Why should voters trust you to make decisions on data centers?
Michigan political candidates debated whether voters should trust them to regulate data center development in the public interest. Both candidates supported a moratorium on new data centers until safeguards for water, electricity costs, noise, local control and pollution are established, while accusing each other of conflicts of interest and weakening local authority.
During a Michigan election debate, one candidate defended a proposed moratorium on new data center development until the state adopts protections for water resources, energy costs, noise and local decision-making. The candidate accused the opponent of voting repeatedly to limit local residents' ability to influence data center projects and of profiting from data center company investments and tax breaks.
The opposing candidate denied the allegations and accused the other candidate and her husband of benefiting from a $370,000 transaction involving development near Saline and productive farmland. He also proposed a five-part moratorium focused on restoring local control, preventing higher electricity bills and pollution, protecting water, and prioritizing brownfields over greenfield sites. The exchange referenced Public Act 233 and broader concerns about state policy overriding local governments.