New Hampshire lawmakers say push from public, governor behind new batch of proposed data center guardrails

This article was originally published by New Hampshire Bulletin.

Although a mash of proposed restrictions and protections for AI data centers raised debate in the New Hampshire Legislature earlier this year, they largely failed to progress. Now, as early filings for the 2027 session show, some lawmakers are hoping to do more.

With some preliminary bill requests tentatively filed ahead of the next legislative session, at least three incumbent lawmakers — only one of whom has a challenger — have so far submitted requests to the state’s Office of Legislative Services for help drafting bills pertaining to data centers. (If a lawmaker is not reelected, their early-filed proposal could be taken on by another legislator or, otherwise, fail to advance.)

The early proposals reflect two visions for a statewide moratorium on data centers. It’s a move more than a dozen states are considering, with New York becoming the first to adopt a one-year ban this summer. Early versions of the proposals floated in New Hampshire differ in their lengths, requirements, and the expectations shared by the legislators who authored them for New Hampshire’s role in a post-moratorium future.

A Call From the Executive Branch

One person pushing for a moratorium on data centers in New Hampshire is Gov. Kelly Ayotte, who said in September she would support such a pause after proposals floated for Nottingham and Bow were met with public opposition. 

The governor indicated she would propose a moratorium on the centers in the next biennial budget, which will be finalized in summer 2027. She said she would support a “years” long pause, according to reporting by New Hampshire Public Radio.

Ayotte, who is up for reelection, has taken criticism from some Democrats, including her challenger,  Cinde Warmington, for not acting sooner. 

In an Oct. 22 debate co-hosted by New Hampshire Public Radio, Manchester Ink Link, and the Granite State News Collaborative, Warmington said Ayotte had previously acted favorably to developers by signing a bill allowing off-grid power generation in the state.

“Be clear about what her position is; it has only changed now because it’s politically convenient,” Warmington said.

Ayotte said that was “absolutely false,” adding that New Hampshire could not sustain a data center. She cited concerns over “energy costs, also the water costs, the environmental costs” of data centers. 

“I oppose data centers… and I will work to get this moratorium done,” she said.

Proposals From the Legislature

Sen. Daniel Innis, a Bradford Republican, is another member of New Hampshire’s majority party calling for a pause on data centers ahead of the 2027 session.

He is running for reelection against Rebecca Harned, a Democrat, who has previously called for regulation of artificial intelligence and data centers; in a September op-ed in the Concord Monitor, Harned called for a “temporary moratorium” on large-scale data centers.

Innis is behind one of two early-phase proposals for a data center moratorium filed so far this fall. In an interview, he acknowledged a shift within his party toward data center skepticism.

“As we’ve learned more, you know, we’ve taken a different position,” he said.

The other early-filed moratorium proposal comes from Rep. Thomas Cormen, a Lebanon Democrat, who is running unopposed for reelection.

Only the titles of the proposals are currently published, but in interviews, Cormen and Innis outlined different visions for the length and details of a potential pause. Both said Ayotte’s request for a moratorium had motivated their proposals.

Innis said he envisions a pause that would expire at the end of 2027. As legislation cannot be acted upon until the upcoming session, this would see the moratorium lasting less than one year. But that would be long enough, Innis said, to allow legislators to map out a way to ensure data centers do not contribute to rising electric rates or environmental disruptions like noise pollution.

Cormen said a draft version of his proposed moratorium would last through the end of 2028, and apply to any data center using 20 megawatts or more of electricity at its peak.

“I think it’s going to take a while to get the guardrails through and get them right,” he said in an interview. 

Other Protective Measures

As for what those guardrails must look like, proposals are forthcoming, Cormen said, including in another proposal he has filed early to regulate facilities — like data centers — that use large amounts of energy.

Both Cormen and Innis identified finding ways to prevent the cost of delivering large amounts of power to data centers being shifted onto ratepayers as a priority. Cormen envisions protections applying to facilities with peak loads of 30 megawatts — a threshold he chose in an attempt to exclude New Hampshire’s existing large-power-use customers, like universities and hospitals. 

Cormen’s draft proposal would require large power users to use entirely “clean” sources if they are generating power on-site to fire their servers, he said, meaning they may not use any greenhouse gas-emitting source of energy. The bill would also seek to require the Public Utilities Commission or utilities to give projects using clean power preference in the queue for interconnecting to the grid, he said. 

Data center developers are increasingly turning to diesel fuel as a power source, including at a site in Lowell, where neighbors have raised air quality concerns as they attempt to stop the development from expanding further.

Cormen said the draft also sought to encourage large power users to reduce demand during peak periods, when electricity is most expensive.

Rep. Laurel Stavis, a Lebanon Democrat who is also running unopposed for reelection, said she was motivated by the failure of proposed AI regulations last session to reintroduce multiple measures this fall, including through her work on an AI working group within the House Democratic caucus. 

One proposal Stavis has filed early would define different scales of data centers in New Hampshire’s statutes, which she said would allow communities to regulate data centers differently depending on their size. 

Data centers exist in a range of sizes, from server clusters found in office buildings to vast complexes used to train artificial intelligence. 

Within Stavis’ proposal is the requirement that any action to repurpose a building for use as a large-load data center — which she defines as a facility with a peak load of 50 megawatts, about the amount of energy used to power about 25,000 homes — would trigger review by the local zoning board. Stavis also intends, she added, to propose a prohibition on the use of non-disclosure agreements between developers and municipal officials during the proposal and permitting process.

These ideas are only the earliest of those filed by lawmakers this session, Stavis said. She and Cormen said they were confident the state will see numerous other proposed regulations in the coming session.

In addition to trepidation, in interviews, Stavis, Cormen, and Innis expressed a mix of cautious optimism about the future of artificial intelligence and data centers in New Hampshire.

Innis said he believes New Hampshire could benefit from the facilities if the right protections are adopted for ratepayers and the environment.

“We’ve got to work with these companies, and we’ve got to work among ourselves and figure out how it is that we want it done in New Hampshire,” Innis said. “I think once we do that, we’ll be able to green-light some of these things.”

Stavis said the developments could become smaller and less obtrusive, while Cormen, a retired computer science professor, said he hoped the technology would lead to new frontiers. 

“I’m worried about AI … I am very concerned about the misuse of it, and it getting out of control,” he said. “But I also see that it’s going to open up many possibilities for many people, and I also believe that it’s going to create industries and careers that we have no idea, right now, what they are.”

But for now, the legislators agreed that a moratorium was warranted and expressed confidence that one would pass through the Legislature in 2027.

While Innis says he believes the tide of public opinion will change, at present, it is clear that public opinion is strongly against the developments and the technology they power, he said. 

“It’s almost universal,” he said.