Georgians must have voice on whether data centers come to their communities

Politicians like to hedge and muddy the waters, especially on complicated and controversial issues like data centers.

I’m not a politician, so I’ll give it to you straight.

When I’m governor, Georgia will have clear, consistent guidelines for data centers.

The short and simple version is this: Data centers must have local support, provide a clear local benefit, pay their own way and meet strong environmental standards.

Data centers can bring investment and revenue to a community. But they can also place enormous demands on local land, roads, water and power.

Those tradeoffs should never be decided behind closed doors or dictated by politicians hundreds of miles away. The people who live with the consequences must have a meaningful voice in the decision.

These five conditions must be met for approval

Rick Jackson is founder, chairman and CEO of Jackson Healthcare and the 2026 Republican nominee for governor. (Courtesy)

First, a data center should not be built without the support of the local government and the local community. State government should establish strong guardrails, but it should not force a project on a city or county that does not want it.

Local leaders and residents know their communities, their infrastructure and their long-term needs better than anyone in Atlanta. Their judgment must carry real weight.

Second, every project must provide a local financial benefit that goes beyond the jobs directly tied to the data center. In some communities, data centers have generated enough revenue to eliminate property taxes. In others, they have helped fund teacher pay raises and other local priorities.

The exact benefit may look different from one community to the next, and that is the point. Local governments should be able to negotiate agreements that reflect local needs and deliver measurable value. No matter what, the community benefit agreements should be in writing to ensure responsible parties can easily be held accountable.

First, a data center should not be built without the support of the local government and the local community. State government should establish strong guardrails, but it should not force a project on a city or county that does not want it.

Local leaders and residents know their communities, their infrastructure and their long-term needs better than anyone in Atlanta. Their judgment must carry real weight.

Second, every project must provide a local financial benefit that goes beyond the jobs directly tied to the data center. In some communities, data centers have generated enough revenue to eliminate property taxes. In others, they have helped fund teacher pay raises and other local priorities.

The exact benefit may look different from one community to the next, and that is the point. Local governments should be able to negotiate agreements that reflect local needs and deliver measurable value. No matter what, the community benefit agreements should be in writing to ensure responsible parties can easily be held accountable.

Third, Georgia families and small businesses should never subsidize a data center through higher electric or water bills. It does no good to lower property taxes with one hand if utility costs rise with the other. Data centers must pay the full cost of the water, power, transmission and other infrastructure they require or provide their own capacity.

Existing ratepayers should not be left holding the bill. And data centers should never cause property values near the data center to increase their taxes.

Fourth, every agreement must be transparent and enforceable. Tax incentives, infrastructure commitments, projected benefits, utility costs and performance requirements should be available for the public to review. Communities deserve to know what has been promised, who is responsible and whether the project is delivering.

There is already a bipartisan push in the Legislature to require greater transparency in these agreements. I will support that effort as governor and insist on real accountability.