Montana counties are charting distinct regulatory paths for artificial intelligence data centers, with some pursuing voter initiatives while others implement temporary construction freezes—a split approach reflecting uncertainty over local zoning authority and state preemption.
Yellowstone County commissioners voted unanimously on July 7 to direct the county attorney to file a district court challenge against a proposed citizen initiative that would require two-thirds voter approval for any data center construction or expansion. Deputy County Attorney Steve Williams cited a precedent from Treasure County v. Edlund, a case in which a court ruled that a citizen initiative regulating wind farms exceeded county zoning authority. Williams stated the ruling “would, in our view, likely bar the proposed data center ordinance.”
The Yellowstone County initiative emerged in response to Quantica Infrastructure’s plans to develop a data center campus on approximately 5,000 acres near Broadview. Kassi Solberg, a Broadview resident leading the effort, framed the petition as a matter of democratic process. “We are simply asking our neighbors to sign a petition so that voters — not bureaucrats — get to decide how massive data center development happens in our communities,” she said.
Meanwhile, Missoula County took a different approach. The county commission approved an interim zoning ordinance on July 9 that imposes a one-year moratorium on data center construction and expansion. The commission identified potential environmental and infrastructure concerns to justify the emergency measure, citing risks including noise, vibration, heat, air quality degradation, water quantity and quality impacts, and strain on energy systems.
The Missoula action follows an application by Idaho-based Krambu to convert part of the Bonner Mill Industrial Park into an AI data center. The facility would consume approximately 29 megawatts of electrical power. Property owner Mike Heisey withdrew his signature from the Krambu application, a development that may reflect shifting sentiment toward the project.
Data center regulation has become increasingly contentious in the region after a Wyoming facility recently contaminated Cheyenne’s wastewater system with rare bacteria, raising public health concerns. Butte-Silver Bow residents are also pursuing a citizen initiative focused on data center regulation, though fewer details on that effort have emerged.
The divergent county responses expose an unresolved question in Montana law: whether local governments possess sufficient authority to regulate data centers through zoning and voter approval requirements, or whether such regulations exceed county jurisdiction. The Yellowstone County legal challenge will likely provide clarity on this question, as courts could address whether citizen initiatives on data center siting are constitutionally permissible exercises of local control.
The temporary moratorium in Missoula provides the county time to develop permanent zoning rules without immediately blocking projects, while Yellowstone County’s court challenge directly contests whether voters can impose approval thresholds for data center development. Both strategies reflect county commissioners’ concerns about the scale and environmental footprint of proposed facilities, but they represent fundamentally different theories of how local governments should regulate industrial development in their jurisdictions.
