Why here?
A useful site can combine power, land, water, fiber, and timing. An advantage matters only if the project actually needs it.
Ask “What can this site deliver that your other realistic options cannot?”
Community field guide
Clear questions. Real protections. A practical place to start when a large data center is proposed near you.
A useful deal starts with evidence about the site, the decision, and the people behind the project.
A useful site can combine power, land, water, fiber, and timing. An advantage matters only if the project actually needs it.
Ask “What can this site deliver that your other realistic options cannot?”
Residents, landowners, local governments, utilities, regulators, and Tribal governments have different roles. Identify the authorized party for each decision.
Ask “Which specific asset, agreement, or approval do you need, and who controls it?”
A proposal needs credible land control, financing, an operator, and a utility path. A strong site alone does not make a funded project.
Ask “What evidence supports your financing, operator commitment, and service date?”
Putting an ask in a separate agreement or calling it voluntary does not automatically make it lawful. Have local counsel confirm authority and the appropriate instrument.
These are separate questions, not points to add together. Missing authority or an unready project cannot be fixed by a high score elsewhere.
Pick a topic. Get the question, the evidence to request, and a promise worth looking at more closely.
Which costs will this project create, who pays them, and what happens if it opens late or uses less power?
An affordability donation is offered without explaining who pays for the infrastructure.
How much water is needed at peak demand, where does it come from, and what changes in a drought?
A phrase such as “closed loop” replaces a complete explanation of water use and heat removal.
What will people hear, breathe, and deal with during construction and full operation?
A property-line average or a generic setback is treated as the whole neighborhood impact study.
How many ongoing jobs are there, what do they pay, and how can local people qualify?
Temporary and permanent roles are added into one impressive jobs number.
After incentives and public costs, what does each public body actually receive over time?
Private construction spending is counted as public revenue, or the same reimbursement is counted twice.
Who owes what, who checks it, and what can happen if it is not delivered?
A company policy, famous logo, or advisory committee stands in for enforceable obligations.
An announcement is a starting point. Turn it into a question someone can answer with evidence.
Illustrative statement
How many are construction job-years, how many are ongoing full-time roles, and what are the wages and local hiring pathways?
A staffing schedule separating construction, employees, and contractors; funded training commitments; placement reporting.
Illustrative statement
What are total annual and peak-day withdrawals and consumption, and what happens during drought?
A full water balance, provider confirmation, metered limits, and an operating drought plan.
Illustrative statement
What does each public body collect after incentives, infrastructure, services, and monitoring costs?
A year-by-year fiscal model with recipients, baseline, incentives, and downside cases.
Illustrative statement
Which entity signs, what exactly must it deliver, and who can enforce the commitment after a sale or closure?
Executed obligations, monitoring and remedy provisions, and collectible financial backing.
Move the timeline to see how recurring value and public costs change the comparison.
Fictional example from the toolkit · Not market rates or a valuation of a real project
Offer A
$20.18m
Value in today's dollars
Offer B
$110.72m
Value in today's dollars
Over 20 years, Offer B has $90.54 million more net present value under these assumptions.
Over 20 years, Offer B has $90.54 million more net present value under these assumptions.
The larger opening payment in Offer A comes with a public capital cost and lower recurring value. Both offers still need comparison with current use and other realistic options.
| Offer | Net present value |
|---|---|
| Offer A | $20.18m |
| Offer B | $110.72m |
| Difference | $90.54m |
A larger financial benefit does not resolve unacceptable impacts or missing legal authority.
| Item | Offer A | Offer B |
|---|---|---|
| Annual taxes before discretionary abatement | 8.00 | 8.00 |
| Annual abatement, deducted | 5.00 | 0.00 |
| Annual contractual benefit | 0.50 | 1.50 |
| Annual services and monitoring, deducted | 1.50 | 1.50 |
| Annual net recurring value | 2.00 | 8.00 |
| Unreimbursed public capital at year zero, deducted | 12.00 | 0.00 |
| One-time benefit at year zero | 5.00 | 2.00 |
This example describes a fictional 100 MW project for one local government. It assumes end-of-year payments, a 4% real discount rate, constant dollars, no terminal value, the same project impacts under each offer, and authority to receive the stated payments. The original guide compares 20 operating years; this explorer also shows shorter horizons using the same simplified inputs.
Net present value translates future net payments into today's value using a stated discount rate.
Real assessment values, exemptions, construction dates, and project phases change. Replace simplified inputs with a reviewed local model before evaluating an actual offer.
Use these six prompts to prepare an agenda. Keep the evidence and detailed notes in the companion worksheet.
Use your browser's Print command for a blank meeting sheet.
This tracks preparation, not whether a project is ready for approval. Selections last until you reload or leave this page.
Before a decision
Unresolved authority, unacceptable resource impacts, unprotected public spending, or obligations that cannot be enforced need resolution through the appropriate process. A larger payment does not cancel them out.
Use worksheet page 12 with the authorized decision bodyRecord whether to proceed, seek revisions, defer a discretionary commitment, or decline through the lawful process, with reasons and a next date.
Use the full guide for the detail and the worksheet to keep the conversation concrete.
Download the worksheet and open it in a PDF reader that supports forms if your browser will not let you type. Save your own completed copy. Calculations in the worksheet are manual.
Adapted from the Community Guide to Data Center Negotiations, US edition, September 12, 2026. The supplied guide contains the source references below. Source descriptions reflect that edition; linked policies and rules may change.
This toolkit is negotiation guidance, not a ready-to-sign contract or legal opinion. Use verified local evidence and appropriate legal, utility, engineering, and tax review before adopting terms.
Community data center — meeting preparation
A blank preparation sheet. Record what you learn and what remains unknown.
Identify the responsible parties.
Name the landowner, developer, operator, proposed guarantor, and authorized signatories.
Map the decisions and deadlines.
List what is requested, who has authority, existing rights, and actual filing or decision dates.
Include the people affected.
Invite nearby residents and relevant community participants; identify Tribal governments and their distinct rights and processes where relevant.
Request the missing evidence.
Track each claim as verified, developer supplied, estimated, or unknown; assign a reviewer and due date.
Separate public value from public costs.
Ask for receipts, incentives, infrastructure costs, ongoing costs, and a realistic baseline.
Ask what happens if plans change.
Test delay, partial buildout, ownership change, default, and closure, with a responsible party for each protection.
For each unresolved claim: record the source, its status (verified, developer supplied, estimated, or unknown), the reviewer, and the next action.
This tracks preparation, not whether a project is ready for approval.