Bill · H.R. 9262· House(119-HR-9262)
Local Control Protection Act
- Introduced
- 6/11/2026
- Last activity
- 6/11/2026 — Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Sponsored by
- Robert Bresnahan
- Cosponsors
- - 2 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill is called the Local Control Protection Act. It is designed to protect the choices that local governments make regarding zoning decisions for large data center developments. Under the bill, United States courts cannot hear challenges to local government decisions stopping a data center if the choice was made by a recorded vote with documented findings. Federal agencies are also banned from approving construction or operation permits if the data center owner is suing to overturn a local zoning denial. Additionally, the bill requires data centers to have a legally enforceable community benefit agreement with local leaders to be eligible for Federal tax credits. This agreement must include local tax terms, infrastructure mitigation, environmental monitoring, and a local workforce plan. A covered data center is defined as a facility or group of facilities under common control with a power demand of 20 megawatts or more.
Yes· 3 of 18
Does this leave more decisions to the states?+7
Strongly protects the authority of local governments to make zoning decisions.
Does this repair or build roads and bridges?+5
Requires infrastructure mitigation measures for roads and utilities.
Does this put more rules on large technology companies?+5
Imposes significant zoning and operational restrictions on large-scale data center developers.
The opposite· 3 of 5
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?-6
Removes the jurisdiction of U.S. courts to hear challenges against certain local zoning decisions.
Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this?-4
Restricts the ability of wealthy developers to challenge local zoning.
Would billionaires be better off under this?-4
Restricts the ability of large-scale developers to challenge local zoning.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 2: This section stops United States courts from hearing challenges to local government decisions that block a data center, as long as the decision used a recorded vote and documented findings. This keeps power in the hands of local officials that people voted for.
-
Section 3: Federal agencies cannot approve permits for data centers if the owner is actively suing a local government to override a zoning denial. This holds developers accountable and stops them from bullying local communities through the legal system.
-
Section 4: Tax credits are denied to data center developers unless they make a public, legally enforceable agreement with local government executives. This provision ensures communities get help with local tax liabilities and infrastructure impacts like roads, water, stormwater, and utilities.
-
Section 4: Developers must include environmental and noise monitoring protocols in their community agreements. This protects the peace and environment of local neighborhoods near the data centers.
-
Section 4: Developers must provide a Local Workforce Utilization Plan that documents good-faith efforts to hire local workers before looking outside the region. It also creates partnerships with local apprenticeship programs, technical schools, community colleges, and prioritizes local contractors.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Section 4: Developers who fail to meet the community benefit requirements, local workforce plans, or public agreement mandates will be blocked from receiving Federal tax credits for their data centers. While this holds them accountable, it could potentially slow down technology investments or increase costs for companies operating in the United States.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Improves Roads And Bridges+5Improves Environmental Protections+4Improves Rural Development+3
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Low Income Households+4Good For Rural Residents+4Good For Business Owners+3Good For Students+3Good For Young Adults+3Good For Middle Class Households+2Good For Union Workers+2Good For Billionaires-4Good For Ultra High Net Worth Individuals-4Good For High Net Worth Individuals-2
- Economy And Finance
- Increases Job Creation+4Improves Small Business Support+3Increases Corporate Taxes+2Reduces National Debt+1
- Education And Technology
- Increases Big Tech Regulation+5
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Poverty Reduction+2
- Governance And Ideology
- Increase States Rights+7Improves Government Transparency+3Improves Due Process-6Improves Interstate Commerce-3
- 9/24/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/4/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/11/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Introduced in House
Thomas KeanRepublican · New Jersey
Daniel MeuserRepublican · Pennsylvania