Building a neutral knowledge base on data centers in Ohio

A version of the following public comment was submitted to the members of the Ohio State Senate on March 24, 2026.

The rapid growth of data centers nationwide requires that both policymakers and the public be well-informed. House Bill 646 represents an invaluable opportunity to build a neutral, trusted, and commonly held knowledge base for Ohioans to decide on state-level policies, as well as permitting in local communities.

House Bill 646 would position Ohio as a leader among states by providing its citizens and policymakers with a go-to source of reliable information on data centers. One state (Virginia) has already produced such a report, while three additional states (California, Maryland, and New Jersey) have passed or are considering similar legislation.

As the data center issue has gained public prominence, several key questions have emerged as particularly important:

• How many data centers are there already, and how many more are planned?
• What is the likely impact on electricity demand, along with rates paid by households?
• What is the likely impact on local water resources?
• Are issues with noise or other local environmental impacts likely to arise?
• What is the local economic impact likely to be, in terms of jobs and tax revenue?
• What are the broader benefits of data centers, including infrastructure for AI and computing, long-term technological progress, and national security?

HB 646 ensures that this core group of questions will be covered both by the topics set forth in Section (D) and the knowledge areas of commissioners set forth in Section (B). A review of similar reports already issued in Virginia, as well as by a small number of counties and municipalities (including Loudon County, VA, and Prince George's County, MD), confirms that HB 646 does not omit any major topics or areas of expertise. The six-month time frame stipulated for the commission to produce a report strikes an appropriate balance between the extensive work mandated by HB 646 and the need to quickly make decisions based on that report.

In addition to the topic areas already set out in the bill, we suggest adding a brief comparative study of Ohio's data center policies compared to those being developed in other states. Ohio is currently considering regulations on data center energy pricing and tax incentives, to name just two examples. A brief report from the commission on similarities or differences between Ohio and other states would help better inform legislators and voters alike in making these decisions.

Similarly, we recommend that the commission review current rules regarding data centers supplying their own power rather than attaching to the grid. With concerns nationwide over grid strain and household rates, building private generation capacity for data centers is an increasingly attractive option. A review by the commission of the regulatory status of such arrangements in Ohio would therefore prove useful.

For the commission's report to achieve its maximum positive impact in Ohio, its findings must be neutral and unbiased, and must also be perceived as such by the many groups opposed to each other on this issue. This can be achieved first and foremost by equipping the commission with the right expert knowledge from around the state, and by presenting all findings and calculations such that they are well-sourced and straightforward to replicate.

Additionally, the commission's report must studiously avoid the appearance of bias in how it presents its findings. To that end, we recommend deleting one of the topic areas currently mandated in HB 646, "Reports of foreign propaganda intended to create opposition to data centers." To the extent that any such information turns out to be relevant to the commission's findings, it can be covered by the final topic area, "Any other relevant topics determined by the Commission."

Making the necessary decisions about data centers requires that state and local officials, along with voters, be well-informed. Because of the many complexities and quickly evolving nature of this issue, a state commission is uniquely well placed to provide the necessary information. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this written testimony, and we welcome the opportunity to advise the legislature on this subject in the future.