internet traffic, offering tax abatements and other perks. Many officials now are rethinking that approach as tax revenues take a bigger hit and high energy demands take a toll on affordability. 

Nevada, for instance, trimmed tax abatements and will ask data centers to agree to foot the bill for energy and water demands, in a September executive order from Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo. 

States where data center costs will be concentrated over the three years are Texas ($638 billion), Virginia ($249 billion), Ohio ($169 billion) and Georgia ($160 billion), according to projections from Industrial Info Resources, a market intelligence firm.   

Southern states dominate the landscape for the number of data centers planned, with large numbers also proposed in Arizona, California, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Indiana, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Washington state, according to a Pew Research Center report in April. 

The profitability of AI has yet to catch up with the expense of the buildout.

“It is not a pretty picture right now,” said IIR’s senior vice president of research, David Pickering. “I think it will become profitable once things settle down a bit and more legislation is put in place to regulate how we handle AI. 

“The big players will no doubt find a way to make it profitable,” he said.  

There are signs the staggering cost of data centers is crowding out other investments such as housing. 

Over the past two years new construction value for data centers has more than doubled to $85 billion annually, while all other construction value has dropped 8%, according to a Stateline analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data as of August.

As new data center value grew by $48 billion since 2024, new houses and apartments dropped by $29 billion, according to the data.

Adam Shapiro, a vice president at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, noted the change in a September social media post: “We’re seeing a pivotal shift in the US economy: investment is shifting away from residential investment and towards computers.” 

Some, like the economist Paul Krugman, see the shift as hurting employment in the long run, despite more current hiring for construction workers. 

“Because data centers employ so few workers, the vast spending on AI currently taking place will also significantly reduce the demand for labor,” Krugman wrote in an Oct. 11 analysis.

Josh Bivens, chief economist for the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute, agreed that the economy’s recent dependence on data centers and other AI spending is unhealthy, calling it “a narrow base of growth, basically one sector, and a pretty fragile one.” 

“Anything that upsets expectations about the future potential profitability of AI investments will likely lead to pretty sharp cutbacks,” Bivens said. “I’m uneasy about how durable this strength might turn out to be.”

As for the historic nature of the buildout, Mark Higgins, author of a book on U.S. financial history, said there are parallels to the age of railroad building in the late 19th century.  

“Railroads were a huge investment,” Higgins said. “In the 1800’s most of the capital was foreign, and it would attract all this money from Europe, then everything would crash — there were several panics —and Americans would buy the distressed railroads and profit, because they knew which were the good ones.” 

Railroad construction, which did not include trains themselves, cost $4.3 billion between 1870 and 1890, about $173 billion in today’s dollars, according to historical figures provided to Stateline by Van Nieuwerburgh and adjusted for inflation.

Other large-scale construction booms consumed only about 1% or less of annual GDP: Canals in the early 19th century, electrification in the early 20th century, highways in the mid- to late-20th century, and telecoms and fiber between 1996 and 2003.

In a report this month the International Monetary Fund warned of the risk of lower stock prices if high expectations for AI fail to materialize. 

“Although core firms in the AI ecosystem have been profitable so far … weaker or less durable investment and profitability in AI could trigger a correction,” the report warned.

The buildout will also double electricity consumption, Van Nieuwerburgh estimated, a continual thorn for data center projects that need more power to process vast data troves to power AI applications. 

An Oregon report last month, which led to a continued freeze on data center approvals in the state, said the single most frequent concern in public comments is utility affordability.

An analysis from two universities in July found that the combination of data centers and cryptocurrency mining could raise electricity bills by 8% nationally, and as much as 25% in parts of Virginia. The report came from a collaboration between Carnegie Mellon University in Pennsylvania and North Carolina State University. 

Virginia passed an electricity consumption surcharge specifically for data centers that began in July, in a budget compromise that preserved lucrative tax breaks for the data centers. Some localities with heavy concentrations are considering pauses, and at least one city has a moratorium.

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

Reading Time: 9 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• Wisconsin’s largest utilities are on track to contribute less to political campaigns than in the last two gubernatorial election years, despite the enormous stakes for the state’s energy future.
• Neither Republican Tom Tiffany nor Democrat David Crowley received contributions from utility political action committees through September. 
• Utilities have directed nearly all their campaign contributions toward state legislative races. 
• Democrats are gaining ground in utility fundraising, receiving about 45% of contributions to legislative candidates and fundraising committees this year, compared with less than 20% in 2022.

Wisconsin’s multibillion-dollar energy infrastructure construction boom isn’t fueling a similar deluge of utility-related campaign spending ahead of the election.

The state’s largest utilities are collectively on track to spend less supporting political candidates this year than in the last two gubernatorial election years.

Utility campaign contributions to Wisconsin’s local, state and federal campaigns — and state-level partisan fundraising groups — reached just under $300,000 by late September, down roughly $50,000 from the same point in 2022.

Neither Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Tiffany nor Democratic candidate David Crowley took in any contributions from the utilities’ political action committees (PACs) between January and September. 

Utilities could still make last-minute contributions before the election, as they have in years past.

Utilities are dialing back contributions despite the influence the next governor and Legislature will wield over the industry. Next month’s winners will appoint and confirm a new majority to the state commission that regulates utilities and weigh in on legislation that could shape Wisconsin’s energy future for decades.

Some industry observers speculate that the mismatch between utilities’ political spending and the election’s ramifications reflect the mounting public hostility to the data center boom — and, by extension, to the utilities themselves. 

“I think utilities are beginning to recognize that their brand is increasingly toxic,” said Jonathan Kim, a Chicago-based researcher for the Energy and Policy Institute, a nonprofit watchdog. As of August, Kim is also the institute’s registered lobbyist in Madison, focusing on residential ratepayer concerns. 

If past ties to utilities put a target on a candidate’s back, Kim added, the companies would have good reason to avoid making direct contributions in hotly contested races. 

Wisconsin isn’t the only state where utility political spending appears to be softening. In Michigan, for example, the state’s largest investor-owned utilities are on track to spend less supporting political candidates this year than they did in the last three midterm cycles. 

The drop in political spending falls short of an all-out retreat in Wisconsin. Utilities have steered nearly all of their contributions toward state legislative contests — and, for the first time in at least a decade, divided their giving almost evenly between Democrats and Republicans. The shift coincides with Democrats’ improved prospects of securing a majority in at least one legislative chamber for the first time since 2010.

How utilities spend on politics

Three companies provide electricity for a majority of Wisconsin households: Alliant Energy, owner of Wisconsin Power and Light; WEC Energy Group, the parent company of We Energies and Wisconsin Public Service Corporation; and Xcel Energy, owner of Northern States Power Company. 

Each company operates separate federal and state political action committees, or PACs. The committees collect voluntary contributions from company executives, employees and shareholders, then distribute those funds to political candidates and organizations chosen by their boards of directors. Candidates can spend donations on their current or future campaigns — or share them with other candidates. They cannot legally spend on personal expenses. 

Can utilities use ratepayer dollars for campaign contributions? (Click to expand)

Wisconsin’s Public Service Commission doesn’t explicitly prohibit it, but utility spokespeople told Wisconsin Watch that their companies do not bill ratepayers for political contributions. We Energies said the same to the state’s Public Service Commission in April.

Voters in Michigan will decide in November whether to prohibit utilities from contributing to state political campaigns entirely.

 Wisconsin law caps how much a PAC can contribute to a given state-level candidate in a single cycle — up to $2,000 for a Senate campaign, for instance, or $86,000 for a gubernatorial campaign. Federal rules similarly limit PAC contributions to individual candidates. Utilities’ federal PACs can give up to $5,000 to a federal candidate.

Utility employees and executives, meanwhile, can donate via employer-sponsored “conduits.” Alliant, WEC Energy and Xcel each sponsor conduits, as do Madison Gas and Electric and the American Transmission Company, Wisconsin’s largest transmission utility. 

Like PACs, conduits serve as pass-throughs for political donations. Unlike PACs, employees choose which candidates receive their donations. The conduit’s sponsor may recommend candidates or races to support, and candidates who receive conduit contributions often also receive PAC donations. 

Conduit contributions appear in campaign finance records under the individual donor’s name. Although state law limits how much individuals may contribute to a candidate, the combined donations routed through a utility’s conduit can exceed the amount a utility’s PAC may give in a single cycle. 

How much have utilities spent on congressional races?

Alliant, WEC Energy and Xcel’s federal PACs gave roughly $23,500 to Wisconsin’s congressional delegation between January and late July.

U.S. Rep. Bryan Steil, facing a competitive race for a district stretching from Janesville to Racine, received $5,000 from Alliant’s PAC in early March — the largest Wisconsin utility contribution to a single candidate this year. Federal campaign finance records show no utility PAC contribution to Steil’s Democratic opponent, Mitchell Berman. 

The state’s utilities have largely steered clear of the high-profile race in Wisconsin’s 3rd District, where incumbent Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden and Democratic challenger Rebecca Cooke have tried to link each other to data center interests.

Utility PACs have donated to all eight Wisconsinites in the U.S. House in the last decade. But annual donations have plunged from 2016, when the three utilities’ PACs gave over $94,000 to the Wisconsin delegation, primarily to Paul Ryan, who was House speaker at the time.

U.S. Rep. Mark Pocan, the Madison area’s representative in Washington since 2013, hasn’t  received a utility contribution since 2018. 

How much have utilities spent on state races? 

Contributions from the state-level utility PACs and their conduits to Wisconsin legislative candidates and legislative fundraising committees totaled roughly $250,000 between January and September.

Much of the decline in utility contributions from 2022 stems from reduced spending by WEC Energy’s PAC and conduit. 

Democratic lawmakers have received about 45% of utilities’ year-to-date contributions, compared to just under 20% in 2022.

“We work with both sides,” WEC Energy President Scott Lauber told investors on a July quarterly earnings call. “It’s just a matter of how we make Wisconsin successful.”

Taylor Adams, an Alliant Energy spokesperson, said the utility’s political giving is bipartisan and varies from year to year based on the communities and elected officials within its service territory, not partisan preference. Adams added that his company focuses on policies that support “reliable and cost-effective energy.”

Rep. David Steffen, chair of the Assembly Committee on Energy and Utilities, is the top individual recipient of utility dollars, campaign finance records show. He has received roughly $13,655 via utility PACs and conduits this year, accounting for roughly a third of his total 2026 fundraising as of September.

Alliant and WEC Energy’s PACs have already given Steffen’s campaign the maximum $1,000 allowed by state statute for an Assembly candidate in a single cycle. Three WEC executives have done the same through their company’s conduit. 

The Assembly committee’s ranking Democratic lawmaker, Rep. Lisa Subeck, D-Madison, received $3,980.

Sen. Melissa Ratcliff of Cottage Grove, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Committee on Utilities, Technology and Tourism, received $5,250, including $2,000 from Alliant alone — the maximum state law allows for a Senate candidate. Ratcliff is not up for reelection until 2028.

Assembly Majority Leader Tyler August, R-Walworth, has received $7,500 from utilities and their conduits while Senate Minority Leader Dianne Hesselbein, D-Middleton, took in $5,560. With longtime Assembly Speaker Robin Vos set to retire, August is likely among top contenders to become speaker if Republicans keep the majority after Election Day. 

August led Assembly’s Republicans through the two consecutive fights over utility-backed “right of first refusal” (ROFR) bills, which would grant Wisconsin’s transmission utilities first dibs on any electrical grid projects within their territory. Ratepayer advocates argue the proposal would risk driving up electricity prices by stifling competition in the transmission market. 

Speaking at a June WisPolitics luncheon, Hesselbein blamed Republicans for the bill’s failure last session, casting the policy as a means to shore up Wisconsin-based businesses and union jobs.

Chamber leadership and members of the Senate and Assembly utilities committees received over a quarter of all utility PAC and conduit contributions this year. 

That pattern isn’t unusual. Other industry interest groups, including in agriculture, also focus contributions on the committees most relevant to their businesses. 

“Election spending from industry and wealthy special interests is about wanting access and sway over policy agendas that could affect their bottom line,” said Nick Ramos, executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. “It’s no surprise that they assess the landscape and find who might have the most impact.”

Some top recipients are less obvious. 

Rep. Tip McGuire, D-Kenosha, has received $4,750 this year — more than many lawmakers on the Assembly utilities committee, despite not serving on it. McGuire is one of four Democrats on the Joint Finance Committee, which drafts the state’s two-year budget.

Other key lawmakers received relatively little this year. Senate utilities committee chair Sen. Julian Bradley, R-New Berlin, received $1,500 from utility PACs and conduits as of late September, and Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer received $1,175. 

Not all utility money reaches lawmakers directly. Utility PACs also contribute to partisan fundraising groups like the Republican Assembly Campaign Committee, which contributes to legislative campaigns. 

Partisan committees also receive contributions directly from the utilities, rather than from their PACs. WEC Energy, for instance, gave $14,000 to partisan fundraising groups between January and June. 

State law doesn’t cap contributions to party fundraising committees. 

“There’s not supposed to be any sort of coordination between donors to the party committee and the campaigns that receive that money,” Kim said, making it difficult to know which candidates ultimately benefit from the utility’s committee contribution.

Scant spending on the governor’s race

About 2% of contributions from utility PACs and utility conduits between January and September flowed directly to gubernatorial candidates — including to candidates who lost their primary. 

Wisconsin hasn’t held an open gubernatorial election since 2010, muddying comparisons with other recent elections. 

Former Republican Gov. Scott Walker collected roughly $269,000 in contributions — not adjusted for inflation — between the launch of his gubernatorial campaign in 2009 and his exit in 2019, including about $86,000 ahead of his 2018 defeat by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers. 

Evers received about $11,000 in utility contributions during that race. Utilities have since contributed roughly $330,000 to his campaign committee.

Ahead of the 2022 election, utilities contributed more than twice as much to Evers as they did Tim Michels, his Republican opponent.

Some gubernatorial spending in 2018 and 2022 came in late October, just after the candidates turned in their final pre-election fundraising reports. 

Utilities haven’t transferred that financial support to Crowley, whom Evers backed during the chaotic final leg of this year’s Democratic primary. Utility PACs have yet to contribute to his or Tiffany’s gubernatorial campaigns.

Tiffany has received roughly $3,600 via WEC and MGE’s conduits while Crowley has drawn none during the campaign. 

Still, both accepted utility contributions during previous runs for office.

Tiffany brought in at least $17,000 from utility PACs and through their conduits over a decade of state legislative campaigns, followed by another $11,500 during and after his U.S. House campaign in 2020.

Crowley’s state Assembly campaign committee raised just over $1,600 from utility PACs and conduits — mostly WEC, which serves households in the Milwaukee district he represented. His Milwaukee County executive campaign committee accepted another $9,900 from WEC’s PAC and via its conduit between 2020 and 2024.

Any additional contributions between Oct. 26 and Election Day will appear on the candidates’ next finance report in January.

Crowley and Tiffany’s visions for the PSC (click to expand)

Both Crowley and Tiffany are picking up the banner of energy affordability, promising to follow through in part via their appointments to the PSC.

“Under David Crowley, the PSC will become a watchdog for taxpayers, ensuring that Wisconsinites’ utility bills stay as low as possible while creating greater transparency in where their tax dollars are going,” Crowley spokesman Philip Schulman wrote in an email. “This includes empowering the PSC to reject rate hikes in favor of cheaper options and publishing a quarterly score card detailing everything from avoided outages to fuel cost savings.”

Tiffany doesn’t shy away from criticizing the current commission, in no small part because of his objections to converting cropland into solar farms. “Day one when I become governor, they will be replaced,” he said at a September town hall in Sauk County, referring to the two acting commissioners — Kristy Nieto and Marcus Hawkins — serving without Senate confirmation.

Utility allies spend more

Utilities share interests with other groups, some of which have poured far more into this year’s governor’s race.

Crowley has received separate $86,000 donations — the PAC cap for a single cycle — from at least four labor groups that often align with utilities on energy infrastructure projects:  International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers PAC, International Union of Operating Engineers Local 139 PAC, Wisconsin Laborers’ District Council and Wisconsin Pipe Trades Association PAC. Two other construction trades unions contributed smaller sums to Crowley’s campaign; a PAC representing a carpenters’ union gave $82,500 and a PAC representing plumbers and steamfitters gave $25,000.

Those unions represent workers who build or operate power plants and transmission lines. The political director of the Wisconsin Laborers’ District Council sits on the board of Fair Rates for Wisconsin’s Dairyland alongside WEC and Alliant representatives.

Tiffany seized on that support in an attack ad that dubbed his opponent “Data Center David Crowley,” citing the labor groups’ vocal support for developing data centers and associated energy infrastructure.

“IBEW certainly supports responsible data center development,” the IBEW state conference vice chair, John Jacobs, wrote in an email. “We also support renewable energy and countless projects that support family supporting jobs, great healthcare, great retirement benefits and a path to the middle class. All priorities of David Crowley – and that’s why we support him.”

Those labor groups had not contributed to Tiffany’s campaign through September. But Robert Marchant, the Wisconsin Data Center Coalition’s sole lobbyist, donated $5,000 in early June. Alliant, WEC and Xcel are founding members of the coalition. 

Spending strategically

Utilities’ spending this year leaves them far behind Wisconsin’s top political donors. Diane Hendricks, for example, has already given exponentially more than utilities in 2026 — all to the Wisconsin Republican Party, which has transferred most to Tiffany’s gubernatorial campaign.

But the companies’ political goals don’t match those of explicitly partisan spenders like Hendricks.

“They just want to be able to wield sufficient political power to get the things that they need,” Kim said. “They’re not going to spend dumb money.”

Despite high stakes for energy future, Wisconsin’s utilities scale back campaign spending — so far is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 6 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• Wisconsin’s statewide economic development agency has signed at least five nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) with data center developers.
• Wisconsin Watch previously reported that five communities had signed local NDAs with data center developers. The statewide disclosure increases to eight the number of Wisconsin projects that used an NDA.
• NDAs have drawn criticism for keeping the public in the dark about the multibillion-dollar projects while government officials negotiate the terms of a project. Economic development officials say NDAs are necessary to attract businesses to Wisconsin.

Wisconsin’s statewide economic development agency has signed at least five nondisclosure agreements with developers of artificial intelligence data centers, adding a previously unknown level of secrecy to the billion-dollar projects.

The Wisconsin Economic Development Corp., a quasi-government state agency, signed one of the NDAs nearly two years before a proposed data center in Menomonie was announced to the public and six months before the city signed its own NDA. 

Wisconsin Watch previously revealed that at least five communities signed local NDAs, keeping the public in the dark about data center proposals for months. 

The newly released state agency NDAs show that in some cases, the proposals were hidden from view even longer. Also, three of the NDAs signed by the state agency are for projects proposed in communities that didn’t have a local secrecy pact.

The agreements, provided to Wisconsin Watch under the state public records law, show the gap in time between when the WEDC NDAs were signed and when the data center proposals were publicly announced:

• Menomonie — 23 months: The August 2023 NDA, signed with a shell company called Balloonist LLC, was done 23 months before the city announced the data center proposal, which is pending. 
• Beaver Dam — 19 months: The NDA for the Meta data center now under construction in Beaver Dam, also signed in August 2023 by Balloonist, was done 19 months before the project was announced to the public. 
• DeForest — 8 months: The NDA was signed in February 2025 with QTS Data Centers, eight months before the public announcement of the proposal, which was later dropped.
• Mount Pleasant — 2 months: Microsoft’s NDA was signed in January 2023, two months before the village announced the proposed data center complex that is now under construction. 
• Port Washington: The July 2025 NDAs signed for the OpenAI/Oracle/Vantage project under construction were done six months after the city announced the proposal. 

WEDC replied to an interview request with a statement saying “the agency is committed to transparency and compliance with Wisconsin’s public records laws and has long been recognized for its strong commitment to reporting.”

“Wisconsin law recognizes that certain information related to pending economic development projects may need to remain confidential to protect their competitive nature,” the agency said. “NDAs are one tool used to facilitate the exchange of business information while companies evaluate potential investments, expansions, or relocations in Wisconsin. These agreements help Wisconsin compete for economic opportunities while remaining consistent with applicable public records laws.”

Told about WEDC’s use of NDAs, state Rep. Clint Moses, R-Menomonie, said he would add the state agency to legislation banning data center NDAs that he plans to introduce in January, after a new governor and Legislature take office. 

His original bill, introduced in January but given no hearings, would have applied only to local governments. 

“I would assume they wouldn’t like it,” Moses said of the WEDC. “I know certain groups … kind of frown on any time you start banning NDAs. But these data centers are such a big issue, and there’s so much unknown about them still, that we need to be doing something.

“I think regardless who the governor is and who has control of the Legislature, I think it’s popular,” Moses added. “I think it will get support, regardless.”

Behind the WEDC and confidentiality

WEDC is the state’s lead economic development agency. It aims to attract new businesses to the state by allocating tax credits, awarding grants and loans and authorizing local governments to issue bonds. 

The state law that created WEDC in 2011 says agency records are open to the public — except for “pending grants, loans, or economic development projects that, in the opinion of the corporation, must remain confidential to protect the competitive nature of the grant, loan, or project.”

That means proposed data centers costing billions of dollars and covering hundreds of acres could be quietly explored long before local residents are informed. 

“It just seems like really bad practice,” said Port Washington Ald. Michael Beaster, who opposed his community’s data center and made public records requests about it before being elected in April. “A state agency is not accountable to the local government.”

The NDA record requests

Wisconsin Watch sought to obtain all NDAs signed by WEDC for hyperscale data center proposals. However, the agency was unable to produce all NDAs in its records in response to a general public records request for them.

The agency initially provided NDAs for three data centers that it certified for a state sales tax exemption and are under construction — Microsoft’s in Mount Pleasant, Meta’s in Beaver Dam and OpenAI/Oracle/Vantage’s in Port Washington.

Mount Pleasant and Port Washington replied to previous public records requests from Wisconsin Watch saying they did not sign NDAs for their data centers. The Beaver Dam Area Development Corp., a quasi-government group, signed an NDA for the Beaver Dam data center.

Wisconsin Watch then followed up with a request for any NDAs that WEDC signed with at least 16 companies that Wisconsin Watch identified as making data center proposals in the state. That prompted WEDC to provide its Menomonie and DeForest NDAs. 

No data center NDAs were turned up by public records requests Wisconsin Watch made to the state’s nine regional economic development agencies. 

Six of the regional agencies said the public records law doesn’t apply to them. But three of those six, plus three others, said they had no such NDAs.

NDAs helped usher in massive economic development

The NDAs helped pave the way for multibillion-dollar developments, but also public backlash.

Microsoft’s plans have grown to $20 billion worth of data centers in Mount Pleasant, south of Milwaukee in Racine County. The OpenAI/Oracle/Vantage project is worth $15 billion in Port Washington, north of Milwaukee in Ozaukee County. Meta’s data center investment is $1 billion in Beaver Dam, 40 miles north of Madison in Dodge County. 

Data centers have also been worth billions of dollars to Wisconsin businesses that serve them. Earlier this year, just three Wisconsin companies had already done more than $1 billion in data center business, Wisconsin Watch reported.

“Non-disclosure agreements are an essential part of doing business in a competitive economic development climate,” the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce said in a statement to Wisconsin Watch. “Companies considering major investments don’t evaluate locations singularly. They compare us with communities across the country, and they expect legitimate trade secrets and proprietary business information to remain confidential while making those decisions. If we make it harder to protect that information, we put ourselves at a competitive disadvantage and risk losing that investment altogether. That means a loss of jobs, tax base and economic momentum. To our knowledge, not a single state prohibits its economic development arm from utilizing NDAs.”

Another measure of data centers’ impact is the sales tax exemption, part of the 2023-25 state budget. It means that generally, data centers certified by the WEDC, including the three facilities under construction, don’t have to pay sales taxes on construction materials, computer servers and other equipment. The exemption is estimated to be worth more than $2 billion and has been targeted by Democrats and Republicans for modification or elimination.

The $1.6 billion data center proposal in Menomonie in western Wisconsin, where $25 million in land has already been purchased, was paused in September 2025 after local opposition mounted. The city is still drafting zoning regulations. The city signed an NDA in February 2024, six months after the WEDC secrecy agreement.

QTS had planned to spend $12 billion on a data center in the Madison suburb of DeForest. The village, which said it did not sign an NDA, reached a wide-ranging community benefits agreement with QTS, but village officials dropped the plan over local opposition. Wisconsin Watch obtained records showing village officials were in talks with QTS around the same time WEDC signed a nondisclosure agreement and months before village officials initially told the public they were aware of the project.

At least two Wisconsin communities have restricted data center NDAs. The Columbia County Board prohibited its members from signing data center NDAs. The Beloit Town Board barred town board employees from signing them without board approval.

Both candidates for governor in the Nov. 3 election, Democrat David Crowley and Republican Tom Tiffany, have expressed support for banning data center NDAs.

More data centers being considered

Data center proposals that are pending include one for a former paper mill in Wisconsin Rapids, north of Madison, where a decisive city council vote could come this month. The city said it did not sign an NDA. 

In Kenosha, which signed an NDA in May 2024, residents are seeking a data center moratorium as the city considers a data center plan from Microsoft. The technology giant terminated the local NDA in June 2026.

That stemmed from Microsoft’s announcement three months earlier that it would no longer sign data center NDAs with local governments and would seek to terminate the ones it had signed, calling it an effort to build trust. 

The announcement didn’t mention state-level NDAs. A Microsoft spokesperson declined to comment on state NDAs.

“We continue to hear these data centers and tech companies talking about wanting to be a good neighbor,” said Beaver Dam data center opponent Maily Kocinski. “This is not something a good neighbor does.”

Disclosure: The OpenAI Foundation recently awarded a grant to Wisconsin Watch but has no control over its editorial decisions. We will update our funding page to reflect the grant. A list of donors and funders through 2025, as well as our donation acceptance policies, can be found here.

Use of NDAs for Wisconsin data centers wider than previously known is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Democratic gubernatorial candidate and Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley said he would sign a bill to repeal tax incentives for data centers if he’s elected, marking a change in his position on the issue.

Gov. Tony Evers and Wisconsin Republicans approved a provision during the 2023 state budget that exempts data center developers from paying sales and use taxes for the “sale of property and equipment to construct, renovate or operate data centers.” The policy is estimated to have already saved data center developers $1.5 billion. 

However, as data centers have become increasingly unpopular, Democrats and Republicans alike have changed their minds on providing these subsidies. 

A group of Republican lawmakers, some of whom voted for the budget that created the tax subsidies in 2023, introduced a bill earlier this month that would repeal the tax breaks, though the bill won’t go anywhere as the Legislature is out of session.

Crowley said he would “absolutely” sign that bill to repeal the tax subsidies if it were sent to him as governor during an event at the Overture Center on Wednesday evening.

“The fact that these tech companies are getting a billion dollars in tax breaks — it’s being delivered on the backs of hard-working families,” Crowley said. “I want to be very clear about my position. We’re going to be aggressive when it comes down to holding data centers to account, making sure that we protect our land, protect our water, have strict environmental standards, but also communities need to have a seat at the table.”

Crowley had previously been noncommittal when it came to repealing the tax benefit for data centers. He told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that he did not “believe Wisconsin should automatically roll back all data center tax incentives” but that he believed that the state needed “a more rigorous review of whether taxpayers are receiving sufficient value for the incentives being provided.” 

Republican candidate and U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany had previously criticized Crowley’s position on the tax incentives, saying that he wanted to give “a blank check to data centers” and that data centers “do not need to be subsidized by us, the taxpayers.” Tiffany has not always been a champion of tough regulation on data centers, either. He previously voted for legislation in Congress that would have banned state and local governments across the country from being able to enforce laws or regulations on AI models, systems, and related digital infrastructure, including data centers, for 10 years. 

Crowley’s changing position comes with less than three weeks left until Election Day and as data centers and AI continue to be unpopular across the political spectrum. A September Marquette Law School poll found that 74% of Wisconsinites say the costs of data centers outweigh the benefits.

This week Crowley laid out an 11-point policy plan for restricting and regulating AI and social media companies. The policies include:

• Requiring platforms to set kids’ accounts and new accounts to the highest privacy setting and cut off unsolicited messages. Users over 18 would have the option to turn the restrictions off. 
• Prohibiting infinite scroll, autoplay and other addictive features for minors’ accounts as well as a ban on push notification for the users overnight and during the school day. 
• Banning surveillance advertising. 
• Allowing parents the option to sue platforms over design choices that harm a child including content promoting suicide, eating disorders and drug sales 
• Regulating AI chatbots by restricting them for users under 13, prohibiting chatbots from posing as doctors and therapists and requiring disclosures on AI chatbots designed to form emotional bonds with individuals
• Increasing the penalties for online predators and sextortion and implementing those same penalties for creating or sharing AI-generated sexual images of children
• Penalizing companies that knowingly make money from scam ads
• Requiring identification verification for advertisers before they can place ads
• Requiring platforms to implement a scam reporting tool that’s easy to use and requiring that they confirm the reports and report the action that they took within a set timeframe
• Funding the state Department of Justice and the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection to support their work to combat online fraud and enforce anti-trust law
• Investing in county and tribal adult protective services and aging and disability resource centers, so victims of scams have support to recover

Crowley said during the Wednesday evening event that the state needs to do something in the absence of the Trump administration and Congress taking action. 

“It’s unfortunate that the federal government has actually not put in these guardrails to protect our young people, protect our families, but also to protect our seniors,” Crowley said. “Look, I’m a father, I have three daughters and I want to make sure I can protect my girls from these chatbots. You have, you know, social media platforms that allow them to chat about sexuality. That’s not what I want my 9 and 7-year-old to be introduced to. My oldest right now is a freshman at Whitewater. I don’t want her having pictures out there, and all of a sudden, she can’t be protected.” 

Crowley said the policies are aimed at putting the burdens on the tech, social media and AI companies, rather than on individuals. 

Tiffany also supports some guardrails for these companies. He said in a statement to the Examiner that the state needs “common sense guardrails that protect children and seniors, safeguard personal privacy, and prevent sensitive data from falling into the hands of foreign adversaries, including Communist China.” His campaign noted that in Congress Tiffany cosponsored a law aimed at strengthening law enforcement’s ability to investigate financial fraud targeting seniors. The legislation covered scams involving AI.

“We cannot allow artificial intelligence to become another tool for harvesting Americans’ personal information or exploiting vulnerable individuals. We must hold Big Tech accountable when its platforms enable the creation of sexually explicit AI-generated images of children or expose minors to sexually inappropriate chatbot conversations,” Tiffany said. 

Tiffany said he would support imposing age verification requirements for app providers, strengthening parental consent protections and “give parents greater control over their children’s online activity.” 

In the course of a single election cycle, the backlash against data centers has grown from an issue at local planning commission and city council meetings to become a flashpoint in state and federal races across the country.

Candidates who once touted data centers as an economic boon have backtracked, and voters in at least three dozen cities, counties and townships will consider ballot measures in November that could ban data centers in their communities. Analysts say the opposition to data centers has come from Republican and Democratic voters alike.

“The people are speaking, and they’re speaking in one voice in opposition to this infrastructure,” said Tatishe Nteta, provost professor of political science at UMass Amherst. “It is not something that people desire in any shape, form or fashion. This potentially could be the issue that gives you the status of a former member of a city council or a former member of Congress.”

Last month, UMass Amherst published a poll, directed by Nteta, showing that only 11% of Americans would support the construction of an artificial intelligence data center in their local community. The poll found that 65% of respondents oppose the construction of such facilities.

Local and national activists have a long list of grievances against data centers, which tech companies are aggressively building to provide the computing power for artificial intelligence platforms. The rapid buildout of data centers is expected to strain the electrical grid and drive up energy costs, some forecasts show.

Opponents are also concerned about the facilities’ pollution, water use, noise and conversion of farmland and other open spaces. Many developers are also building private, “behind-the-meter” natural gas plants to power their data centers, increasing concerns about emissions and public health.

Some activists also object to the artificial intelligence technologies the sites will power, which threaten to disrupt the economy, replace workers, erode critical thinking skills and mental health and even — according to some tech executives — potentially kill all humans.

“For so many years, Ohio rolled out the red carpet to become a tech hub,” said Nick Owens, an attorney with Conserve Ohio, a campaign seeking to block data center development. “Unfortunately, what we’ve become is a tech dump.”

Anger at both parties

Activists across the country have lashed out at elected officials from both parties who have offered state and local tax breaks in order to entice data center developers. They’ve also called out local officials for negotiating deals behind closed doors and signing non-disclosure agreements with large tech companies.

“The politicians are chasing the grassroots, they aren’t leading on the issue,” said Anthony Elmo, public education defender with Good Jobs First, a policy group that tracks government subsidies related to economic development. “(Politicians) who were very pro-data center a year ago are now coming out against them due to political factors.”

Tech companies have launched their own political efforts to respond to the backlash. Industry leaders argue that artificial intelligence is key to the nation’s economic competitiveness. They note that the data center boom has created many construction jobs and increased property tax revenue in communities desperate for more money.

Leading the Future, a tech-backed Super PAC, has invested in federal and state campaigns in support of both Republican and Democratic candidates who support artificial intelligence. Josh Vlasto, the group’s co-leader, argued that the narrative around data centers has conflated the industry at large with its worst offenders — speculative projects that disregarded local opposition and failed to meet environmental standards.

“(Voters) want the jobs in their communities, they want the revenue, but they want the risks and downsides mitigated and addressed,” he said. “There is backlash in communities that don’t want them, but if you look to the states that are building and doing it right, these data centers are being welcomed and generating a massive amount of revenue. If this is done correctly, I could see this issue turning drastically in a different direction.”

An investigation earlier this year linked Leading the Future with a news website that used AI bots posing as journalists to solicit quotes for stories that promoted industry talking points. Another investigation found that a dark-money group tied to Leading the Future paid lifestyle influencers to promote artificial intelligence by highlighting the threat of competition from Chinese AI.

The Data Center Coalition, a membership association for tech companies, did not respond to a Stateline interview request. Amazon, Google and OpenAI — industry leaders that have pushed for data center construction — did not respond to Stateline inquiries. Think Big, an associated PAC of Leading the Future that supports Democratic candidates, did not respond to an interview request.

‘People coming together’

Across the United States,  data centers currently use about 49 gigawatts of electricity, according to the website US Data Center Map. New projects planned or under construction total nearly 350 gigawatts — roughly a quarter of the country’s current electrical generation capacity.

While data centers have long powered our online infrastructure, many of the “hyperscale” facilities being built to support artificial intelligence are much larger and use vastly more power.

Ohio has become the political epicenter of the data center backlash. Like many states, Ohio agreed to sales tax exemptions for data centers in the 2010s in order to secure investment from tech companies. In recent years, the state has seen a boom in construction, with 154 operational facilities and 84 more data centers in the works — more than all but three other states.

“Our attraction in Ohio was a very minimal regulatory framework, plentiful farmland and plentiful water,” said Nick Owens, the Conserve Ohio attorney.

Owens, like many data center activists, became engaged on the issue when he learned that a large project was planned in his rural community in Brown County. Owens is a lifelong Republican and was a 2024 delegate for President Donald Trump, who has called data center opponents “backwards and poor.” He said politicians from city councils to the White House have failed to hear residents’ concerns.

“The dysfunction and unresponsiveness of government at all levels is truly sickening and frightening,” he said. “Conversely, it’s one of the most beautiful things I’ve ever seen, people coming together across communities, putting partisan differences aside and uniting (to oppose data centers).”

Conserve Ohio has worked with community activists across the state to draft ballot initiatives to ban data centers, change zoning regulations or require voter approval for large facilities. In total, Ohio municipalities will vote on 21 ballot measures related to data centers. Nationwide, 39 measures in eight states will be on the ballot this year, according to Ballotpedia.

In elections earlier this year, four local ballot measures across the country were decided with overwhelming opposition to data centers.

Jen Belt is the leader of Protect Grove City, an Ohio nonprofit backing a ballot measure to block development in that community.

“This is the first issue that I’ve seen Grove City united in such a way,” she said. “It is red, it is blue, it is every age, it is every socioeconomic status. It kind of gives you hope.”

Three communities in Kansas will vote on data center bans in November, including Ottawa, a city in the eastern portion of the state where residents have fought back against a proposed data center. Michael Lewis, with the nonprofit group Ottawa United, which has led the campaign, said locals were outraged when city commissioners announced the planned development.

“Everything was negotiated without public input, it was all done behind closed doors until they brought it out and approved it,” he said.

Lewis serves as vice chair of the Franklin County Democratic Party and is running for state representative. But the data center backlash has been so strong that his allies on the issue include the secretary of the Franklin County Republican Party and GOP state Rep. Rebecca Schmoe, his opponent in the general election.

Issue in statewide races

The issue has been a focal point of statewide races as well. U.S.  Sen. Jon Husted of Ohio, a Republican, has come under attack for championing tax breaks for data centers during his time as lieutenant governor. His Democratic opponent, former U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown, has run ads calling him “the face of data centers.”

Last month, the National Republican Senatorial Committee warned in a memo that data centers are “the anchor hanging around Husted’s neck,” The Washington Post reported. Husted has drafted a bill that would require state utility regulators to consider making data centers pay to cover the costs of their own electrical infrastructure needs. Senate Democrats blocked the bill last month, calling it “toothless” political messaging.

In Pennsylvania, both gubernatorial candidates have distanced themselves from their previous support for data centers. Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott, until recently a staunch data center advocate, issued a moratorium on new data center permits last month, amid attacks from his Democratic opponent.

“Republican candidates know this is a losing issue and one that can do damage to their already questionable electoral positions,” said Nteta, the political science professor. “It’s a unique issue that brings together Americans in ways we don’t usually see.”

Vlasto, with the pro-data center Super PAC, said candidates calling for statewide bans on data centers are overcorrecting.

“Each community is going to make their choice,” he said. “Some communities are just not going to welcome data centers. From a political position, it doesn’t seem like preventing communities that want to build data centers is a palatable position either.”

Elmo, with Good Jobs First, said even longtime data center opponents are surprised at how quickly they have become a top political issue. He said tech companies and politicians who once promoted data centers have now joined calls for “responsible” development.

“This issue puts (politicians) between a rock and a hard place between the grassroots and their wealthy tech donors,” he said. “If the industry you’re trying to regulate immediately agrees with everything you’re suggesting to regulate them, I’d suggest that those regulations are not extremely effective.”

Stateline reporter Alex Brown can be reached at abrown@stateline.org.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

In a governor’s race that has focused more on data center construction than artificial intelligence technology, Democratic gubernatorial candidate David Crowley on Tuesday announced a plan for state regulations on AI aimed at protecting vulnerable Wisconsinites. 

In an 11-point plan shared with Wisconsin Watch, Crowley calls for guardrails on AI offerings for minors and holding technology companies responsible for scams and fraud on their platforms. Some key components of the plan include: 

• Limiting access to AI chatbot apps for children under 13. 
• Prohibiting addictive design features, such as infinite scrolling and autoplay, on accounts of minors.
• Increasing penalties for circulating AI-generated sexual images of minors. 
• Allowing families to sue AI platforms if their content harms children, such as by promoting suicide or eating disorders. 
• Penalizing technology companies that profit from scams or fraudulent ads. 
• More funding for adult protective services and resource centers that can help victims of scams or fraud.

Crowley, the Milwaukee county executive, is running for governor against Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany in what polling from Marquette University Law School shows could be another close governor’s race in Wisconsin. AI policy debates between the two candidates in the months since the August primary have mostly been focused on the planning and construction of AI data centers, rather than the technology itself. 

In a statement, Tiffany also said Wisconsin needs “commonsense guardrails” to protect children and older adults, including holding companies accountable for platforms that allow creation of sexually explicit images or engage minors in inappropriate chatbot conversations. Tiffany said he also wants to prevent personal data from “falling into the hands of foreign adversaries, including Communist China.”  

“As governor, I will also support commonsense age-verification requirements for app providers, strengthen parental-consent protections, and give parents greater control over their children’s online activity,” Tiffany said. 

Crowley’s proposed state-level AI regulations land as President Donald Trump has dismissed calls for guardrails and warnings from technology company leaders asking for government oversight as their platforms become more advanced. 

Trump in May 2025 signed the Take it Down Act, which criminalized the online publication of real and AI-generated intimate images and requires social media platforms to remove them once notified of their existence. Tiffany, and the rest of Wisconsin’s congressional delegation, voted for the bill in 2025. 

Other proposed federal legislation has not advanced, including bills requiring public reporting of safety incidents by AI companies and requiring labels on any AI-generated content. Crowley in a statement said he would not “wait around for DC to act” on additional AI regulations if he is elected. 

“Like so many parents, Ericka and I are raising our three girls in the age of social media and AI, and we’re navigating things no generation before us has ever had to, worrying about whether a stranger is messaging our kids, or a fake picture of our daughter is going around school, or even scammers trying to drain a grandparent’s life savings,” Crowley said. 

The proposals in Crowley’s regulatory plan would require state legislative action. They echo recent bipartisan efforts signed into law by Gov. Tony Evers, including a series of bills that classified sextortion as a crime and provided additional recourse for victims and their families. 

Additionally, Attorney General Josh Kaul in August announced Wisconsin could receive up to $313 million in a settlement social media company Meta made with 47 states in a case that alleged addictive components of its platforms threatened teens’ mental health.

As data centers remain potent political issue, David Crowley offers plan to regulate artificial intelligence in Wisconsin is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Wisconsin is facing another major test of how it plans its energy future.

We Energies has proposed a new 750-megawatt natural gas plant in Wrightstown, the Fox North Energy Center. If approved, it could begin operating around 2032 and run for 30 years or more. With Fox North added to the queue, We Energies now has roughly 4.25 gigawatts of methane gas generation awaiting Public Service Commission approval.

The utility says the buildout is needed to meet rapidly growing electricity demand and maintain reliability. Data centers are a major part of that growth.

But projected demand does not make new gas plants inevitable.

Wisconsin is being asked to make decades-long energy decisions based on electricity demand forecasts that are changing faster than our regulatory system. That is exactly why new methane gas plants must first prove they are the cleanest, lowest-cost, lowest-risk option before customers are committed to paying for them.

Before Wisconsin commits customers to decades of fuel costs and long-lived infrastructure, regulators should ask a more important question: What combination of resources can meet that demand reliably, affordably and with the least long-term risk?

That means comparing new gas plants not just with one solar farm or one battery project, but with complete portfolios of solar, wind, storage, energy efficiency, transmission, distributed resources, nuclear power and demand flexibility.

Other states, including Minnesota and North Carolina, have already shown that regulators can challenge utility assumptions and require closer examination of alternatives rather than treating new gas plants as the default response to projected load growth.

Wisconsin can do the same.

That approach is already gaining support in Wisconsin, including among labor leaders who see comprehensive energy planning as an opportunity to create good-paying jobs.

Climate Jobs Wisconsin, whose leadership includes representatives of Wisconsin building trades and construction unions, recently advanced a “35 by ’35” clean-energy and good-jobs agenda. The proposal envisions roughly 35 gigawatts of new clean-energy resources by 2035, including storage, utility-scale solar, wind, nuclear generation and networked distributed power. A plan  developed by the PSC would map what gets built, where and when, establish resource targets and create a grid-investment roadmap.

That is exactly the kind of planning Wisconsin needs.

Whether policymakers ultimately adopt those exact numbers is less important than the principle behind them: Evaluate the whole system before locking customers into decades of costs.

And expanding clean energy does not have to mean sacrificing Wisconsin’s best farmland or open space.

Renewable development can be directed toward brownfields, marginal and previously disturbed lands, rooftops, parking structures, industrial parks, sites near substations and existing infrastructure. Solar can also be integrated with agricultural production through agrivoltaics, allowing farming and energy production to coexist rather than compete.

Wisconsin should be able to protect prime agricultural land while dramatically expanding clean energy. Those goals are compatible if we plan carefully.

The jobs case matters, too.

Climate Jobs Wisconsin’s agenda is built around creating clean-energy careers with prevailing wages, registered apprenticeships and local hiring. It proposes tying those labor standards to PSC approvals and expanding Wisconsin’s ability to build new energy infrastructure with skilled union labor.

That is important because Wisconsin’s energy transition should not be framed as a choice between workers and the environment.

Done well, it is an industrial green growth strategy.

It can create careers for electricians, operating engineers, laborers, carpenters, pipefitters and other skilled trades while reducing exposure to volatile fuel costs and strengthening Wisconsin manufacturing.

The rapid growth of data centers makes this kind of comprehensive planning even more important.

Wisconsin families, farmers, manufacturers and existing businesses should not become the financial backstop for those investments.

If a gas plant is justified largely by projected data-center demand, regulators should determine how certain that demand really is, what alternatives were considered, who will pay for the plant and who bears the stranded-cost risk if forecasts change.

Transparency is equally important.

That means disclosing projected electricity and water use, infrastructure requirements, tax arrangements and long-term impacts before commitments become difficult to reverse.

It also means using transparent Community Benefit Agreements, so benefits are public, measurable and enforceable.

Transparency is not anti-development. It is how responsible development earns trust.

Wisconsin does not have an electricity shortage. It has a planning challenge.

The choice before us is not new gas or reliability. It is whether Wisconsin evaluates all available resources together before committing customers to another generation of long-term fossil fuel infrastructure costs.

The Fox North proposal gives Wisconsin another opportunity to get that right.

A new gas plant should have to prove it is necessary. It should not be treated as inevitable.

A perfect storm of harsh immigration enforcement, aging journeymen and a building boom for data centers is wreaking havoc on the nation’s supply of skilled trade workers. 

Automakers and construction contractors say they need more access to workers through accelerated training, steady immigration and a cultural shift to encourage young people to do the hard, dirty work of skilled trades. They’re looking for plumbers, electricians, carpenters, machinists and technicians — specializations increasingly in short supply. 

Worker shortages are the top reason for construction project delays, a September survey by the Association of General Contractors of America found. Applicants are there, but half of the contractors who were surveyed said too many job candidates are unqualified and need more training. 

The association cited both the demand for workers building data centers and tougher immigration enforcement as contributing causes for the shortage.  

“Over 50% of craft workers are born outside the United States. We don’t know that they’re illegal but frankly DHS (the Department of Homeland Security) is not being that discriminating in whom they pick up or who feels threatened by them,” said Ken Simonson, the chief economist for the Association of General Contractors of America. One answer is for the government to allow more worker visas for construction and other trades, he said. 

“We’ve been stymied for 20 years or longer trying to get construction treated similarly to agriculture, where if you can demonstrate that there isn’t enough Americans interested in a job you can bring in somebody,” Simonson said. 

Pay is rising for the skilled trades, but it’s hard to say how soon higher wages would attract more people. On social media, trades workers complain of long commutes to work sites, long waits through low-paid apprenticeships and a feeling they’re not valued as much as office workers.

“Getting up at 4am-5am. Driving 50 plus miles to random job sites. Obviously the dirty part which is construction sites and inhaling dust and dirt all day. Seeing people in corporate jobs in nice clothes while I’m dirty going on lunch break,” wrote a 30-year-old on a Reddit social media post in July, concluding that they should have finished a college chemistry degree.

Thousands agreed, including a 31-year-old tradesperson from Michigan who said top pay in their field, plumbing and HVAC, is attractive but that many make less than $70,000. 

“Been in the trades since I was 16 and recently started going back to college,” the person wrote. “Everybody I know who chose a degree over an apprenticeship is starting to outpace me in life buying houses and having kids while we’re check to check and getting less healthy by the day. “

These are the concerns employers have to address if they’re going to find enough workers to build homes, cars and data centers for artificial intelligence. Ford Motor Company and the Ad Council announced a publicity campaign to bring more young people into the trades, with a video declaring “millions of skilled trade jobs are waiting for people ready to do something, with great pay, job security and work you can take pride in.” 

Ford and the alliance didn’t mention immigration enforcement as an issue, but the Association of General Contractors and an unrelated survey of roofers both mentioned it as a prominent factor in reducing the supply of skilled workers. 

John Burns Research and Consulting, an independent housing research company, reported that many of the roofers it surveyed earlier this year saw immigration enforcement as hurting their business. 

“There are no American kids willing to install roofs in Central Texas,” said one roofing contractor in anonymous quotes published by the group. 

“Tough immigration reform and not enough Americans to fill the void,” said another. 

“A lot of these people have been deported. The next generation is complacent and does not want to do physical work,” said a Florida roofer. 

Elizabeth LaJeunesse, vice president of building products research at John Burns, said the vehemence of responses about immigration was surprising. 

“Most of these firms are pretty conservative, so this is a real phenomenon we’re picking up on, that level of concern over immigration enforcement,” LaJeunesse said.

Duane Musser, vice president for government relations for the National Roofing Contractors Association, said the responses are typical of what he hears from members. Immigration as well as better trade education are critical to roofing, he said. 

“Advocating for solutions to workforce shortages, including expanded career and technical education programs and bipartisan immigration reform, is a top priority,” Musser said. 

The DHS told Stateline in an unattributed statement that “those who are here legally and are not breaking other laws have nothing to fear” and that “we will continue to enforce our nation’s laws and remove illegal aliens from American communities.” 

In September a Trump-appointed federal judge stayed a federal practice of entering construction sites without a warrant to investigate immigration status. One construction worker of Mexican descent in Alabama complained that he had been detained three times since 2025 despite showing a state driver’s license demonstrating that he was a citizen born in Florida. 

Immigrant workers make up a majority of roofers, painters and stucco masons, according to a Stateline analysis last year.  

The nation will need 1.7 million new skilled trade workers every year through 2035, according to a September report by Alliance for America’s Skilled Trades, a trade group including Ford Motor Company, toolmakers and other businesses. Training programs produce just more than half the numbers needed, and only half of those who enroll in skilled training programs finish, the report found.  

Nine states were identified by the alliance report as having high demand but low supply of skilled labor: Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina and Texas. 

Florida ranks first for demand for skilled workers, but nearly last for supply, higher only than Maine. Not enough new Florida workers are coming online as building in the state booms and current workers near retirement age. The state’s Association of General Contractors’ chapter hopes the advancements in workforce AI will drive more young adults into construction jobs since those can’t be replaced by chatbots.

Other states have the opposite issue: ranking high for new workers but low in demand for them, based on recent hiring and future projections. 

In the top 10 for worker supply but bottom 10 for demand: Indiana, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Wyoming. 

The alliance report suggested employers themselves need to help train future workers. The companies building data centers, in particular, want those tradespeople.

“America needs hundreds of thousands of electricians, welders and fiber technicians to build AI infrastructure,” said Dina Powell McCormick, president and vice chairman of Meta, in a statement, adding that the alliance is “paying for the training, removing the barriers that keep people from stepping into these careers, and guaranteeing a job at the end of it.”

Shoua Thao, 40,  is straddling the line between trades and AI as a machinist in the computer-assisted manufacturing business known as CNC machining, which uses computer code to control production. The son of Hmong refugees in the Twin Cities area of Minnesota, Thao is now experimenting with AI production techniques. 

“Trades are the one career path that doesn’t lie,” he said. “You can’t hide lower skills in a trade, whereas middle management and white collar jobs are protected by the vagueness of the job.”

Eventually trades could become a more valued career path than college, Thao said, though he has been discouraged at times by low pay and long hours that take time away from family.

“I think it will be a slow process but eventually, sometime in the future, maybe my children’s future, trades will take over,” Thao said. 

Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org.

Reading Time: < 1 minute

The candidates for Wisconsin governor in the Nov. 3 election have emphasized how they would regulate artificial intelligence data centers, but they also have spoken favorably of them.

Democrat David Crowley, the Milwaukee County executive, said in November that government should “make sure that this is fertile ground for entrepreneurs and businesses to either stay or move right here to the state of Wisconsin. I do think that data centers play a huge role. …

“There’s an opportunity for us to really become an AI and a data hub not only for the entire country, but for the entire globe.”

Republican U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany voted in December to speed the process for permitting construction of projects such as data centers.

In January, he called data centers “exciting new technology.”

In August, Tiffany said data centers are needed to keep technology from being outsourced to China, WSAW-TV reported.

This Fact Brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Sources

• Wisconsin Public Radio: Tom Tiffany attacks David Crowley on data centers as campaign for governor ramps up
• WISN-TV: Gubernatorial candidates meet for first joint forum focused on tech and the economy
• Congress.gov: House Roll Call Vote 356
• CNBC: House passes bill to ease permits for building out AI infrastructure
• PBS Wisconsin: Tom Tiffany on issues in Wisconsin's 2026 governor's race
• WSAW-TV: Tiffany launches campaign in Mosinee, Crowley visits Fox Valley
• TomTiffany.com: Data Centers
• CrowleyForWI.com: David on Data Centers
• Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Where Tom Tiffany and David Crowley stand on Wisconsin data centers

Have David Crowley and Tom Tiffany both expressed support for data centers? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

A group of four legislative Republicans, including two who aren’t running for reelection, announced this week proposed legislation that would repeal the sales tax exemption for data centers that was included in the 2023-25 budget. 

The biennial budget signed into law in July 2023 exempts data center developers from paying sales and use taxes for the “sale of property and equipment to construct, renovate or operate data centers.” An analysis conducted by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau in March found that the provision has saved developers in the state $1.5 billion. 

The co-sponsorship memo for the proposed bill states that it was authored by Sen. Andre Jacque (R-New Franken) and Reps. Lindee Brill (R-Sheboygan Falls), Dean Kaufert (R-Neenah) and Shae Sortwell (R-Two Rivers). Kaufert and Jacque are both retiring from the Legislature. 

The memo points to the significant public opposition to data centers from the public as the inspiration for the bill. 

“The tax code should not be used to effectuate crony capitalism,” the memo states. 

But Democratic leaders say the proposed legislation is a “stunt” because at this point in the calendar, no legislation is going anywhere. For a bill to even get assigned a number and given a public hearing, a special session of the Legislature would need to be called, according to the Legislative Reference Bureau. 

The Republicans who have signed onto the bill say they’ve done so to start a debate about data centers that can be picked up when the new Legislature takes office in January. Brill told WisPolitics.com that it’s “important to start the conversation on this topic.”

For more than a year, data centers have been one of the most prominent political conversations in the state and across the country. President Donald Trump has frequently spoken about his support for artificial intelligence — which he’s decreed should be renamed “super intelligence” — and argued that communities that reject data centers will “end up being backwards and poor.”

In Wisconsin, lawmakers from both parties introduced bills during the last session to regulate the development of hyperscale data centers. 

A proposal from Sen. Jodi Habush Sinykin (D-Whitefish Bay) and Rep. Angela Stroud (D-Ashland) and supported by most of the Democratic caucus would have required data centers to report to the state on their energy usage, incentivized the development of renewable energy to power the data centers and require the use of union labor. The bill received a public hearing but did not move forward

A separate proposal from Republicans that passed the Assembly but not the Senate was authored by Rep. Shannon Zimmerman (R-River Falls) and Sen. Romaine Quinn (R-Birchwood). Zimmerman has been criticized in his reelection effort for his work as an executive for AI companies. 

The Republican bill would have made data centers pay for their own power development and required any renewable energy facilities built to power the data centers to be located on site — a provision that opponents said would have discouraged any solar or wind projects from actually happening.

Data centers have also played a significant role in the race for governor. Republican Tom Tiffany has tried to paint Democrat David Crowley as being pro-data center.  

Crowley’s data center policies largely match the provisions in the previously introduced Democratic bill. Tiffany has said he supports additional regulations on data center developments but has also tied his opposition to the projects with his broader distaste for renewable energy, which he says takes up too much farmland in the state. 

Prior to data centers becoming so broadly despised by the voting public, however, Republicans introduced a number of bills that would have encouraged their construction in Wisconsin. 

The sales tax exemption that was ultimately included in the budget was first introduced as a piece of standalone legislation in June 2023 by more than a dozen Republicans. 

“As we move ever more into a world driven by technology, these facilities will be necessary to provide the storage and processing power required to service societal demands,” Zimmerman said in his testimony at the bill’s June 8, 2023, hearing. “Construction of these facilities require hundreds if not thousands of tradespeople. Once complete, they rely on a highly skilled and highly paid workforce.” 

“Beyond the nuts and bolts of the policy and projects to follow, I have a personally [sic] affinity for the industry as I’ve been a tech entrepreneur for the last 30 years,” he continued. “Putting Wisconsin up for consideration when the site selectors are reviewing potential locations would be a step in the right direction.” 

In April of 2025, a group of Republican lawmakers introduced another pro-data center bill that would have loosened restrictions on their inclusion in local tax increment districts. These districts are a financing tool used by local governments that divert property taxes paid within that area away from the municipal general fund and direct the money toward infrastructure improvements within the district. Critics of TIDs argue they divert public money to pay for private development costs. 

Under current law, the value of property within a community’s TIDs cannot be more than 12% of all the taxable property in the city. The proposed bill would have exempted data centers from the 12% rule. The measure never made it to the floor of either chamber.

“[The sales tax exemption] is already bearing fruit,” Rep. Mark Born (R-Beaver Dam) said at the bill’s April 30, 2025 hearing. “Two enormous data centers are under construction already in Wisconsin (including one in the district that I represent); more are being planned. All of these projects far exceed the minimum capital investment required to qualify for the tax exemption, and it seems that the demand for these facilities in our nation and in our region will only increase with time.”

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Wisconsin is preparing for a massive expansion of data centers. Billions of dollars are flowing into new facilities, which could sharply increase the state’s electricity demand. At the same time, families across Wisconsin are struggling to afford something much more basic: child care.

Child care costs in Wisconsin have climbed beyond what many families can afford. In 2026, full-time infant care at a center costs an average of $17,400 a year — equal to 22% of Wisconsin’s median household income and more than a year of in-state tuition at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

The problem extends beyond cost. Wisconsin’s child care workforce declined by more than 26% between 2010 and 2022. Child care workers in 2022 earned a median annual wage of $26,333, ranking 13th lowest among 546 occupations, according to a 2023 Forward Analytics report. 

This is not just a problem for parents. It’s a drag on the economy. When families cannot find reliable care, parents may reduce their hours, turn down jobs or leave the workforce. When providers cannot afford to retain workers, classrooms close and families lose options.

Wisconsin has already seen what targeted investment can accomplish. Child Care Counts supported 5,762 programs, 75,740 educators and more than 430,000 children. It also helped the early childhood workforce grow by roughly 17%, according to the Wisconsin Early Childhood Association’s Center for Policy, Research, and Engagement.

But that funding was temporary, and about one-quarter of providers could close or significantly reduce services without continued support.

We cannot keep treating child care as a temporary crisis. Like roads, power lines and broadband, child care is infrastructure that allows the economy to function. 

That is why Wisconsin needs a Wisconsin Public Child Care Act to create a permanent child care trust fund that would make care more affordable and stabilize providers while supporting private, nonprofit, family-based, tribal and in-home programs. Regional child care councils would help tailor investments to local needs.

A permanent program also needs a permanent funding source. Wisconsin’s growing data center industry provides an opportunity.

A 2026 UW-Madison Extension analysis identified more than 4,500 megawatts of potential electricity demand from major current and planned data center projects across the state. The Public Service Commission projects Wisconsin’s peak electricity demand could rise from 14.2 gigawatts in 2026 to approximately 20 gigawatts by 2032, a roughly 40% increase. 

Wisconsin already offers significant tax incentives to attract data centers. The Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimates the state’s data center sales and use tax exemption could result in more than $2 billion in forgone tax revenue from data centers that come to the state.

If Wisconsin is willing to invest billions to attract these projects, it should also ask them to invest in the workforce they rely on.

Rather than treating data centers and child care as competing priorities, Wisconsin should connect them. The largest facilities could pay a modest assessment based on electricity demands. At an illustrative $50,000 per megawatt, 2,000 megawatts of demand could generate approximately $100 million annually for child care. That revenue would increase as more data centers go online. 

This is not an anti-business proposal. Data centers depend on Wisconsin’s roads, energy systems, communities and workforce. That workforce depends on child care.

Wisconsin should welcome economic development while ensuring the public shares its benefits. A small contribution from the state’s largest data centers could help families afford care, stabilize providers, improve child care worker compensation and expand access in communities facing shortages.

Wisconsin should not have to choose between technological investment and working families. We can build the data centers of the future while investing in the child care system that allows Wisconsin’s economy to function.

Child care is essential infrastructure. Wisconsin should fund it accordingly.

Connie Acuahuitl is a University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee student. She recently completed a fellowship with the Roosevelt Institute, which “champions new ideas and new leaders to make our economy and democracy work for the many, not the few.” She also interned at Caring Across Generations, whose mission is to “change our culture and policies in America to value and support caregiving.”

Guest opinion: Wisconsin should tax data centers to fund child care is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Editor’s note: This story was updated Oct. 5, 2026 to add comment from the Wisconsin Citizens Utility Board.

Oracle is looking to Wisconsin’s only operating nuclear plant to power its Ozaukee County data center.

We Energies announced an agreement with the cloud computing giant on Friday that would allow Oracle to “subscribe” to between 10% and 20% of the Point Beach Nuclear Plant’s electricity generation. That electricity would help meet the energy needs of Project Lighthouse, the data center campus in Port Washington that Oracle is co-developing with artificial intelligence firm OpenAI. 

The agreement still requires approval by Wisconsin’s Public Service Commission. If it is approved, We Energies spokesman Brendan Conway said it could spare the utility’s other customers roughly $300 million in fuel costs over the next five years.

The 60-year-old Point Beach plant in Manitowoc County is the state’s largest generator, but the electricity it produces is more expensive than alternatives. We Energies spends about twice as much on fuel as its sibling utility, Wisconsin Public Service Company (PSC). The cost of nuclear fuel for Point Beach accounts for much of the difference. 

We Energies owned the facility until 2007, when it sold Point Beach to independent energy infrastructure giant NextEra Energy but continued purchasing most of the plant’s electricity output. The utility’s current purchase agreement expires in 2033, but We Energies recently signed on to continue buying roughly 86% of the plant’s electricity for another 20-year term. 

“The announcement by Oracle is certainly a step forward, as we have been seeking relief on this for years,” Wisconsin Citizens Utility Board Executive Director Tom Content said. “Whether that is a baby step or a leap forward for affordability remains to be seen.”

Meanwhile, We Energies filed a separate application with the PSC on Friday seeking approval  to build a new natural gas power plant on the site of the Fox Energy Center in Outagamie County. The proposed plant would more than double the site’s electricity output.

Disclosure: The OpenAI Foundation recently awarded a grant to Wisconsin Watch but has no control over its editorial decisions. We will update our funding page to reflect the grant. A list of donors and funders through 2025, as well as our donation acceptance policies, can be found here.

We Energies strikes deal to power Oracle data center with nuclear energy is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Data centers may provide a major economic development opportunity for local communities in Wisconsin, but concerns around water and energy use and potential costs to residents have made them increasingly controversial.

A new report from the Wisconsin Policy Forum aims to put those issues — and Wisconsin’s data center debate — into context. Researchers examined tax incentives supporting those projects as well as their energy and water use.

Three major data center projects are in varying stages of development in Mount Pleasant, Port Washington and Beaver Dam. Others have been proposed but canceled in DeForest, Greenleaf and Janesville as polling has shown the issue to be unpopular with the public.

Communities have ‘significant protections’ under data center incentive deals

State law allows qualified developers to avoid paying sales and use tax on most purchases supporting the construction and operation of a data center.

The Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimates Wisconsin will lose out on $1.5 billion in sales tax revenues related to data center construction between 2024 and 2028, as well as forgo $369 million annually in sales tax revenue related to data center operations.

Wisconsin is one of 38 states that offer tax incentives to data centers. Jason Stein, one of the report’s authors, said without its sales tax exemption, Wisconsin might not have attracted the prominent developments.

“I think it’s reasonable to think that a lot of this investment — maybe most of this investment — would not have occurred without the incentive,” he said.

The report says the state could “recoup a significant portion of the forgone sales tax revenues” if the sales tax exemption helped attract a significant share of data center investment to Wisconsin.

That’s through income and sales taxes paid by construction workers and corporate income taxes paid by construction companies, as well as additional taxes paid by utilities serving data centers. 

Data centers are also expected to generate increased property tax revenues in the communities hosting them. 

Researchers reviewed local development agreements in Mount Pleasant, Port Washington and Beaver Dam, as well as proposed deals in communities where developments fell through. They found that, in general, local communities were striking “reasonable deals” that included financial safeguards.

Those safeguards often included limits on municipal borrowing, guaranteed property values and incentives tied to project performance, the report said.

“If the developer and the community follow through on their agreement and it moves forward as laid out, then those agreements offer substantial protections for the communities,” Stein said. “There are significant protections in each of these deals.”

Data centers use water, but Wisconsin water use has declined

While much of the public debate around data centers in Wisconsin has centered around water use, policy forum researchers found the bigger challenge is meeting the large electricity demands of those projects while protecting existing ratepayers.

That’s because water use in Wisconsin has declined over the past generation as some heavy industry left the state, industrial and residential users became more efficient and electric utilities shifted some energy generation from “water-intensive” coal plants to natural gas and renewable energy, the report said.

From 2011 to 2024, water withdrawals in the state fell by more than 500 billion gallons, or almost 24%, according to the report. 

The three main data center projects in Wisconsin are projected to use less water than the decline in water withdrawals over that period, the report states.

“We were on this track to use less and less water because of changes in our society, and maybe this will slow that down somewhat,” Stein said. “But that is a different thing than saying, ‘Oh my gosh, we’re using more water than ever before.’”

For example, Racine Water Works, the utility providing water for Microsoft’s data center campus in Mount Pleasant, saw its annual water sales decline by 2.3 billion gallons from 2000 to 2025, according to the report.

That’s “more than 250 times” as much water as the 8.4 million gallons annually Microsoft’s data center will use when fully operational, the report states. 

Electricity demand expected to rise significantly

While long-term declines in water use are expected to help offset demand from data centers, Wisconsin’s electricity demand is expected to grow, in large part driven by demand from data centers.

Peak demand from all customers on the grid is expected to rise from 14.6 gigawatts in 2024 to 19.9 gigawatts by 2030, the report states. 

A recent report from state utility regulators found data centers were driving that projected peak demand growth.

The report found that the state Public Service Commission modified proposals from We Energies and Alliant Energy establishing rates for data center-scale customers to shield existing residential customers from costs associated with data centers.

But it remains to be seen how data centers will affect transmission rates, which are set at the federal level, said Tyler Byrnes, one of the report’s authors. 

“It’s a little bit easier to do the math on one power plant for one data center, whereas you’re starting to divide up electrons moving across power lines (and) across state lines, so it’s more complicated,” he said.

He also said there is not currently an approved data center rate framework for developments of that scale outside the service territories of Alliant Energy and We Energies. He said policymakers may want to consider adopting a statewide framework for electric rates tied to data centers.

The report also notes that there are unresolved questions about whether utilities will be able to bring new energy generation and transmission lines online quickly enough to meet the growing demand.

This story was originally published by WPR.

Report: Wisconsin could make up taxes lost to data center incentives is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

What will power the data center boom?

A guide to natural gas, LNG, CNG, propane and other fuels for onsite and behind-the-meter data center power.

Onsite power has moved from contingency plan to mainstream strategy. Data center developers as of September of 2026 have announced roughly 101 GW of onsite natural gas generation to get around grid interconnection queues, and analysts expect behind-the-meter systems to supply a quarter to a third of new data center power demand through 2030.

Most of the industry conversation is about the generation technology: turbine or engine, fuel cell or microgrid. But every one of those machines sits at the end of a fuel supply chain, and the fuel decision shapes cost, schedule, permitting, and uptime as much as the generator does. This guide covers the fuels in use today, what each one requires, and where each fits.

Reading Time: < 1 minute

Congress did not vote up-or-down on giving data center operators a $68 billion tax break, despite that claim in an ad targeting U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany.

Tiffany, a northern Wisconsin Republican, is running for governor in the Nov. 3 election.

The ad from a Democratic Governors Association-backed group cites Tiffany’s 2025 vote for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

A yes vote on the nearly 900-page federal budget package, filled with hundreds of tax breaks and spending cuts, was not necessarily a yes vote for any single provision.

The bill contains business tax breaks, including ”100% depreciation. But they are available broadly, including for data centers, to deduct the cost of many investments. 

A left-leaning think tank said four tech companies — Microsoft, Meta, Alphabet and Amazon — avoided $68 billion in 2025 taxes from the depreciation and three other tax breaks in the bill.

This Fact Brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Sources

• Congress.gov: House Roll Call Vote 190
• Wisconsin Watch: Here are 6 claims about Donald Trump’s big bill — and the facts
• Joint Committee on Taxation: Letter
• Tax Foundation: FAQ: The One Big Beautiful Bill, Explained
• Politico: Corporate tax payments plunge as AI feasts on new incentives
• National Review: No, Republicans Did Not Give Data Centers a Special Tax Break
• BDO: 4 Key OBBBA Provisions Data Centers Need to Know
• Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy: 391 companies avoided $174.9 billion in federal income tax on $1.3 trillion of profit in 2025

Did Tom Tiffany vote to give data center operators a $68 billion tax break? is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

The influence of voter opposition to data center development on November’s elections has begun to show in Wisconsin’s 3rd Congressional District, in one of the state’s most hotly contested races. 

Both candidates in the race, Republican U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden and Democrat Rebecca Cooke, as well as outside spending groups, have each worked to connect the other to pro-data center policies. 

Van Orden’s campaign has pointed out that Cooke worked with the Wisconsin Technology Council and the think tank Third Way, both organizations that have supported data center projects in the past. 

Cooke’s campaign and the Democratic-aligned House Majority PAC have recently run ads criticizing Van Orden for taking campaign contributions from people and organizations tied to the data center industry while voting for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — which included tax breaks that data center developers have used over the past year. 

The House Majority PAC ad refers to the two-term congressman as “Data Center Derrick” marking the alliterative danger for candidates of both parties whose names begin with the letter D this year. In Wisconsin’s race for governor, Republican Tom Tiffany has run ads criticizing “Data Center David” Crowley for his previous statements of support for data center projects. 

Voters in the western Wisconsin district have been vocal in their opposition to data center projects, successfully working to kill a proposed development in Menomonie last year.

WASHINGTON — The rare 2026 issue that draws huge support from Republicans and Democrats in Congress is the same one that’s mobilized many Americans: restrictions on giant data centers.

The House has overwhelmingly passed legislation forcing state regulators to consider requirements that data centers absorb the cost of the electricity they use. 

But there’s more to be done, say data center critics, and they’re finding there is no easy or even obvious answer about what to do next.

Leave it to state and local governments to decide whether and how the centers should function? Should their size be restricted? Should they be banned altogether?

The future of data centers has become a flashpoint in this year’s congressional races. It’s woven into the debate about affordability, artificial intelligence and corporate influence on government.

“People see big energy cost increases and say data centers must be the reason,” said Daniel Birdsong, senior lecturer in political science at the University of Dayton.

Before leaving Washington for an extended recess not due to end until after the election, the House voted Wednesday 417-3 on a bill that requires states to consider having data centers using large amounts of electricity pay the full additional cost of that generation, as well as transmission and distribution upgrades that are needed.

Obstacles to action

The vote was only a prologue for action. There’s no clear next chapter, as skepticism is coming from critics at the White House and among progressives.

The biggest obstacle appears to be President Donald Trump.

“The people that say AI is going to destroy the World, and that Data Centers are bad for your neighborhood, are the same people that said, just a short time ago, that the World would be extinguished by ‘Climate Change,’” he said on his Truth Social site Monday.

“That HOAX never worked out for them, and now they’re on to the next one. These people are Revolutionaries, but Revolutionaries for a Bad and Evil Cause. Soon you’ll find out they’re working for people that do not have the best interests of the United States in mind!”

Senate leaders have not said how or if they’ll take up the House bill, or any other data center legislation.

Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., the Senate’s second-ranking Democrat, was not optimistic.

“There aren’t many alternatives to a president who thinks this is a wonderful asset and communities who think just the opposite,” he said.

The lawmakers know this much: Their constituents don’t like data centers. 

“I’ve never seen people come together across the political spectrum like I have the last few months on concerns about big tech, concerns around AI, concerns around data center development,” said Rep. Chris Pappas, D-N.H.

A national University of Massachusetts Amherst Poll released this week showed just 11% said they backed the construction of the data centers in their local area. Sixty-five percent were opposed, and about half said they were strongly opposed.

“Opposition to AI data centers has emerged as one of these rare areas of consensus,” said poll director Tatishe Nteta.

The political divide

Solutions tend to fall along three very general lines: A complete ban or moratorium; giving state and local governments more tools to regulate the centers; and withdrawing federal support.

Putting pressure on utility companies appears to have the most legislative traction. Rep. Rob Latta, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Energy Subcommittee, found the House-passed legislation would protect consumers from runaway center-inspired utility rates.

The bill, he said, “protects American ratepayers from being forced to cover the cost of energy infrastructure upgrades needed to support data centers.”

Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Fla., one of the bill’s lead sponsors, saw the measure as help for constituents facing affordability issues. “Data centers cannot come at a cost to neighbors who are already facing high grocery, gas, utility, health care and housing costs,” she said.

At the Edison Electric Institute, which represents the nation’s investor-owned electric companies, Drew Maloney, president and CEO, said in a statement that he appreciated Congress’ work and that EEI’s members “will continue working in lockstep to ensure large customers cover the costs of the energy infrastructure they use, and communities have a strong voice from the beginning of the planning process.”  

But some environmental activists saw big flaws in the bill.

“With only a weak directive to states to voluntarily consider adopting cost protections against the energy costs of data centers for ratepayers, state regulators could ultimately choose to ignore this bill,” said Sara Chieffo, senior vice president for government affairs at the League of Conservation Voters. 

A report last year from the Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found that in 2023, data centers used roughly 4.4% of total electricity in this country. It forecast that the figure could double or triple by 2028 to meet the needs of more data, notably from artificial intelligence.

Consumers’ costs are generally figured by how much it costs to generate and deliver electricity. State and local regulators usually set those rates.

Looking ahead 

While the House bill had strong Democratic support, many in the party wanted to go further.

“It’s a step forward,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-New York, told reporters when asked about the House bill. “But more needs to be done.”

That could include some sort of ban, or at least a moratorium, on building more centers, an approach favored by many Democratic progressives.

“Communities should have the right to say ‘no’ to a data center being shoved down their throats,” Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., told colleagues in a floor speech. 

In the Senate, some Democrats sent a strong signal that they wanted to do more than the House bill provided.

The bill “does nothing to meaningfully address the rising costs of AI data center development. Instead, it relies on a voluntary framework that does not require AI data centers to pay the full cost of the energy they consume or the strain they place on the grid,” said Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, top Democrat on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

“We need legislation that makes AI data centers pay their fair share and actually protects families,” he said. 

Among this week’s efforts was new legislation from a group of House Democrats to end certain currently available federal tax incentives available to data centers.

“Tax cuts need to go to families, not data centers. We absolutely should not cut healthcare and food assistance for children and seniors to pay for tax giveaways to corporations,” said Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet, D-Mich., one of the bill’s lead sponsors, at a Capitol Hill press conference.

“Why incentivize this right now?” asked Rep. Don Davis, D-N.C., another top sponsor.

Political fallout

Find a close House or Senate race and chances are good there’s a brawl between candidates over who can best deal with the data center issue.

In Ohio, Sen. Jon Husted, a Republican, is in a close battle with former Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat.

Husted is the lead sponsor of the Senate ratepayer protection bill. Husted tried to get the Senate to consider the measure Thursday but it was blocked by Heinrich.

Asked why he doesn’t support a ban, Husted said, “Whether you want a data center should be a local decision. What we should do is protect the ratepayers from bearing the burden of the cost of building the electricity those data centers use.”

Husted is in a difficult position, Birdsong said, because his call for limits on data centers “puts him at odds with Trump.”

Close House races have similar fights. In Michigan, Rep. Tom Barrett, a Republican, is campaigning as the voice of the consumer.

One way to deal with data centers, he said, is by “stopping federal overreach and preventing the secrecy pledges that have plagued Michigan and undermined the power of local residents.”

The House, though, left Washington and won’t be back voting until a lame-duck session starting Nov. 8, sparking outrage from Democrats.

“That means ZERO votes on lowering costs, ending corruption, addressing AI, or responding to the Iran war before Election Day,” tweeted Rep. Johnny Olszewski Jr., D-Md. 

The Senate’s scheduled to be around through September, but there’s no sign it will take a close look at the data center issue. The big hope is that it will continue to be discussed back home and lawmakers will return ready to act or at least debate.

“We have to understand, ‘What’s the real implication here?’” Davis said.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

The American Transmission Company (ATC) refiled an application on Monday for a sweeping series of grid upgrades in eastern Wisconsin, restarting the state’s six-month review of a project to plug the new Port Washington data center into the grid.

ATC, the state’s largest transmission utility, initially sought Wisconsin Public Service Commission permission last September, with plans to break ground as early as May 2026. Its initial application outlined a more than $1.3 billion infrastructure package, including a high-voltage transmission line and five new substations across Fond du Lac, Ozaukee, Sheboygan and Washington counties, needed to “reliably serve” the new data center by December 2027.

But the commission sent ATC back to the drawing board last month after the company repeatedly adjusted the project’s design, leaving the public with a hazy picture of the proposal, according to commission staff and ratepayer advocates.

Project’s design keeps changing

ATC has since stressed the urgency of the buildout needed to support the data center boom. The company is part of a coalition of utilities asking the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to speed up regional transmission projects needed to serve data centers by suspending competitive bidding, arguing that “bureaucratic red tape” presents a national security risk as the U.S. competes with China for “dominance” in the artificial intelligence race.

But the utility’s first application underwent multiple redesigns, including the addition of temporary bypass lines to avoid outages during construction. The PSC must review those changes and allow other parties, namely ratepayer advocates and affected landowners, an opportunity to weigh in. 

“I don’t recall any other comparable cases in my experience with as many application material document revisions and ongoing design changes throughout the process,” PSC Environmental Affairs Coordinator Adam Ingwell wrote in testimony filed in July. “The sheer volume of documents and revisions, without adequate explanation, likely makes it more challenging than typical for a member of the public to find specific information about the project.”

ATC, by contrast, cast the revisions as “routine.”

“Every application develops during review,” company attorneys wrote last month. “Changes far larger and later than ATC’s have never cast doubt” on whether an application should move forward, they added, citing a Barron County solar farm the PSC approved last March despite an “eleventh-hour” overhaul that included “relocating an entire substation.”

“There is simply no principled basis on which to treat ATC’s lesser and earlier changes more harshly,” the attorneys wrote. 

The three-member commission in August unanimously sided with ATC’s critics, directing ATC to  submit a new application to give the public a better opportunity to assess the full package. 

“This PSC is not opposed or hostile to data centers, construction, generation, (or) transmission,” PSC Chair Summer Strand said, calling the decision “an unfortunate outcome.” Nevertheless, she added, “this application represents a cautionary tale of when unrealistic and unreasonable speed-to-power expectations collide with a deliberative regulatory process.”

How latest application differs

ATC’s new application departs from the previous version in several ways, including removing a segment of transmission line through Trenton in Washington County and Saukville in Ozaukee County.

“The need for this project has not changed, but the application has,” Jared Winters,

ATC executive vice president and chief assets officer, said in a Monday press release.

The PSC will hold a new round of public comment on the project before determining whether it can move forward. That review will begin once the commission determines the new application is “complete.”

ATC restarts push for grid upgrades serving Port Washington data center is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.