Kansas City-area voters head to Missouri and Kansas primaries Tuesday with data centers nowhere on the ballot — yet the mega-server campuses have become a campaign litmus test. Candidates are being pressed to take positions on water use, electricity demand, tax incentives and who gets the final say when a project lands near a community. In a region where development fights can stretch across city and state lines, the server farms are proving unusually hard for politicians to ignore.
More than a dozen Kansas candidates have signed the No Data Centers in Kansas pledge, according to KSHB 41. The pledge calls for independent environmental and infrastructure studies, protections for local water supplies, public hearings, buffer zones near schools and an end to preferential treatment through special tax incentives; four of the state's 10 registered gubernatorial candidates have signed it.
Kansas Tax Incentives Put Water And Power At Center Stage
The political backdrop is Kansas' 2025 Senate Bill 98, which created a 20-year sales-tax exemption for qualified data centers that invest at least $250 million and create at least 20 jobs. The Kansas Legislative Research Department says eligible projects must also commit to water-conservation practices and undergo state review before receiving public financial benefits. According to Evergy's Sustainability Report 2023, its integrated resource plan considers forecasts of future electricity demand, fuel prices, transmission improvements, new generating capacity and the cost of environmental compliance.
That incentive structure helps explain why candidates are arguing over more than whether they like new buildings filled with servers. In its Kansas candidate guide, KSHB 41 found positions crossing party lines: some candidates favor moratoriums, others want decisions left to cities and counties, and others support development only if companies cover their full infrastructure costs. The Beacon reported on 29 Nov 2021 that Kansas City offers several developer-incentive programs, including TIFs, PIEA and LCRA.
Missouri Officials Are Weighing The Same Local Costs
On the Missouri side, Kansas City lawmakers have already directed the city manager to examine how data centers could affect electricity demand, water supplies, utility rates and the return on economic incentives. The Kansas City Council resolution called for recommendations within 120 days, underscoring that the debate is no longer limited to distant statehouse policy.
A national comparison comes from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, whose December 2024 2024 United States Data Center Energy Usage Report updates the 2016 estimate of data-center energy use and analyzes projected electricity demand and water implications. The U.S. Department of Energy's April 2024 Future of Resource Adequacy report discusses data centers as part of broader electric-grid resource-adequacy questions.
The issue has also shaped Missouri campaigns. In the redrawn Missouri 4th Congressional District, candidate Randy Miller has called for an immediate pause on new data centers and higher taxes on existing facilities, according to Axios Kansas City. Earlier this year, a proposed Nebius AI data center and more than $6 billion in potential tax breaks helped define Independence's mayoral contest, making the technology sector a very local political issue.
The growth debate is also moving into Kansas City's downtown core, where a proposed 20-story data tower could replace the historic Western Newspaper Union Building at 934 Central Street. A public hearing on that project is scheduled for Wednesday, according to Hoodline's local report, giving residents another immediate example of how data-center decisions can collide with preservation, zoning and neighborhood priorities.
Tuesday's Ballot May Still Shape The Next Data-Center Fight
Voters are not being asked directly whether Kansas City should approve a data center, or whether Kansas should keep its incentive package. They are choosing the officials who may decide future siting rules, tax deals, utility protections and public-hearing requirements — which is why an issue absent from the ballot is still finding its way into campaign conversations.
That makes data centers an unusually potent proxy for broader concerns about the cost of living and who benefits from economic development. For candidates, supporting growth can mean defending jobs and investment; opposing unchecked expansion can mean promising to protect water, power bills and local control.
