Manchester Township, NJ adopts data-centre ban (Ord. 26-48)
Blocked
MANCHESTER REVERSED ITSELF AND BANNED DATA CENTRES, UNANIMOUSLY. The Ocean County township council adopted Ordinance 26-48 on second reading in mid-September 2026 (reported 18 Sep), undoing an earlier decision that had let data centres into the township's redevelopment plan. The ban was introduced in late August. Council President Michele Zolezi said data centres are not permitted in Manchester, full stop. The ordinance takes effect after a 20-day wait. Residents who came to the meeting at Manchester Township High School were not reassured: they asked whether a developer could file during those 20 days, whether a lawsuit would follow, why the text has no definition of a data centre, and whether a moratorium should be layered on top. A use variance before the Zoning Board remains possible under state land-use law. NOT ESTABLISHED: the exact meeting date, the roll call by name, and which redevelopment project had included data centres. Ask the township clerk for the adopted ordinance and roll call.
Millburn's planning board finds the ban inconsistent with the master plan
Contesting
MILLBURN'S PLANNERS SAID NO TO A BAN, NARROWLY. On 17 Sep 2026 the Planning Board found the Township Committee's draft data-centre prohibition inconsistent with the master plan, and suggested a limit instead: accessory computing capped at 20% of a building or 10,000 square feet and 2 megawatts of dedicated capacity. A subcommittee will study technology and utility impacts on a short timetable. In New Jersey a governing body can still adopt an ordinance the planning board calls inconsistent, but it must state its reasons, so the next move is the committee's. NOT ESTABLISHED: the board's vote count and whether the committee will proceed, amend or drop the ban.
Gloucester Township adopts a ban that reaches redevelopment areas
Blocked
GLOUCESTER TOWNSHIP (CAMDEN COUNTY) ADOPTED AN ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION ON 15 SEP 2026, unanimously, with nobody speaking at the hearing. Ordinance O-26-16 bars commercial, industrial or large-scale data centres in every zoning district, overlay zone and redevelopment area. THE REDEVELOPMENT CLAUSE IS THE PART TO NOTE. The Pinelands Alliance argues that towns can let a banned use back in through redevelopment plans, and that neighbours are not individually notified when those plans are adopted. An ordinance that names redevelopment areas closes that route unless a later plan overrides it. A resident had earlier asked about a proposed data-centre listing in the township, and the administration was told to follow up. NOT ESTABLISHED: how 'large-scale' is defined or whether there is a size threshold, the roll-call names, and what the listing was. The source is an automated summary of the meeting video, so confirm against the adopted ordinance.
Linden, NJ introduces citywide AI data-centre ban (Ord. 70-53)
Contesting
LINDEN PUT A CITYWIDE BAN ON THE TABLE ON 15 SEP 2026. Mayor Derek Armstead and Council President Michele Yamakaitis brought an ordinance to the Union County city's council prohibiting AI data centres in every zoning district. The city posted notice of Ordinance 70-53, adding data centres to its list of prohibited uses (Chapter 31-20.25), on 18 Sep. Officials cited electricity and water demand, noise, emissions and strain on local infrastructure against few permanent jobs; no specific project is named as the trigger. The city says it consulted the youth group Climate Revolution Action Network, which drafts many of these ordinances. NOT ESTABLISHED: the first-reading vote and the date of the public hearing and final vote. The city clerk's published notice of Ordinance 70-53 will give the hearing date.
Middletown introduces a ban; final vote was set for 21 Sep
Contesting
MIDDLETOWN INTRODUCED A BAN ON 8 SEP 2026 WITH A FINAL VOTE SET FOR 21 SEP. Ordinance 2026-3536 would list data centres as a prohibited use in every zoning district of the Monmouth County township, next door to Holmdel, which banned them in August after a 40 MW application arrived. NOT ESTABLISHED: whether the 21 Sep hearing went ahead and how the committee voted. What would settle it: the township clerk's record of the 21 Sep meeting or a local report of the second reading.
Raritan Township bans data centres, including inside warehouses and flex space
Blocked
RARITAN TOWNSHIP BANNED DATA CENTRES IN SEPTEMBER 2026 AND CLOSED THE WAREHOUSE DOOR BY NAME. The Hunterdon County committee amended its land development code to prohibit data centres in every district and to say that warehouses, flex space and research buildings cannot contain one -- the conversions a developer would otherwise try. It keeps a narrow allowance: a server room inside a building, serving only that building, capped at 10% of floor area or 2,000 square feet, whichever is smaller. Mayor Brad Perry and the whole committee supported it. Compare Summit and Bernards, which also wrote their carve-outs down in numbers. NOT ESTABLISHED: the exact adoption date (reported 21 Sep as 'recent'), the ordinance number and roll call. Ask the clerk.
Rochelle Park, NJ drafting a data-centre ordinance; planner advises against a blanket ban
Contesting
ROCHELLE PARK IS WRITING RULES, NOT YET A BAN -- and its planner warned against a blanket one. At the Bergen County township's Land Use Board on 28 Aug 2026, members were told the governing body wants a data-centre ordinance drafted. Consultant planner Burgess advised barring large data centres while allowing small computer rooms serving a single business, with generator noise limits and assurances on water and power. His reason is worth noting for every New Jersey town counting bans: he said emerging case law treating some uses as 'inherently beneficial' may bring more lawsuits, and that master-plan language is sturdier than a flat prohibition. A draft is expected in October. NOT ESTABLISHED: whether a ban or a regulation will be introduced, and when. No data-centre project is pending in the township.
New Jersey requires data centres to report energy and water use, and rejects a statewide pause
Restricted
THE STATE CHOSE DISCLOSURE, NOT A PAUSE. On 27 Aug 2026 Gov. Mikie Sherrill signed a law requiring data centres to report to the Board of Public Utilities every six months: total power, cooling and IT-equipment energy, peak daily water use, water sources and backup power. It is one of four pillars of the plan she announced in May -- reporting, a separate rate class (signed 7 Jul), help for towns negotiating with developers, and state technical assistance for towns reviewing projects. The same day, residents and Food & Water Watch confronted her asking for a statewide moratorium; her spokesperson answered that rather than a three-year study, the governor acted. That is the split this map keeps recording: by CRAN's count nearly 100 New Jersey towns have banned data centres, and the state will regulate them rather than pause them. NOT ESTABLISHED: the bill number and whether small facilities are exempt from reporting. WHAT TO ASK: when the first reports are due and whether BPU will publish them.
Mullica Township introduces a six-month data-centre moratorium
Contesting
MULLICA INTRODUCED A SIX-MONTH PAUSE; ADOPTION IS NOT CONFIRMED. Ordinance 09-2026, posted by the township on 27 Aug 2026 at first reading, would halt approval, construction, expansion and operation of data centers in Mullica Township for six months while the Planning Board and Environmental Commission study the issue and make recommendations. It amends section 144-9 of the township code. Mullica is a Pinelands township. NOT ESTABLISHED: the second-reading date, the vote, and whether the pause has taken effect. Ask the township clerk.
Jackson bans data centres, and its council president says that weakens the town
Blocked
The Jackson Township Council voted 4-1 on Aug 25, 2026 to ban data centres by ordinance, before a packed municipal building and after a large turnout. Councilman Chris Pollak drafted Ordinance 2026-25; the township contains part of the Pinelands National Reserve, and residents organising with Climate Revolution Action Network New Jersey pointed to grid strain and clean water. Councilman Nino Borrelli framed it as getting a law on the books BEFORE an application arrives, and noted the wording could later be tightened toward the stronger ordinance neighbouring Howell Township adopted. THE DISSENT IS THE MOST USEFUL PART OF THIS RECORD AND IS NOT A PRO-DATA-CENTRE POSITION. Council President Mordechai Burnstein, who opposes data centres like everyone else on the dais, voted no on the ground that the ordinance WEAKENS the township. Township legal counsel had already advised that data centres are not a permitted use anywhere in Jackson: under Township Code 244-6 any use not specifically permitted is prohibited, and data centres appear in no zone, so an applicant would already need a use variance. Burnstein argued that writing a definition into the code helps applicants and their lawyers rather than residents, citing a 2015 episode in which the township had no definition of dormitories, banned them, and opened what he called a can of worms. NOT ESTABLISHED: which reading is right. No court has tested it. But it is a live legal question under any municipality's land-use scheme, and it is not visible in any count of bans.
East Brunswick bans data centres with nobody speaking against
Blocked
East Brunswick banned data centres unanimously on Aug 25, 2026, one of three New Jersey municipalities to act the same night alongside North Brunswick and Stafford Township. NO MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC SPOKE at the ordinance's public hearing -- worth recording because this map's records are usually built from packed rooms and hours of comment, and an unopposed, unattended, unanimous ban is a different political fact: by August 2026 this had stopped being contentious here. Before the vote the council made a clerical correction, changing "primary use" to "principal use" to match the terminology already in the township's land use code, a change made earlier at planning board level. Charlie Kratovil of Food & Water Watch spoke in support during general public comment after the hearing had closed.
Middlesex neighbour acts the same night, with nothing pending
Blocked
Unverified
North Brunswick prohibited data centres on Aug 25, 2026, the same night as neighbouring East Brunswick and as Stafford Township on the shore. Residents organised alongside Food & Water Watch New Jersey, The Watershed Institute and Climate Revolution Action Network. CRAN's executive director Ben Dziobek described the mechanism plainly: residents see what other towns have done, talk to each other, and demand the same protection, so each ordinance makes the next one easier. That is a claim about diffusion rather than about any local application -- nothing was pending here. SOURCING NOTE: this record rests on the advocacy release and ROI-NJ's report of it. The ordinance number and vote count have not been read directly and should be confirmed with the township clerk.
Stafford Township bans data centres, first in Ocean County
Blocked
Stafford Township adopted Ordinance 2026-22 on Aug 24, 2026, the first ban in Ocean County. It supplements Section 212-4.1 of the township code, headed Additional Prohibited Uses, and the operative line is one sentence: all data centres are prohibited from operating anywhere in the township. The ordinance defines a data centre as a facility used to store and manage digital data -- a broad definition, which cuts both ways, since breadth is what makes a ban hard to route around and also what makes it vulnerable to the argument that it sweeps in ordinary server rooms. A resident told the council she hoped it would set a precedent among other shore towns; one Ocean County town, Jackson, followed the next night. NOTE THE DRAFTING ROUTE, because it differs from the objection raised in Jackson: Stafford added data centres to an EXISTING list of prohibited uses rather than writing a new definitional section, which is the narrower move.
Howell declares an existing prohibition rather than creating a new one
Blocked
Howell Township's all-Republican council voted UNANIMOUSLY on Aug 18, 2026 for an ordinance that, in its own words, RECONFIRMS data centres as a prohibited use under the township's existing zoning rules -- introduced Jul 14, after the township had already adopted a moratorium by unanimous vote the previous December. THAT WORDING IS THE POINT, and it answers the objection raised in Jackson. Jackson's council president voted against a ban there arguing that writing a new definition into the code helps applicants' lawyers, because uses not specifically permitted are already prohibited. Howell drafted around exactly that risk: rather than creating a new prohibition it declares an existing one, which leaves nothing new for a developer to argue was absent before. Two neighbouring Monmouth-area townships took opposite drafting views of the same legal question within a week of each other. Resident Joe Bizonos of Howell Connections framed it as being proactive in a farm town with natural resources to protect; residents organised with Climate Revolution Action Network. Mayor John Leggio and the council backed it.
Cresskill, NJ adopts data-centre ban (Ord. 26-44-1700)
Blocked
CRESSKILL BANNED DATA CENTRES ON 12 AUG 2026 WITHOUT A SINGLE PUBLIC COMMENT. The Bergen County borough council adopted Ordinance 26-44-1700 unanimously, adding a definition of data centre to its zoning code and prohibiting the use. Council Member Schultz-Rummel moved it and Council Member Savas seconded. No project is on record as having prompted it, and no resident spoke at the hearing. NOT ESTABLISHED: the introduction date and whether any application was pending. The borough's 2026 ordinance library holds the adopted text.
Holmdel bans data centres -- after a 40 MW application arrived
Contesting
THE BAN PASSED; THE PROJECT IT WAS AIMED AT MAY NOT BE COVERED. Holmdel's Township Committee banned data centres unanimously on 11 Aug 2026. But three days after the ordinance was introduced on 21 Jul, Bell Works owner Somerset Development filed a site plan for a 108,000-square-foot, 40-megawatt data centre inside an existing building at 101 Crawford Corner Road. The township's own attorney, Michael Collins, told the public that New Jersey's time-of-application rule means a complete application is judged under the zoning that existed when it was filed -- before the ban. THIS IS THE GAP IN EVERY BAN ON THIS MAP: an ordinance protects a town only against applications that arrive after it. The Planning Board took the application up from 1 Sep and has up to about 120 days. NOT ESTABLISHED: whether the board approves it, and on what conditions. WHAT TO ASK: the Planning Board's hearing dates for the Bell Works site plan.
Vineland approves an AI data centre as residents object
Overruled
Unverified
A LOSS, IN THE STATE WITH THE MOST BANS. While three dozen New Jersey municipalities were prohibiting data centres, Vineland approved the next phase of a large AI data-centre project in August 2026 over resident objection -- NJ.com reported residents erupting at the meeting, one telling officials they had been sold out. THIS RECORD EXISTS BECAUSE THE MAP NEEDS IT. New Jersey is being described nationally as the state that said no, on the strength of a ban count kept by advocacy groups. A count of bans cannot show the towns that said yes, and a reader who sees only the bans will misjudge what is actually happening in the state. WHAT HAS SINCE BEEN ESTABLISHED: the developer is DataOne, building for Nebius. The phase approved in August is an LNG tank and fuel-cell plant; DataOne later drew stop-work notices for starting it before city approval, neighbours filed a class-action suit over noise, and on 22 Sep 2026 the state fined DataOne $1.07 million for running 62 gas generators without air permits (separate records). NOT ESTABLISHED: the Planning Board's vote on the phase. The approval itself is still recorded from Patch's summary of NJ.com.
Jersey City, the state's second-largest, prohibits the use
Blocked
Unverified
Jersey City, the second-largest city in New Jersey, voted to ban data centres within its limits in August 2026, alongside Howell and Bayonne in the same week. It is the largest municipality on the state's ban list and the one that most complicates the picture of this as a suburban and rural movement -- a dense city with existing commercial infrastructure prohibiting a commercial use outright. SOURCING NOTE: recorded from Patch's statewide roundup and its linked local report; the ordinance number and vote count have not been read directly.
Bayonne votes 5-0 after the question decided a mayoral race
Blocked
A DEFINING ELECTION ISSUE, then a 5-0 vote. Bayonne's city council approved a data-centre prohibition unanimously and Mayor Sharon Ashe-Nadrowski signed it, making Bayonne -- by Patch's count at the time -- the 23rd New Jersey municipality to ban them. THE DIFFERENCE FROM MOST ENTRIES ON THIS LIST is that Bayonne had something concrete to refuse: no data centre operates there, but three were proposed in the preceding year, including a large AI facility at the Delta Self-Storage site on New Hook Road. Residents packed council meetings for months and the question became a defining issue in the city's mayoral election -- a rare case on this map where a data-centre fight was fought at the ballot box rather than only in a council chamber. The campaign was backed by Friends of Liberty State Park and state Senator Angela McKnight. Resident Jennah Reddick, who led it, said the point was that residents rather than developers held the power, and that they had been told it was a losing fight.
Summit removes the megawatt threshold that would have been the loophole
Blocked
THE ONLY TOWN ON THIS MAP THAT PUBLICLY WORKED OUT THAT ITS OWN THRESHOLD WAS THE LOOPHOLE. Summit's Common Council spent months not on WHETHER to prohibit data centres but on how to DEFINE one in the ordinance, adding them to the prohibited land uses in Chapter 35 of the city's Development Regulations. The draft turned on a 20-MEGAWATT PEAK POWER THRESHOLD. Municipal Land Use Manager Augusto Thomaso said the benchmark came from industry standards: a traditional server room runs around that level, while a large AI data centre can need hundreds of megawatts. COUNCILMAN JAMEL BOYER MADE THE OBJECTION THAT EVERY JURISDICTION WRITING ONE OF THESE SHOULD READ. His point was that the threshold sat at the top of the fastest-growing category, so the ordinance would bar the rare giant while leaving the door open to the common kind, and that as written it did not prohibit what residents were actually asking to be prohibited. Council members and residents raised the same worry from the other side -- that newer, smaller-scale projects are designed and operated in ways a strict power cutoff does not capture. THE COUNCIL AGREED AND REMOVED THE NUMBER: staff and consultants were directed to draft a revised ordinance dropping the automatic 20 MW classification, introduced Jul 7 with a public hearing on Jul 28. The prohibition reaches major redevelopment sites including the former Bristol Myers Squibb campus. Planner Joe Burgess noted the trade-off officials keep citing: heavy construction work, few permanent jobs afterwards. WHY THIS RECORD MATTERS BEYOND SUMMIT: a megawatt threshold is the most common way these ordinances are drafted, and it is a ceiling, not a floor -- it defines exactly how small a facility has to be to escape. Summit is the case where that was said out loud before adoption rather than discovered afterwards.
Cherry Hill bans large-scale data centres before any arrive
Blocked
CHERRY HILL SAID NO WITH NOTHING ON THE TABLE. The township council unanimously adopted a ban on large-scale data centres on 27 Jul 2026, drawing the line between AI and cloud facilities and the small server rooms ordinary businesses keep. Mayor David Fleisher said Cherry Hill should not be a guinea pig while the technology changes. WHAT THE BAN ACTUALLY DOES is worth stating precisely: it does not make a data centre impossible, it forces any applicant to seek a use variance from the zoning board, the hardest approval in New Jersey land use. It is one of a run of South Jersey bans the same summer -- Medford, Mansfield, Chesterfield, Millville -- while Vineland, down the road, approved a large AI campus. NOT ESTABLISHED: the ordinance number and the size or power line that separates 'large-scale' from a server room.
Mansfield Township names data centres as prohibited though they were never permitted
Blocked
A BAN ON SOMETHING ALREADY NOT ALLOWED -- ON PURPOSE. Mansfield Township in Burlington County adopted its data-centre prohibition 4-0 on 15 Jul 2026. The township says data centres were already not permitted under its code; it named them as a prohibited use anyway, with a definition, specifically to make legal challenges harder. That is the opposite bet from the one Jackson's council president made when he voted no, arguing that writing a definition gives developers' lawyers something to attack. Deputy Mayor Kelly Stobie framed it as protecting quality of life; the township cited water, open space and electricity rates. NOT ESTABLISHED: the ordinance number, and whether any application was ever contemplated.
Neptune bans data centres and ICE detention in one ordinance
Blocked
TWO LAND USES, ONE ORDINANCE. Neptune Township's committee banned data centres on 13 Jul 2026 in the same ordinance that bars immigration detention facilities -- the only entry on this map to pair them. Deputy Mayor Derel Stroud said both raise serious concerns, from resource use and environmental harm to due process and public safety. ROI-NJ counted Neptune the 25th New Jersey town to ban data centres; that ordinal is not attributed and does not match other counts. Nothing was pending in Neptune. NOT ESTABLISHED: the vote and ordinance number.
Lebanon Township (Hunterdon) classifies data centres as a non-permitted use
Blocked
LEBANON TOWNSHIP ADOPTED ORDINANCE 10-2026 ON 8 JUL 2026, making data centres a non-permitted use in every zoning district. The Hunterdon County township's ordinance defines the use broadly -- conventional data centres, AI processing, cloud computing and cryptocurrency mining -- rather than setting a megawatt or floor-area threshold. A committee member tied it to rural character, groundwater and the electrical infrastructure such sites demand. This is the township, not Lebanon Borough. NOT ESTABLISHED: the roll-call tally, any carve-out for accessory server rooms, and whether a proposal prompted it; nothing in the meeting record names one. The township clerk has the adopted text.
New Jersey enacts data-center ratepayer law
Restricted
New Jersey enacted the Data Center Fair Share Act (S731/A796) on July 7, 2026, the rate-class pillar of the four-part plan Governor Mikie Sherrill unveiled in May: reporting (signed Aug 27, own record), a separate rate class (this law), resources for towns negotiating with developers, and state technical assistance for towns reviewing projects. The law creates a separate ratepayer class so large data centers pay for the grid upgrades and energy their operations require, rather than shifting those costs onto residential and small-business customers, and pairs with energy and water reporting and community-benefit standards. Environmental groups had pressed for a stronger three-year moratorium on facilities over 20 megawatts.
Hampton Township (Sussex), NJ adopts data-centre ban (Ord. 2026-13)
Blocked
HAMPTON BANNED DATA CENTRES IN EVERY ZONE ON 29 JUN 2026. The Sussex County township committee adopted Ordinance 2026-13, amending Chapter 108 of its code, unanimously among members present; Committeewoman E. Klose moved it and Committeeman E. Ramm seconded. Residents who spoke thanked the committee. No project is on record as the trigger. NOT ESTABLISHED: the number of members present, the effective date, and whether any application was pending. This is Hampton Township in Sussex County, not the several other Hamptons in New Jersey.
Hardyston bans data centres -- a town missing from the published roster
Blocked
Hardyston adopted Ordinance 2026-12 unanimously on 24 Jun 2026, prohibiting data centres in every zoning district. No developer had approached the township; residents' concern was a 64-acre town-owned parcel on Route 94 whose zoning allowed data centres among other uses -- so the ban closes a door the township itself held open. THE REASON FOR THIS RECORD IS THE COUNT: Hardyston is not on the 33-town roster CRAN supplied to Patch on 20 Aug, two months after it acted. That fits CRAN's later statement that the real number is nearer 100 than 40, and it is one more reason no single New Jersey figure should be repeated without saying whose list it is.
Old Bridge's mayor says the gap is its redevelopment plans, not its zoning
Contesting
OLD BRIDGE IS THE REDEVELOPMENT LOOPHOLE IN ONE TOWN. Mayor Debbie Walker said on 24 Jun 2026 that data centres were already barred from every ordinary zoning district, because in New Jersey an unlisted use is a prohibited use -- but that two of the township's adopted redevelopment plans, Crossroads and Jake Brown Road, had allowed them. A council majority voted on 9 Jun to draft an ordinance adding data centres as a prohibited use everywhere. The Pinelands Alliance now counts Old Bridge as a ban. NOT ESTABLISHED: that the ordinance was introduced and adopted, on what dates and by what vote, and whether it amends the redevelopment plans, which is where the permission sat. Ask the clerk for the ordinance number and whether Crossroads and Jake Brown Road were changed.
Bernards Township bans data centres but spares small server rooms by the numbers
Blocked
A BAN THAT WRITES DOWN WHAT IS STILL ALLOWED. Bernards Township's committee unanimously adopted Ordinance 2599 in June 2026, banning data centres in every zone and deleting 'data processing centers' from the permitted uses in its E-1 to E-5 office zones -- where they had previously been allowed. It names what is barred: colocation, cloud computing, server farms, cryptocurrency mining and wholesale digital infrastructure. And it exempts server rooms that stay accessory to another use and fall under stated limits on size, electrical load, infrastructure and standby generation. That second tier is the answer to the problem Medford ran into, where a broad definition swept in homes and doctors' offices. Mayor Ana Duarte McCarthy's case was sewer capacity: she said a 200,000-square-foot data centre could send 100,000 gallons a day into sewers, five times a typical office complex. NOT ESTABLISHED: the actual numeric caps -- read the ordinance before copying it.
Medford's ban turns out to cover homes and doctors' offices
Blocked
BANNED FIRST, DEFINED LATER. Medford's council unanimously adopted a data-centre ban on 23 Jun 2026, and within weeks its own Planning Board found the problem: the ordinance defines a data centre as any facility that stores, manages or processes digital data, and a board member pointed out that his house fits. Read literally it could reach medical offices, cell towers and any business running servers. The board set up a subcommittee to rewrite it, and the township planner proposed separating types of data centre -- the tiering that Bernards Township wrote in from the start and that New York's statute uses. THIS IS THE COST OF COPYING A MODEL ORDINANCE QUICKLY: breadth makes a ban hard to route around and also easy to attack as sweeping in lawful uses, which is the argument developers are already making in Monroe, Montgomery and Andover. NOT ESTABLISHED: the revised text or when council will vote on it.
Vernon bans large data centres with carve-outs for schools, hospitals and cell sites
Blocked
Vernon Township's council adopted Ordinance 2611 on 23 Jun 2026 by a 5-0 roll call, banning data centres -- defined as facilities primarily engaged in storing, processing or hosting digital data and high-density computing, including cloud, cryptocurrency mining and AI processing and the cooling, generators and utility equipment that serve them. It exempts ordinary IT at schools, hospitals, government buildings and businesses, and keeps cell sites and fiber lines permitted. Unlike Bernards Township, it sets no numeric size or power cap; the exemptions are by type of user, not by scale. One of three Sussex County bans that month, with Andover (now under suit) and Hardyston. NOT ESTABLISHED: whether any project was pending. SOURCING: an AI-generated summary of the meeting video (Citizen Portal) plus a local newspaper listing; the ordinance itself has not been read.
Asbury Park passes a resolution against data centres -- not a zoning ban
Contesting
ASBURY PARK PASSED A RESOLUTION, NOT AN ORDINANCE. On 17 Jun 2026 the council unanimously adopted a resolution opposing data centres in the city and urging Governor Sherrill and the Legislature to pause new construction statewide. Patch's headline called it a ban; its own text, TAPinto and GovTech all describe a resolution. In New Jersey a use is barred by zoning ordinance, so unless a later ordinance exists, Asbury Park is a statement of opposition on a list of bans -- the same kind of slippage as Sayreville's moratorium. Its stated concerns (grid, cooling water, noise, air quality, diesel backup generators) stand. NOT ESTABLISHED: whether a zoning ordinance followed.
Red Bank bans data centres and asks for a statewide pause
Blocked
A LOCAL BAN AND A REQUEST TO THE STATE, THE SAME NIGHT. Red Bank's council voted unanimously on 11 Jun 2026 to ban data centres in the borough, and in the same meeting asked the state to pause large-scale data-centre construction everywhere until there is real oversight -- the first New Jersey municipality to make that request. Mayor Billy Portman said he supports a statewide ban until the impacts can be removed. Several towns later paired their bans with the same request, and the state answered in August with reporting rules instead of a pause. NOT ESTABLISHED: the ordinance number; confirm the ban was adopted by ordinance, since Asbury Park's similar action a week later was only a resolution.
Monroe Township sued for $300M after banning data centers
Contesting
Monroe Township banned data centers by ordinance on April 22, 2026 after months of packed, hours-long meetings over water quality, pollution, and noise. Developer Hexa Builders answered with a $300 million lawsuit -- now removed to federal court -- claiming the ban violates equal protection and even free speech, after the township denied its application for a 1-million-square-foot data center and warehouse. The case tests whether a town that says no can be litigated into yes, and its price tag is aimed at every other municipality weighing a ban.
Kenilworth: a $1.8B AI data centre goes up as residents say they were never told
Overruled
APPROVED, UNDER CONSTRUCTION, AND OPPOSED AFTER THE FACT. While New Jersey towns were passing bans on projects that did not exist, Kenilworth in Union County already had one: a $1.8 billion AI data centre under construction. More than 100 residents came to a borough council meeting in June 2026 to protest it, and ROI-NJ reports residents say they were never told it would be built in their community. NJ.com's headline says the borough approved it. THIS IS THE CASE A BAN COUNT CANNOT SHOW: a ban protects a town only before an application lands. The same week, Warren Township committeeman Daniel Croson, whose town had just banned data centres, said no single town can solve this and asked the state for a statewide moratorium on large-scale facilities -- which Governor Sherrill has declined. NOT ESTABLISHED: who is building it, its size in megawatts, when and by what vote the borough approved it, and whether any legal challenge exists. WHAT TO ASK: the borough's approval resolution and whether notice went to neighbours.
Warren Township bans data centres and asks the state for a moratorium
Blocked
Warren Township's committee voted 5-0 in June 2026 to ban AI data centres. What makes it worth a record is what its own committeeman said next: Daniel Croson said the town was proud of the ban but that no single town can solve this alone, and asked the state for a statewide moratorium on large-scale data centres until real protections exist. That is a town telling the state its own ban is not enough. Governor Sherrill has since declined a statewide pause in favour of reporting rules and a rate class. NOT ESTABLISHED: the exact adoption date and ordinance number.
East Greenwich bans data centres after a 4 MW edge-site proposal
Blocked
A BAN THAT FOLLOWED A SMALL PROPOSAL, NOT A HYPERSCALE ONE. East Greenwich Township has adopted an ordinance prohibiting future data centres, Mayor Jim Philbin said, as NJ.com reported on 12 Jun 2026. What prompted it was American Tower's Mt. Royal Data Storage Facility: about 16,000 square feet and nearly 4 megawatts, plus roughly 3,500 square feet of power equipment. That is an edge site, a fraction of the size of the campuses driving the statewide fight. American Tower withdrew the application before a 30 Jun hearing. Residents organised as East Greenwich Grassroots, led by Anthony Chan. WHY IT IS WORTH A RECORD: most New Jersey bans are aimed at AI-scale facilities, but this one was triggered by a 4-megawatt site. That is the size class a megawatt threshold like the 20 MW line in Summit's first draft would have let through. NOT ESTABLISHED: the ordinance number, adoption date and vote, and whether the withdrawal came because of the ban or before it.
Sayreville pauses for eighteen months, and gets counted as a ban
Paused
A MORATORIUM BEING COUNTED AS A BAN, AND THE HEADLINES DID IT TOO. Sayreville's borough council voted 4-3 to adopt an EIGHTEEN-MONTH MORATORIUM on data centres -- a temporary halt with an expiry, not a prohibition. It was introduced in June with a public hearing set for Jul 20. THE SLIPPAGE IS VISIBLE IN THE COVERAGE ITSELF: TAPinto's headline calls it a ban while its own first line calls it an eighteen-month moratorium. Patch described it accurately as a temporary halt. GovTech ran it under a headline about bans emerging in four New Jersey communities. WHY THIS RECORD MATTERS BEYOND SAYREVILLE: it is the test case for the New Jersey count. Advocacy tallies put the state at roughly 38 municipal BANS, the most in the country, and Sayreville appears on that roster. If a temporary moratorium is being counted as an outright ban, the headline figure is measuring two different things -- and this map records the difference as `paused` versus `blocked` precisely because they are not the same. A moratorium expires on a date; a ban has to be repealed. THE 4-3 MARGIN IS ALSO WORTH KEEPING. Most New Jersey ordinances recorded here passed unanimously or near it; Sayreville's council split, after what was reported as a lengthy and at times heated discussion. NOT ESTABLISHED: whether the moratorium has since been extended, allowed to lapse, or converted into a permanent prohibition, and the borough clerk is the route to that rather than a search.
Greenwich Township (Gloucester County) bans data centres with nobody speaking
Blocked
GREENWICH TOWNSHIP BANNED DATA CENTRES ON 21 MAY 2026 AND NOBODY CAME TO SPEAK. The Township Committee in Gibbstown, Gloucester County, adopted Ordinance 107/2026 unanimously, prohibiting data centres within the township; the public hearing opened and closed without a single comment. This is not East Greenwich, its neighbour, which banned data centres in June after a 4 MW proposal was withdrawn. Greenwich is an industrial riverfront town, which is exactly where a developer would look, and it is absent from the published advocacy rosters -- another sign that the statewide counts miss towns in both directions. NOT ESTABLISHED: the roll-call names, how the ordinance defines a data centre, any exemptions, and whether a specific proposal prompted it. The township clerk can supply the adopted text.
Millville bans data centres and kills the largest project proposed in New Jersey
Blocked
THE BIGGEST ONE ANY NEW JERSEY TOWN HAS STOPPED. Millville's commissioners banned data centres on 19 May 2026, and the ban killed a live proposal: A1Data Center's 2.6-million-square-foot campus drawing 1.4 gigawatts, the largest data-centre project yet blocked in the state. Unlike most entries on New Jersey's ban list, which were passed with nothing pending, Millville had a specific, very large application in front of it -- which is also what makes it the likeliest to be tested in court, as Monroe, Montgomery and Andover already have been. Climate Revolution Action Network led the campaign, pairing students with local farmers. Neighbouring Vineland, in the same county, approved its own large AI campus. NOT ESTABLISHED: the vote count, the ordinance number, and whether A1Data has sued. WHAT TO ASK: whether A1Data's application was complete before the ban, since a complete filing can lock in the old zoning.
Green Township (Sussex), NJ adopts data-centre ban (Ord. 2026-04)
Blocked
GREEN TOWNSHIP BANNED DATA CENTRES 3-0 ON 18 MAY 2026, after waiting on its own planners. The Sussex County committee's Ordinance 2026-04 adds data centres to the prohibited uses in every zone, defining them to include servers, network gear, transformers, substations, generators and cooling. The hearing was carried to April and the vote was postponed on 4 May because the Land Use Board's review had not arrived. Voting yes: Bader Qarmout, Deputy Mayor Michael Rose and Mayor Virginia Raffay; members DeYoung and Phillips were absent. Residents spoke on water, power and rural character; nobody spoke against. NOT ESTABLISHED: whether any project was pending. One meeting summary for 1 June attaches the ban to a different ordinance number whose text is a salary schedule; the township's own list shows 2026-04 as the data-centre ordinance.
Andover's ban is in court: the developer says the town skipped required notice
Contesting
BANNED IN MAY, SUED IN JULY. Andover Township adopted Ordinance 2026-13 on 12 May 2026, prohibiting data centres everywhere in the township. On 10 Jul National Land Developers LLC sued in Sussex County Superior Court over a roughly 100-acre former airport site, arguing the ban had no valid land-use purpose and that the township skipped notice steps the Municipal Land Use Law requires. It asks the court to void the ordinance and award fees. THE NOTICE CLAIM IS THE ONE TO WATCH: it does not depend on whether data centres are good or bad, and if it succeeds it tells every town that rushed an ordinance to redo it properly. NOT ESTABLISHED: any hearing date or ruling as of 22 Sep 2026. WHAT TO ASK: the Sussex County case management order.
Harrison Township (Gloucester County) held its ban a month for a master-plan review
Blocked
HARRISON TOWNSHIP (GLOUCESTER COUNTY) HELD ITS BAN BACK A MONTH TO DO IT BY THE BOOK. In April 2026 the township committee tabled an ordinance prohibiting AI data centres and rescheduled adoption for 18 May. The reason: the Joint Land Use Board had cancelled the meeting at which it was to check the ordinance against the master plan. That step, a planning-board consistency review before adoption, is the kind of procedure the developer suing Andover says was skipped there. Mayor Adam Wingate said the township would revisit the ban if concerns about grid strain, energy, cooling water and environmental impact were answered, and until then data centres would be prohibited. NJ 101.5, in a roundup published after Millville's 19 May vote, listed Harrison Township among towns that had adopted a ban. NOT ESTABLISHED: the adoption date, ordinance number and roll call. The tabling date as reported (18 Apr) fell on a Saturday and should be checked. This is the Gloucester County township (Mullica Hill), not the Town of Harrison in Hudson County.
Winslow introduces a ban that stops at the Pinelands line
Contesting
WINSLOW INTRODUCED A BAN ON 14 APR 2026, AND IT STOPS AT THE PINELANDS LINE. The township committee's ordinance was set for a public hearing and final vote on 26 May. It prohibits data centres in all non-Pinelands zoning districts. It defines a data centre as a building occupied mainly by computer or telecom equipment where digital information is processed, transferred or stored, and it expressly includes cryptocurrency mining, blockchain processing and server farms. Mayor Marie Lawrence cited the electricity, water and infrastructure load on local utilities, and the zoning change was found consistent with the master plan. NOT ESTABLISHED: that the 26 May vote happened, or how it went. No report of the final vote was found, though Winslow appears as a ban on both CRAN's 20 Aug roster and the Pinelands Alliance's 14 Sep list. Also not established: what rules apply to data centres in Winslow's Pinelands-area districts, which the report says this ordinance does not reach. What to ask the township clerk: the adopted ordinance number and the roll call.
Phillipsburg bans data centres in all zones
Blocked
PHILLIPSBURG BANNED DATA CENTRES IN APRIL. The Town Council gave final approval in mid-April 2026 to an ordinance prohibiting data centers and related uses in every zone, according to WRNJ and News 12. The ordinance defines data centers as facilities for storing, processing and managing digital data, including supporting infrastructure. Mayor Piazza said it ensures balanced development; the town cited power and water demand, noise and strain on local resources. The council has since moved to back the ban with a master-plan update. NOT ESTABLISHED: the vote count and ordinance number. Some rosters still list Phillipsburg as pending; that is out of date.
Waterford Township bans data centres 4-0 and bars relabelling them
Blocked
WATERFORD TOWNSHIP BANNED DATA CENTRES 4-0 ON 8 APR 2026, one of the earliest bans in South Jersey. Ordinance 2026-12 prohibits them in every zoning district. It also forbids reclassifying a data centre as some other commercial or industrial use to get around the ban, a clause many later ordinances lack. The township committee adopted it after a presentation by Rowan University student Jonathan Duff, working with Mayor Stephanie Jones-Freitag, on power, water, wastewater, aquifer draw, noise and electricity prices. The presentation projected a 267% rise in residential rates within five years of full operation; that is the presenter's projection, not a measured result. The ordinance leans on Waterford's status as a Pinelands community. Nothing was pending in Waterford; the presentation pointed to East Greenwich, Millville and Franklin as places where projects were appearing. NOT ESTABLISHED: the roll-call names, whether small accessory server rooms are exempt, and whether any application has tested the ban.
Salem County's small townships ban data centres one by one
Blocked
AT LEAST FOUR SALEM COUNTY TOWNS HAVE BANNED DATA CENTRES, MOSTLY BEFORE THE STATEWIDE WAVE WAS NEWS. Mannington went first, adopting Ordinance 26-01 unanimously on 5 Mar 2026 to prohibit data centres in every zoning district. Quinton followed on 5 May (Ord. 2026-05, two votes to none, one member absent), Pittsgrove on 27 May (Ord. 2026-06, 5-0) and Woodstown Borough on 14 Jul (Ord. 2026-8, unanimous). Each amends its land-use chapter the same way, which reads like a shared model ordinance. The Pinelands Alliance counts ten Salem County municipalities; this map can confirm four from meeting records. Oldmans introduced a ban and reportedly adopted it, date not established. CARNEYS POINT IS COUNTED AS A BAN BUT IS NOT ONE ON THE RECORD WE FOUND: on 20 May its Ordinance 1093 split the committee -- one yes, two no, one abstention -- despite a 651-signature petition, and the mayor proposed a subcommittee to rewrite it. NOT ESTABLISHED: Elsinboro, Pennsville, Pilesgrove and Upper Pittsgrove, which rest on the Pinelands list alone. Ask each township clerk for the adopted ordinance number and roll call.
Pemberton Township, an early ban that rarely gets the credit
Blocked
PEMBERTON TOWNSHIP (BURLINGTON COUNTY) WAS AMONG THE FIRST NEW JERSEY TOWNS TO BAN DATA CENTRES. NJ 101.5 reports it adopted an ordinance in February 2026, earlier than Monroe (April) and Millville (May), which usually get the credit for starting the wave. NJ.com, reporting East Greenwich's ban on 12 Jun, also named Pemberton Township among the towns that had already acted, and it is on the Pinelands Alliance's 14 Sep list. On this evidence the 'Pemberton' on CRAN's roster is the township, not Pemberton Borough. NOT ESTABLISHED: the ordinance number, exact date, vote, and whether the ban reaches the township's Pinelands-area districts. The township minutes or its code on eCode360 would settle it.
Logan Township reported to ban data centres after rumours of an AI project
Blocked
LOGAN TOWNSHIP (GLOUCESTER COUNTY) IS REPORTED TO HAVE BANNED DATA CENTRES IN SPRING 2026. The trigger appears to have been rumours of a large AI data-centre project rather than an application on file. NJ 101.5 listed Logan among towns that had adopted bans in the two months before its late-May roundup, and the Pinelands Alliance's 14 Sep list includes it. A syndicated news story, headlined to say rumours of a massive AI data centre drove the town to act, could not be read. NOT ESTABLISHED: the ordinance number, adoption date and vote, what the rumoured project was, and whether small accessory server rooms are exempt. Ask the township clerk for the adopted ordinance. If the ban was passed on rumour alone, it is also a test of the objection raised in Jackson that a ban written with no application in hand gives developers' lawyers something to attack.
Union Township's AI data-centre ban passes first reading
Contesting
UNION TOWNSHIP'S BAN HAS PASSED FIRST READING, and whether it was finally adopted is not established. TAPinto Union reported that the Township Committee in Union, Union County, unanimously approved on first reading an ordinance prohibiting AI data centres in all zoning districts. CRAN's 20 Aug roster and the Pinelands Alliance's 14 Sep list both count Union Township as a ban, but neither links to an adopted ordinance, and we have not seen a report of the second reading. This is Union Township in Union County, not Union Township in Hunterdon County. NOT ESTABLISHED: the first-reading date, ordinance number, and the date and outcome of the second reading. The township clerk can confirm; if the ordinance was adopted, this becomes a 'blocked' record.
New Jersey has the most municipal bans, and a question about what they are worth
Incident
THIRTY-EIGHT MUNICIPALITIES, FOUR OF THEM IN ONE WEEK, and the most of any state -- but read the count carefully. Stafford Township, Jackson Township, North Brunswick and East Brunswick all acted in the last week of August 2026, and New Jersey is approaching 40 municipal bans on data-centre construction. WHO IS COUNTING MATTERS, as it does for every tally on this site: the figure is kept by Climate Revolution Action Network New Jersey, an advocacy group that describes itself as the state's largest Gen-Z political organisation and that trains residents to pass these ordinances. It is the best count available and it is not a government register. THE LEGAL QUESTION UNDERNEATH THE NUMBER, raised by an opponent of data centres rather than a supporter: in New Jersey, as under most municipal land-use schemes, a use not specifically permitted is already prohibited. Jackson's own township counsel advised that data centres were therefore ALREADY barred everywhere in the township before any ban was passed, and the council president voted against the ordinance arguing that defining the use gives applicants' lawyers something to work with. If that reading is right, some share of these 38 ordinances are symbolic at best and counterproductive at worst -- and nobody counting bans is counting that distinction. NOT ESTABLISHED: no court has ruled, and the answer will differ by municipality depending on how each code is written. WHAT IS ALREADY BEING TESTED IS THE PRICE. Two developers have sued: Hexa Builders is seeking $300 MILLION from Monroe Township in Gloucester County over its April 2026 ban, now in federal court, and a developer sued Andover Township in Sussex County over its ban earlier. That is the same mechanism recorded on this map in Illinois, where a county's own attorney warned a moratorium invited suit and the moratorium died without a vote. In New Jersey the towns passed the bans anyway and the bill is arriving afterwards. WHAT WOULD SETTLE THE REAL QUESTION: how many of the 38 have been tested by an application or a suit. Thirty-six have not.
THE COUNT IS NOT AGREED, AND THE DISAGREEMENT IS BETWEEN ALLIES. On the night of Aug 25, 2026 two advocacy groups working TOGETHER on the same ordinances published incompatible totals. Climate Revolution Action Network called North Brunswick, East Brunswick and Stafford the 35th, 36th and 37th New Jersey municipalities to ban data centres, and Jackson the 38th the following night. At the East Brunswick meeting the same evening, Food & Water Watch's Charlie Kratovil told the council it was joining MORE THAN 50 other New Jersey communities. Both groups organised these ordinances side by side. The gap is at least fourteen towns. WHAT WOULD EXPLAIN IT is a definitional difference of the kind this map keeps running into -- whether a moratorium counts as a ban, whether a planning-board recommendation counts before the council votes, whether a town where the use was never permitted counts at all -- and neither group publishes its rule. A THIRD COUNT, from electricchoice.com, tracks 225 moratoriums across 30 states and puts Ohio first with 35, then Michigan 34, Georgia 24 and North Carolina 19, which would displace New Jersey from the top spot entirely; but that count is of MORATORIUMS, and New Jersey's claim is about outright BANS, so the two are not measuring the same thing. OHIO'S OWN COUNT HAS SINCE OVERTAKEN IT: the Ohio Capital Journal's reporter Siddarth Sivaraman counted at least 138 Ohio municipalities and townships with data-centre moratoriums in force as of 17 Sep 2026, working from local records and news reports -- the headline rounds it to more than 125 -- plus 23 Ohio communities that have effectively banned data centres. He says the true figure is likely higher because many townships post nothing online. One newsroom's hand count in one state is more than half electricchoice's national total, so that tracker is a large undercount. The comparable Ohio figure for New Jersey's ban claim is the 23 effective bans, not the 138 pauses. WE ARE NOT PICKING A NUMBER. This site records that the range runs from roughly 38 to more than 50 depending on who is counting, that no government register exists, and that anyone citing a single figure should say whose rule they are using.
THE ROSTER, AS PUBLISHED. CRAN's list of New Jersey municipalities with bans on the books, reported by Patch on Aug 20, 2026, named 33: Andover, Asbury Park, Bayonne, Berkeley Heights, Bernards, Burlington, Cherry Hill, Deerfield, Delanco, East Greenwich, Edgewater Park, Harrison, Holland, Holmdel, Howell, Jersey City, Logan Township, Mansfield, Medford, Millville, Monroe, Montgomery, Neptune, Pemberton, Red Bank, Sayreville, Sparta, Summit, Union, Vernon, Warren, Waterford and Winslow. Adding Stafford, North Brunswick and East Brunswick on Aug 25 gives 36, and Jackson on Aug 26 gives 37 -- while CRAN called Jackson the 38th. One municipality is unaccounted for in the published list, which is a further reason to treat any single figure as approximate. Cinnaminson and South Brunswick had ordinances awaiting second reading. THE STATE HAS NOT FOLLOWED THE TOWNS: in May 2026 Governor Mikie Sherrill announced a plan to REGULATE rather than ban, promising guardrails, transparency, investment in energy infrastructure and job standards, and positioning New Jersey to compete in AI. So the municipal wave and the state policy are pulling in different directions, which is the same split recorded in Michigan and now New York.
THE NUMBER HAS MOVED AGAIN, AND STILL NOBODY PUBLISHES THE LIST. On 2 Sep 2026 Gothamist reported 93 New Jersey municipalities with data-centre bans, attributed to Climate Revolution Action Network's Ben Dziobek, who said his group had passed nearly 40 itself and found through further research that the real total was nearing 100. CRAN's website carries no roster or counting rule; the newest published list is still Patch's 33 names from 20 Aug, which Patch called full or partial bans. OUR AUDIT OF THOSE 33: seventeen are confirmed ordinance bans from a direct local report; Sayreville is an 18-month moratorium; Asbury Park's June action was a council RESOLUTION, which cannot change zoning in New Jersey; twelve we could not verify. And the list misses towns: Hardyston adopted a ban on 24 Jun 2026 and is not on it. So the right statement is: somewhere between the high 30s and the low 90s, depending on whose rule and whether you count resolutions, moratoriums and codes that never permitted the use. The towns written up individually from local reports this build: Millville, Holmdel, Bernards, Cherry Hill, Medford, Mansfield, Neptune, Red Bank, Vernon, Warren, Hardyston and Andover. A FOURTH COUNT, AND THE ROSTER AUDIT MOVES. The Pinelands Alliance, a conservation group, lists 79 New Jersey municipalities with data-centre bans as of 14 Sep 2026, by name and county but with no counting rule or ordinance links. It leaves out Sayreville (a moratorium) and Asbury Park (a resolution), which suggests it counts only bans. It also leaves out Hardyston, Holland and Sparta. Its list settles several ambiguous names on CRAN's 20 Aug roster: they are Burlington Township, Pemberton Township, Harrison Township in Gloucester County and Union Township in Union County. Of the twelve roster towns we could not previously verify, local reports now confirm Waterford (Ordinance 2026-12, 8 Apr, 4-0) and East Greenwich (reported 12 Jun, after an American Tower application was withdrawn). A regional roundup reports Harrison, Logan and Pemberton Townships as adopted. Winslow's ban was introduced on 14 Apr for a 26 May final vote, and Union Township's passed first reading; neither final vote is confirmed. Burlington Township, Deerfield, Delanco, Edgewater Park and Holland are still unverified from a primary. Separately, Gloucester Township in Camden County adopted Ordinance O-26-16 on 15 Sep, and it covers redevelopment areas too. The range now runs from roughly 38 to 93 depending on who counts, and 79 falls inside it. Written up individually this build: Waterford, East Greenwich, Harrison Township, Logan Township, Pemberton Township, Gloucester Township, and Winslow and Union as pending.
Developers sue three towns, arguing a ban passed under pressure is not planning
Incident
THREE NEW JERSEY TOWNS ARE NOW BEING SUED OVER THEIR BANS, not one. The New Jersey Monitor reported that developers have sued MONTGOMERY, ANDOVER and MONROE seeking to overturn municipal prohibitions on data centres. The Monroe case (Hexa Builders, more than $300 million) is recorded separately here -- and it is not the only one with a number attached. THE ARGUMENT THE DEVELOPERS ARE MAKING IS THE part worth recording, because it will be made everywhere: the suit against Montgomery's ordinance contends the township committee acted on "public hysteria" and political attention rather than sound land use planning. That is a claim about PROCESS, not about data centres -- it says a ban passed under public pressure is not a planning decision and should not survive review. Every one of the roughly 38 New Jersey ordinances was passed under exactly that kind of pressure, and most were passed with no application pending, which is the fact the argument is designed to exploit. WHAT IS NOT ESTABLISHED: none of the three has been decided. If any succeeds, the reasoning would reach far past New Jersey, and it would land hardest on the towns that acted earliest and with the least record of planning analysis behind them. This is the same mechanism recorded in Illinois, where a county attorney's warning that a moratorium invited suit killed the moratorium before a vote -- here the towns acted first and the litigation followed. THE PRICE TAG APPEARS TWICE. E. Kahn Development Corp. is seeking $300 million from Montgomery in Somerset County Superior Court (filed 31 Jul 2026) over Ordinance 26-1779, adopted 18 Jun, which barred data centres from the 257-acre former Kenvue campus -- the complaint is where the 'public hysteria' language comes from. Hexa Builders' suit against Monroe is in federal court before Judge Edward Kiel, where the township moved in late July to dismiss, arguing a land-use rule does not become a speech restriction because data centres carry communications. National Land Developers sued Andover in Sussex County Superior Court on 10 Jul over Ordinance 2026-13 (adopted 12 May), alleging Municipal Land Use Law notice defects and no valid planning purpose, over a former airport site of about 100 acres. NOT ESTABLISHED, as of 22 Sep 2026: any ruling or hearing date in any of the three. WHAT WOULD SETTLE IT: Judge Kiel's ruling on the motion to dismiss, and case management orders in Somerset and Sussex. NO FOURTH SUIT FOUND as of 22 Sep 2026 in news coverage (court dockets were not searched). THE CLOSEST PARALLEL IS IN ILLINOIS: on 18 Jun 2026 Logan County's own state's attorney declared a freshly adopted 12-month moratorium invalid, two days after the developer Hut 8 threatened to sue, because it had skipped the zoning board advisory vote and public hearings its zoning process requires (own record). No court ruled; the threat was enough. That is the same kind of procedural argument being made against Andover. On the other side, Seton Hall's Matthew Hale told Gothamist that banning towns stand on firm ground under the Municipal Land Use Law's strong grant of local control.
Vineland's DataOne fined $1.07 million for 62 unpermitted gas generators
Pollution
$1.07 MILLION FOR 62 GENERATORS RUN WITHOUT PERMITS. New Jersey's environmental regulator on 22 Sep 2026 fined DataOne, whose Vineland data centre serves Nebius, for installing and operating 62 natural-gas generators of nearly 2 MW each with no air permits -- by this site's arithmetic roughly 120 MW of on-site combustion no regulator had reviewed. Inspectors found it on 29 Jul; the last inspection had been in December 2025. DataOne has 45 days to obtain permits or shut the units off. Commissioner Ed Potosnak called it the largest action ever taken against a data centre in the state. The company says the generators are a stopgap until Bloom fuel cells come online and disputes DEP's view of 'temporary'. This is the same project the city approved for a next phase over resident objection (see pb-nj-vineland-approved): it has since drawn stop-work notices for starting LNG and fuel-cell construction without city sign-off, and a class-action suit from neighbours over noise. NOT ESTABLISHED: whether DataOne appeals the penalty.
Vineland residents sue the AI data centre their city approved, over noise
Pollution
RESIDENTS SUED THE DATA CENTRE THEIR CITY APPROVED. Two Vineland residents, one of them Michael Gentile, filed a proposed class action in federal court against DataOne USA LLC. They sue on behalf of about 1,000 homes within a mile of its AI data centre at 3963 S. Lincoln Ave, claiming private and public nuisance and negligence over noise. Residents describe constant industrial fan noise, likened to helicopters or an airport, that they can hear indoors and out. They want the use of their homes back and compensation for lost property value. The facility is planned at about 2.6 million square feet and roughly 300 megawatts, and three data rooms were already running when Vineland Today reported the suit on 27 May 2026. DataOne would not discuss the claims, saying it had installed noise mitigation and was talking with stakeholders. WHY IT MATTERS: once a town says yes, what residents have left is nuisance law after the building goes up, not zoning before it. Vineland approved the next phase in August over objection (see the Vineland record). NOT ESTABLISHED: the court, the docket number, the filing date and any ruling.