As public backlash against artificial intelligence data centers grows, tech companies are spending big bucks to influence and dissuade state lawmakers from reining in the facilities, report CalMatters’ Katherine Ortiz and Khari Johnson.
The Legislature is currently considering bills that would shift electric infrastructure costs toward data center operators and away from residential customers. Other proposals would mandate disclosures or estimates of water use, and require all data center projects to undergo environmental review.
Tech companies oppose the bills, arguing they would stifle innovation and competition, and have spent millions of dollars lobbying the state government. Amazon spent more than $1.7 million lobbying in California last year, while AI company Anthropic has spent $90,000. The Data Center Coalition, which counts Google, Microsoft and OpenAI among its members, spent roughly $60,000 to oppose nearly every bill that would regulate data centers.
Their lobbying efforts have worked before: Last year, four bills that would have limited the facilities or exert additional rules against them died or were watered down.
But since then, public sentiment against data centers has intensified. A March Gallup poll found that seven out of 10 Americans surveyed oppose data centers. Roughly the same percentage of those polled in the state oppose them too, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.
- Assemblymember Diane Papan, a San Mateo Democrat who authored two of the bills: “When you’re looking down the barrel of public outcry that says we don’t want (data centers) at all, and you’ve got localities that are saying they’re going to ban them, then you know the atmosphere has changed.”
Join CalMatters, KALW Public Media and San Francisco Public Press on Sept. 16 in San Francisco for the lowdown on your San Francisco ballot. We’ll break down local races and propositions, why it matters and what you need to know before you vote. Register here.
Other Stories You Should Know
New report links prison changes to homelessness
A new report finds that a voter-backed 2014 statewide ballot measure lowering some felony drug crimes to misdemeanors also likely increased homelessness in the state, writes CalMatters’ Marisa Kendall.
Public Policy Institute of California researchers determined Proposition 47 — which was intended to reduce prison overcrowding — likely led to an estimated increase in street homelessness of about 10% between 2015 and 2019. It also resulted in an additional 7,000 Californians experiencing “unsheltered” homelessness, such as sleeping in parks or cars.
This look at Prop. 47’s long-term effects comes at a time when many Californians are disillusioned with the state’s past efforts to reduce incarceration, as underscored by voters overwhelming approval of the anti-crime measure Prop. 36 in 2024.
The report is controversial in part because of the implication that jails are housing.
- Margot Kushel, director of the UCSF Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative: “I think we can all agree that criminal legal systems were not designed to be places for people to live. That’s not their role. That’s not what they’re meant for.”
Dems move to ban electric ICE gloves
Democratic state lawmakers are pushing a last-minute bill that would ban federal agents from using electric shock gloves, but critics say the proposal is largely symbolic.
As CalMatters’ Nadia Lathan explains, earlier this month the federal government issued a notice stating that the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is seeking to spend up to $20 million to buy thousands of taser-like gloves. California Democrats moved quickly to push a bill that would prohibit them, as well as state and local officers, from wearing any device that can deliver electric shocks.
Civil rights groups support the bill, arguing that the gloves are inhumane and an excessive use of force. Last year, a Kentucky man died after allegedly being shocked 40 times in jail.
But law enforcement groups argue the measure would hamstring officers’ ability to deescalate situations. Vikram Amar, a UC Davis law professor, also says that without a clear argument on how the gloves violate people’s constitutional rights, the bill wouldn’t hold up in court.
- Amar: “States simply can’t regulate how federal officers do their jobs. … It makes a lot of bills like this kind of more performative than real.”
And lastly: Deal on school sex abuse claims
California lawmakers made a deal that reduces schools’ exposure somewhat to sex abuse claims, although it does not go as far as some public agencies wanted by capping payouts. It would raise the bar for evidence in older claims. Read more from CalMatters’ Maya C. Miller
California Voices
CalMatters columnist Dan Walters: Due to the Democratic party’s dominance in California, Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislators can spend billions of dollars more than revenues cover, leaving legislative analysts perplexed about what these policymakers wrought.
Other things worth your time:
ICE agent’s gun found in SFO bathroom // NBC Bay Area (free)
Newsom’s big housing claim is built on bad data // Politico (free)
The fossil fuel industry is spending record amounts to keep CA from regulating it // Grist (free)
Big oil and gas companies are partly responsible for CA’s water woes, study finds // Los Angeles Times (paywall)
In reaction to recent ICE shootings, Legislature mandates state investigations // The Sacramento Bee (paywall)
Controversial CA bill would give tribes much more sway over ancestral state lands // San Francisco Chronicle (gift link)
CA moves closer to approving plug-in solar // The Orange County Register (gift link)
CA passed a law to help abuse victims. It’s costing taxpayers billions // The Wall Street Journal (gift link)
Trump administration’s wage cuts for seasonal farmworkers is unlawful, federal judge in CA rules // Los Angeles Times (paywall)
