Spartanburg Says No: How One South Carolina Town Is Fighting Back Against Big Tech's AI Land Grab

Small Town Draws a Line in the Sand

On June 22, 2026, the Spartanburg County Council in upstate South Carolina voted to impose a one-year moratorium on all data center applications, using a legal mechanism to immediately halt a wave of proposed developments that residents feared would transform their community. The vote stopped all data center construction for twelve months and could be extended beyond that by another council vote.

Spartanburg, a county of about 330,000 people, is not the kind of place that typically makes national technology headlines. But it has found itself at the center of a battle that is playing out in communities across America — the scramble by Big Tech companies to build massive data centers to power the artificial intelligence revolution. And Spartanburg's decision to push back is being watched closely by other small communities facing the same pressures.

The story of Spartanburg's fight against the data center invasion is a story about who gets to decide the future of small-town America — the people who live there, or the corporations that want to exploit their land and resources.

The AI Gold Rush

The artificial intelligence boom has created an insatiable demand for data centers — massive warehouse-like facilities packed with servers that process and store the enormous volumes of data required to train and run AI models. These facilities require enormous amounts of electricity, water, and land, and they produce almost no local employment once constructed.

Big Tech companies — Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, and others — are in a race to build data centers as fast as possible. They are targeting small towns and rural areas where land is cheap, local governments are pliable, and residents may not fully understand what is being built in their backyards. The incentives offered to these companies — tax breaks, infrastructure subsidies, zoning variances — are often negotiated in secret, with minimal public input.

In Spartanburg, the county had approved tax incentives in 2025 for a company called Northmark Strategies to construct a data center at the former Kohler Plant on South Pine Street. But as more proposals emerged and residents began to understand the scale and impact of what was being proposed, opposition grew. The Spartanburg County Council member who pushed for the moratorium cited concerns about water usage, power consumption, and the lack of local economic benefit.

The False Promise of Jobs

The primary selling point that data center developers use to win local support is the promise of jobs. But the reality is that data centers are among the most employment-inefficient forms of economic development that exist. A typical data center employs between 30 and 50 people — mostly highly specialized technicians who are often brought in from outside the local area rather than hired locally.

For a facility that may occupy hundreds of acres of land, consume as much electricity as a small city, and require millions of gallons of water for cooling, the return on investment for the local community is minimal. The jobs that are created tend to be low-wage security and maintenance positions, not the high-tech employment that residents are promised.

Meanwhile, the costs to the community are significant. Data centers place enormous strain on local power grids, often requiring the construction of new transmission lines and substations that are paid for by ratepayers. They consume vast quantities of water in areas that may already face supply challenges. They contribute almost nothing to the local tax base because of the incentives they receive. And they take land that could otherwise be used for housing, agriculture, or light industry that would generate far more local employment.

The Environmental Double Standard

Perhaps the most galling aspect of the data center invasion is the environmental double standard. The same Big Tech companies that lecture Americans about climate change, that impose carbon neutrality goals on their supply chains, that fund environmental activist organizations — these same companies are building data centers that consume electricity on a scale that dwarfs entire communities.

A single large data center can consume as much electricity as a mid-sized city. The AI models that these data centers train and run require enormous computational power, and that power translates directly into energy consumption and carbon emissions. The tech industry's own estimates suggest that AI could double global data center energy consumption within the next few years.

Yet the environmental movement, which routinely opposes oil pipelines, coal plants, and natural gas fracking, has been largely silent about the data center explosion. The hypocrisy is staggering. When a traditional energy company builds a facility that creates jobs and produces affordable energy, environmentalists mobilize in opposition. When a Big Tech company builds a data center that consumes massive energy and produces almost no local employment, environmentalists look the other way.

The reason is simple: the environmental movement is not really about the environment. It is about power. And the Big Tech companies that fund it have the power and the money to buy silence.

The Water Crisis

In Spartanburg and communities like it, the water consumption of data centers is a particularly pressing concern. Data centers require millions of gallons of water for cooling — water that is drawn from local supplies that are already under strain from population growth, agriculture, and industrial use.

In drought-prone areas, the impact can be devastating. Rivers and aquifers that supply drinking water to communities are being tapped to cool server farms that benefit no one locally. The long-term sustainability of this water consumption is rarely considered in the rush to approve data center projects.

Spartanburg's moratorium specifically cited water usage as a concern, and the county is not alone. Communities across the Southeast, where drought cycles have become more severe, are beginning to question whether they can afford to give away their water resources to Big Tech companies that contribute almost nothing to the local economy.

What Spartanburg's Fight Means for America

Spartanburg's moratorium is a victory for local democracy and a model for other communities facing the same pressures. Other South Carolina counties are following Spartanburg's lead — the South Carolina Daily Gazette reported that multiple counties are enacting data center moratoriums to evaluate where these facilities should go and what the communities get in return.

The lesson is that communities do not have to accept whatever Big Tech wants to build. They can demand transparency, negotiate real benefits, and reject projects that do not serve the interests of local residents. The data center gold rush has been proceeding with minimal scrutiny for years. Spartanburg's decision to hit pause is a reminder that local governments have the power — and the obligation — to protect their communities.

What Every Small Town Should Do

Spartanburg's fight offers a roadmap for every American community facing the data center invasion.

Impose a moratorium. Before approving any data center project, communities should pause and conduct a thorough assessment of the costs and benefits. A moratorium gives local officials time to understand what is being proposed and to negotiate from a position of strength rather than desperation.

Demand real economic benefits. If a data center is going to consume local land, water, and electricity, it should provide real economic benefits to the community — not a handful of low-wage jobs. Local hiring requirements, community benefit agreements, and meaningful tax contributions should be non-negotiable.

Protect water and power resources. Data centers should be required to demonstrate that their water and energy consumption will not strain local supplies. They should pay the full cost of any infrastructure upgrades needed to serve them — not shift those costs to local ratepayers.

Ensure transparency. Data center deals are often negotiated in secret, with tax incentives and zoning variances approved before the public has any opportunity to weigh in. Every proposal should be subject to full public review, with all terms disclosed.

Look beyond the promises. Data center developers promise jobs, tax revenue, and economic development. Communities should demand evidence, not promises — and they should be prepared to walk away from deals that do not serve their interests.

Spartanburg said no. Every small town in America facing the same invasion should have the courage to do the same. The fight for local control over local resources is a fight worth winning.