LANSING, Mich. (WOWO) — Michigan residents and local officials are increasingly finding themselves caught in the middle of a growing fight over data center development, with communities raising concerns about development, infrastructure and quality of life while some local leaders say they have little ability to stop major projects once the process is underway.

At least 28 public officials in eight Michigan communities have faced recall efforts tied to decisions involving data centers, according to an analysis by Bridge Michigan. But only one of those officials is currently expected to face voters in a November recall election.

Many of the other efforts failed because of problems involving petition language or signature requirements.

The controversy illustrates a larger conflict emerging across the state as Michigan positions itself for major data center investment while residents question whether local governments have enough authority to regulate or reject the facilities.

Elaine Ferris, a longtime member of the Mason City Council in Ingham County, is facing a November recall after a vote she says was intended to protect the community from future data center development.

Mason began working on changes to its zoning ordinance in late 2025 as state and federal officials encouraged additional data center development. Ferris said the city was attempting to establish rules before a developer arrived.

The recall effort nevertheless moved forward.

“We have zero power to prevent this,” Ferris told Bridge Michigan.

The backlash has been especially intense in some communities. In Marshall, residents’ opposition to a proposed data center contributed to what authorities described as credible death threats against members of the City Council.

And residents aren’t the only ones frustrated.

In Oakland County’s Lyon Township, a recall effort targeting local officials did not make the November ballot. Aaron Rinehimer, who helped lead that effort, said supporters are considering another attempt for the May election.

“It’s disappointing because, you know, obviously, we believed in the effort,” Rinehimer said, according to Bridge Michigan.

University of Michigan associate professor Sarah Mills told Bridge Michigan that the intensity of the disputes reflects a broader problem with how communities handle controversial development.

Residents can become particularly concerned when a major project is expected to change the character of their community through noise, visual impacts, infrastructure demands or other effects on quality of life.

Mills said those concerns can become even more pronounced when residents believe they were not brought into the process early enough.

Under Michigan’s planning and zoning system, residents generally become involved after a developer has already designed a project and submitted an application. At that point, residents may have fewer opportunities to substantially alter the proposal.

“That’s one of the problems here,” Mills said.

The experience in Washtenaw County’s Saline Township is one example of why local officials say the reality can be more complicated than simply voting against a project.

Saline Township is home to The Barn, a planned hyperscale data center being developed by OpenAI and Oracle. The project has been described as a $7 billion development and is expected to be Michigan’s first hyperscale data center.

The township board initially rejected a rezoning request involving farmland for the project.

Developers then sued.

Rather than continue what could have become an expensive legal battle, the township settled. Hammond and other township officials subsequently faced a recall effort over their decision to support the settlement, but that effort ultimately failed.

Township Supervisor Tom Hammond said residents can sometimes assume local officials have more authority over a project than they actually do.

“I would agree with that,” Hammond said when asked whether residents may overestimate the township’s ability to prevent data centers from being built.

Hammond said he received hostile messages during the controversy, including accusations that township officials had accepted bribes.

He said he did not view the recall effort as a personal attack, but rather as a sign that residents believed their community needed to take a different direction.

The controversy has nevertheless increased public involvement in Saline Township.

Hammond said township meetings that once attracted only a handful of residents can now draw dozens.

The fights also aren’t neatly divided along traditional political lines.

Marjorie Steele, executive director of the Economic Development Responsibility Alliance of Michigan, told Bridge Michigan that her organization is tracking data center disputes in more than 34 communities.

Steele said residents with different political backgrounds are raising similar concerns about proposed projects.

For many of those residents, the question isn’t simply whether a data center should be built. They’re asking what their communities will receive in return.

Mills said local governments can potentially reduce some of the opposition by requiring developers to make specific commitments involving jobs, tax revenue and other community benefits — and then putting those promises in writing.

“Very often, their neighbors are asking kind of, ‘What’s in it for me?’” Mills said.

The debate could have consequences that extend beyond individual projects.

Mills warned that repeated recall campaigns could drive experienced officials out of local government and discourage residents from volunteering for planning commissions, township boards and other local positions.

“I think it could mean that we lose people with local government officials with a lot of experience,” Mills said.

That creates a difficult balance for Michigan communities.

Data centers can bring significant investment and are increasingly viewed as critical infrastructure for the technology industry. But the facilities can also require substantial land, electricity, water and other infrastructure, making them highly consequential decisions for the communities where they’re proposed.

The political backlash is now unfolding as state lawmakers separately examine Michigan’s approach to data center development, including incentives and local authority.

For residents challenging projects, the question is whether local governments have enough tools to give communities a meaningful say before development decisions become difficult or impossible to reverse.

For local officials, the issue is more complicated: a vote that residents see as approving a data center may sometimes be an attempt to negotiate the terms of a project, avoid costly litigation or work within limited legal authority.

And as more projects are proposed, the tension between economic development and local control is likely to remain a major issue in Michigan communities.

Bridge Michigan reported that the recall campaigns and local disputes demonstrate both the intensity of the backlash and a growing perception among residents and officials that communities have limited power once major developers begin pursuing a project.

The fight over data centers, meanwhile, is moving beyond individual zoning meetings and into Michigan’s broader debate over who should have the final say when large-scale technology projects come to town.