AI Data Center Push Collides With Local and Tribal Opposition

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is expected to sign two bills this month that would expand data center development across the state while providing no formal role for Native tribes in the decision process. The legislation, Senate Bills 886 and 887, arrives at the same time Newsom is considering a separate measure that would give the state’s 109 Native nations a government-to-government voice on water policy decisions.

The contrast has drawn attention from tribal leaders who argue the data center bills undercut the consultation rights offered in the water measure, known as Assembly Bill 2218. That bill, co-sponsored by the Karuk Tribe, would require state agencies to address historical water inequities and consult tribes on related decisions even when environmental reviews are not otherwise triggered. Tribal officials say the data center bills lack any equivalent requirement.

Data centers have become central to the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence systems. Companies including Anthropic and OpenAI have pursued both large-scale facilities and smaller 20- to 30-megawatt deployments in recent months to secure computing capacity more quickly. Sources familiar with the discussions say the firms have explored options in the United States as well as the United Kingdom and Nordic countries. The push reflects the industry’s need to match infrastructure growth with rising demand for model training and deployment.

In California, at least some of the proposed sites sit on or near tribal lands. A national tracker maintained by Honor the Earth has identified more than 100 data centers proposed or operating on or adjacent to Native territory nationwide. Several tribes outside California, including the Cherokee Nation, the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians and the Seminole Nation, have already moved to restrict hyperscale projects on their lands.

Native voters represent a measurable bloc in several swing states, including Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan and Nevada. Newsom’s handling of the California bills is therefore being watched beyond state lines. Tribal advocates note that the absence of required consultation in the data center legislation could set a precedent for other states facing similar infrastructure pressures.

State officials have not detailed how the new bills would address tribal input or environmental impacts. The legislation focuses primarily on streamlining approvals and supporting energy infrastructure needed for large computing facilities. Proponents argue that faster deployment of data centers will help maintain California’s position in the technology sector and support broader economic goals.

Tribal representatives contend that the speed of development risks repeating patterns of limited engagement that have historically affected Native communities on issues such as water rights and land use. They point to the water policy bill as an example of the kind of structured consultation they seek across policy areas.

The overlap of these measures this fall places Newsom in a position where his choices on data centers could shape perceptions among Native communities ahead of future elections. The outcome will also test how state governments balance the demands of emerging technologies with existing commitments to tribal consultation.