Iowans
in Control

The water doesn't come back

Meta's data center in Altoona draws from the Jordan Aquifer, a deep, ancient groundwater source, and its agreement with the city lets it use up to 16% of Altoona's water. Iowa's state geologist, Keith Schilling, warns that water pumped from deep aquifers like these isn't coming back: "All water lost to this deep aquifer is lost forever in human terms."

Google told Linn County its proposed data center could use as much as 12 million gallons of water a day, drawn from the Cedar River. When the county asked for a water study, Google had committed up to $500,000 to fund one – then walked away from that commitment by moving to annex its land into a neighboring town.

Fifty jobs, $208 million

Apple got about $208 million in tax breaks to build its Waukee data center back in 2017 – a facility that created just 50 permanent jobs. That works out to roughly $4.16 million in public subsidy for every job.

Iowa hands data centers at least $150 million a year in tax breaks. In Cedar Rapids alone, the city's agreement with QTS could rebate an estimated $529 million in property taxes over 20 years – for a campus its own documents say may bring as few as 15 to 30 long-term jobs.

The deal's done before you hear a word

In February 2026, Linn County unanimously passed one of the most comprehensive data center ordinances in the country – mandatory water studies, 1,000-foot setbacks, and binding water-use agreements. Days later, Google moved to annex its land into the tiny city of Palo (pop. ~1,407) to get out from under those rules. A later investigation found Palo's leaders had negotiated with Google for months while downplaying it in public.

Supervisor Sami Scheetz described what happened as a "multi-trillion dollar corporation pitting local governments against each other in a race to the bottom." At a public hearing, Palo resident Dorothy Landt asked: "Why has Linn County, Iowa, become a dumping ground for soon-to-be obsolete technology that spoils our landscape and robs us of our resources?"

The fight is still live. On July 1, 2026, Linn County paused all new large data center rezonings for 18 months. Weeks later, Palo passed its own, looser rules – the kind Google's annexation move was designed to reach. Even now, the county is weighing an exception that could let the project through anyway, tied to a nearby nuclear plant restart. No deal is final.

Where we stand

Data centers can bring construction jobs and real investment. But a project can help a county's budget and still get decided without the people who live there. Iowans deserve a real say before the deal is signed, and we all deserve a say over the powerful AI these data centers are built to run. Whether any one project gets built is a local call – we don't make it for anyone.

Why do they need data centers?

These data centers are critical in the race toward powerful AI that the companies admit they can't fully control. Either we set the rules for AI now, or the companies keep playing by their own – and AI's only getting more powerful.

Who owns what your equipment knows

Modern tractors collect everything – planting dates, yield maps, fertilizer rates, field boundaries, even fuel use. John Deere says farmers "control" that data. But the fine print lets Deere pool it, share it with its affiliates, and hand dealers access by default. A law firm is now investigating whether Deere used and shared farmers' data beyond what it disclosed. Who really controls the data your farm produces?

Iowa farmers already know this fight

For years, Iowa farmers have battled John Deere just to fix their own tractors – and to control the data their equipment collects. In 2026 the Iowa House passed a right-to-repair bill 70-18, Republicans and Democrats together. It stalled in the Senate, and Iowa still has no right-to-repair law. The question underneath it is the one AI raises everywhere: who controls the technology that runs your farm?

The squeeze farmers are already feeling

Iowa farm income is projected to fall about a quarter this year – driven by low crop prices and high costs, not AI. But it's why farmers are in no mood to hand yet more control to companies they can't hold accountable.

Who controls the technology, controls the farm

Meatpacking companies are already building toward automation in Iowa plants, and no one has told workers what happens next. The pattern is the same across the whole farm economy: the tools that run it are owned by companies you can't hold to account. Either we set the rules for AI now, or the companies keep playing by their own – and AI's only getting more powerful.

The big picture

According to a lawsuit against OpenAI, its own safety system flagged more than 300 of one teen's messages about self-harm, and the chatbot kept talking. And these companies aren't building better chatbots – their own mission statements say the goal is AI that does everything a human can do. A chatbot was the easy test. They failed it. Either we set the rules for AI now, or the companies keep playing by their own – and AI's only getting more powerful.