New Hampshire
New Hampshire's data-center policy debate is nascent but real: a statewide moratorium bill (HB 1265) died in committee, a Senate zoning bill (SB 439) was tabled 304-11 leaving no new state law, a Canterbury zoning ban went to town ballot, and towns like Nottingham are now exploring local moratoriums (Citizens Count HB1265, InDepthNH (SB439), NHPR (Canterbury), NHPR (Nottingham)).
ILens Signals
Civic/Governance Barriers activates on moratorium-class action (C1), 2026 ballot measure (C2) — governance instruments on the electoral, legislative, and regulatory surface (protocol §10; Overview Civic breakout). Energy/Power is dominant (grid/electric-rate and noise concerns drove HB 1265). Water/Geology is a secondary stressor: Canterbury and Nottingham cite water use and environmental-resource impacts as reasons for local action (Canterbury Warrant Article 4 PDF, NHPR (Nottingham)). Capital Flows is NOT included: no ratepayer cost-shift statute, tax-incentive repeal, or insurer/investor risk-pricing action was identified in New Hampshire in the public record — the 2026 activity was zoning/moratorium-oriented (InDepthNH (SB439)).
IIKey 2026 Races
None identified. The issue is more salient in local zoning and legislative debate than in named 2026 federal or statewide New Hampshire campaigns in the public record (NHPR (Nottingham)).
IIIMoratorium · Ban Status
No statewide moratorium. HB 1265 (Rep. Peter Schmidt, D-Dover) would have imposed a one-year moratorium on new data-center construction plus a study committee, but the House committee voted Inexpedient to Legislate (15-0, Feb. 18) and the House killed it on March 11, 2026 (gc.nh.gov HB1265, Citizens Count HB1265). SB 439 (Sen. Debra Altschiller), after being amended to a 'by-right' industry-friendly version, was tabled by the full House 304-11 on May 14, effectively killing it and leaving municipalities with existing tools (InDepthNH (SB439), NHPR (SB439)). Local: Canterbury's Warrant Article 4 to ban data centers in all zones was placed on the March 10, 2026 town ballot; Nottingham is exploring a moratorium (Canterbury Warrant Article 4 PDF, NHPR (Nottingham)).
IVRatepayer · Cost-Shift Legislation
None identified as enacted. No New Hampshire data-center ratepayer/cost-shift statute passed in 2026; SB 439 concerned municipal zoning (not ratepayer cost allocation) and was tabled, and HB 1739 (data-center incentives) was among filed bills but did not advance to law in the public record (InDepthNH (SB439), NH Business Review (bill preview)).
VBallot Measures
Yes — 2026 cycle local measure. Canterbury Warrant Article 4 (zoning ban on data centers in all zones) was on the March 10, 2026 town ballot (Canterbury Warrant Article 4 PDF, NHPR). No state-level November 2026 New Hampshire data-center ballot measure identified.
VITop Contested Sites
A Nottingham data-center proposal drew backlash and reportedly prompted the developer to back out for now, pushing the town toward a moratorium; New Hampshire had roughly 10 data centers as of March 2026 (five in Manchester; one each in Keene, Lebanon, Littleton, Laconia, Portsmouth) (NHPR (Nottingham), NHPR (Canterbury)).
VIITalent · Workforce
No distinct AI labor-displacement or construction-labor-organizing fight identified in New Hampshire; the debate centered on environmental/zoning impacts and local control. Not a dominant domain (InDepthNH (SB439)).
VIIIData Center Cluster Size
Emerging/small: about 10 data centers statewide as of March 2026, concentrated in Manchester (five) with single facilities in Keene, Lebanon, Littleton, Laconia and Portsmouth (NHPR (Canterbury)).
IXKey Quote
"Municipalities are left with whatever they have in place right now, today. And it's not a whole lot." — Sen. Debra Altschiller, after SB 439 died (NHPR (Nottingham)).