Berkeley Heights town council will vote on final adoption of an ordinance that will ban data centers in town. Ahead of that vote, let’s take a look at some of the major points concerning data centers, including both pros and cons that should be taken into consideration, as the matter may not be as straight-forward as one might think.
At the last town council meeting, several residents spoke urging council members to postpone voting on the first reading. It seems fair to say that most people are aware of the negatives associated with data centers, so I wanted to take a look at why a fair number of residents would ask for the vote to be postponed.
The format of this article will look at sections of the ordinance and add comments and information to the various sections. Let’s start with the two opening points:
WHEREAS, the Township of Berkeley Heights’s Master Plan emphasizes protection of the Township’s environmental resources and historic and cultural heritage; and
WHEREAS, data centers present a form of land use that poses harmful effects to both the environment and to residents’ health and quality of life, such as excessive and costly electricity consumption, loud noise, air pollution, excessive water use, and water pollution; and
While it makes sense that an ordinance aiming to ban data centers is going to highlight negative aspects, it is still necessary to keep biases in check and provide relevant and factual language. It’s worth noting that the lead point speaks about the Master Plan, yet the town council members admitted at the last meeting that they had not received input from the town planner. The ordinance was subsequently referred to the Planning Board for its July 15 meeting. The points in the second section will be addressed further down in the ordinance.
WHEREAS, as of March 2024, there were 5,381 data centers located in the United States, 73 of which were located in New Jersey; and
This is an interesting data point, but it wasn’t immediately clear to me why it was included or considered a factor in the formation of the ordinance. A best-guess is that it relates to the next two sections.
WHEREAS, on March 27, 2026, Governor Sherrill identified data centers as among the biggest drivers of energy costs in New Jersey; and
WHEREAS, Governor Sherrill, Executive Order No. 2 details that from June 2023 to June 2025 the average residential electricity price in the State rose by well over 33 percent, and the average electricity price for all customers in the State, including commercial customers, rose by nearly 30 percent; and
The ordinance attributes this statement to March 27, 2026, but the Governor’s official announcement containing that language was issued on May 27, 2026. Executive Order No. 2 was issued separately on January 20, 2026.
Here is where bias and selective ‘facts’ enter. Yes, data centers can and do cause an increase in electricity costs, but that’s not the only important factor to consider. New Jersey gets its power from PJM Interconnection, which supplies power across a multistate region. New Jersey also lost in-state generation capacity while replacement projects lagged, adding to a broader regional problem involving growing demand, delayed generation interconnections, supply constraints and PJM capacity-market rules. New Jersey did see a significant increase in solar generation, but much of that capacity is behind the meter, meaning it primarily supplies the home or business where it is installed rather than functioning as utility-scale generation available to serve the broader grid. So while excess power CAN still flow back to the grid, and New Jersey also has grid-supply and community solar projects, the question of how much actually reaches the broader grid remains unanswered.
While data centers may compound the problem, there is opportunity for relief to residents of an area. Some municipalities require centers to supply their own power, or to provide subsidies to offset costs. “Renewable Energy Additionality” clauses can ensure centers contribute to renewable capacity, rather than rely on existing resources.
WHEREAS, preliminary data cited by Members of the New Jersey State Legislature has cautioned that large-scale data centers can use as much as 3 to 5 million gallons of water in a single day between liquid cooling and water consumed to generate the energy that powers them; and
WHEREAS, this extreme volume of water usage negatively impacts homes and businesses within the Township and the surrounding communities; and
Like the issue of power, water usage is more nuanced than it first appears. The ordinance cites potential usage of 3 to 5 million gallons per day by some large-scale data centers, but it does not establish that those figures represent an average facility or the size and type of facility that could realistically be built in Berkeley Heights.
For perspective, Berkeley Heights has approximately 4,825 households. Using an estimated average of 300 gallons per household per day would place combined residential water use at roughly 1.45 million gallons per day. That is an estimate based on household count and assumed average usage, not an actual measurement of the Township’s daily residential water consumption.
As many residents are aware, our waste water treatment plant is a subject of concern, with the town considering a sale of the plant and/or breaking out separate billing for waste treatment, rather than having costs included in taxes, since the current amounts being paid by residents is artificially low. Depending on the project and its documented impacts, the Township could explore requiring or negotiating contributions toward necessary utility or infrastructure improvements.
Additionally, though the most common method of cooling for centers is water, some data-center cooling designs can greatly reduce or avoid the use of potable water, although the energy, infrastructure and environmental tradeoffs vary by system. Even where water is used, there are methods to decrease water and electricity usage, like geothermal. Air cooling is possible, though with increased electricity required. Other centers are using immersive cooling, which submerge servers in non-conducive fluids which transfer heat to the fluid without needing evaporative cooling. Some draw from recycled wastewater for cooling.
WHEREAS, preliminary studies noted by the State Legislature also indicate that some data centers require 300 MW of electricity, which is roughly equivalent to the output of a small modular nuclear reactor; and
Like the numbers given in the section for water usage, note the inclusion of the word “some” in the above section. Small sites use under 2 Megawatts, while medium-sized centers draw 10 to 25 Megawatts.
Electric and water usage amounts can be determined by limiting the size and type of any potential data centers.
WHEREAS, it is well established that data centers bring overdevelopment and overuse of environmental resources negatively impacting subterranean aquifers, potable drinking water and other water resources; and
WHEREAS, the Township is conscious of the hazards of data centers, such as depletion of critical groundwater resources, and the impact to the environmental and natural resources posed by the scope, depth and pervasiveness of large-scale commercial data center operations; and
Once again, note the language used here of “large-scale” operations. Not having a ban doesn’t automatically equate to a massive data center being built in town. Without a categorical ban, Berkeley Heights could still regulate data centers and apply valid zoning, site-plan and environmental standards. However, it could not simply reject an otherwise permitted and compliant application without a legally supportable basis.
WHEREAS, municipal regulations designed for the preservation of the environment and the protection of ecological values are a well-recognized, legitimate and proper exercise of municipality authority; and
WHEREAS, the construction of data centers often results in the cutting and removal of trees causing increased soil erosion and dust, instability and deterioration in the value of surrounding property, and other adverse environmental and geographical conditions; and
Forgive a little unprofessional writing here, but did the authors of this ordinance really write this with a straight face? All one needs to do to see the staggering inconsistency between this ordinance and actual policy is to look at all the trees that have been removed thanks to the multiple “affordable” housing developments and new construction sites in our town.
WHEREAS, the environmental hazards, pollution of potable drinking water, and increase electricity costs of certain data center operations on residents, businesses, the environment, and private and public property imposes significant burdens on municipal resources thus creating a need to assess the rights, health and safety, and interests of the residents and the community; and
The better-documented concerns involve consumption of potable water, strain on water and wastewater infrastructure and the management of cooling-system discharges, rather than an assumption that every data center directly contaminates drinking water. That said, and to repeat what has been said already, these burdens and potential issues can be mitigated with proper planning.
WHEREAS, the Township Committee has determined it necessary and appropriate to amend and update its ordinances to adequately address data center uses in a manner that best reflects present needs and realities; and
To address present needs and realities, one could argue that the potential exists for a center to actually benefit our town by way of the following: subsidies for power usage, generation of new power, upgrades to wastewater treatment facilities, and, with careful structure, contributing revenue from taxes.
WHEREAS, the Township Committee has determined that it is in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of its residents and members of the public who visit, travel or conduct business in the Township, to amend the Municipal Code of the Township to prohibit data centers as a land use within the Township.
This last section makes assumptions that may or may not be correct. This ordinance appears to have been based on a single presentation by Council member Susan Poage, without input from the town planner at the time it was introduced. The ordinance was subsequently referred to the Planning Board for review. Issuing a decree that a ban is “in the best interest….” without seeming to have done complete and thorough research first is the very antithesis of good governance.
As of this time, no data centers are being proposed. Berkeley Heights most likely does not want a data center, but preemptively closing the door before exploring all options seems as short-sighted as New Jersey’s closing of power plants with no adequate plans to replace them.
Editor’s Note: We’ve gotten a couple of comments about the Nokia property. The article’s facts still hold. A conventional standalone data center wouldn’t fit within the permitted-use definitions. New Jersey requires that a proposed use fall within a permitted category, so unless the Township’s zoning officer determines that a data center actually falls into one of those categories, which would be a massive stretch, the Nokia property is likely off limits on that alone unless an applicant seeks a use variance. In that case, the applicant would have the burden.
Additionally, the Nokia property is already moving through an affordable-housing pathway that includes age-restricted housing. If the Township were really concerned about that property, it could address data centers through the zoning or redevelopment rules governing that property or district.
Lastly, given the recent Montville ruling, even if a variance were sought any developer would need to address both the project’s individual impact, but also whether allowing the use would substantially impair Berkeley Heights’ zoning plan and ordinance.
Also related to the 07/21/2026 Berkeley Heights Town Council Meeting:
$800K Words In The Air: Berkeley Heights Proposes $2.5M in New Sewer Debt
Examining the Facts Behind Berkeley Heights’ Proposed Data Center Ban
Questions Mount Over Lower Columbia and No-Bid Contracts Ahead of July 21 Council Meeting
Related Articles
Questions Mount Over Lower Columbia and No-Bid Contracts Ahead of July 21 Council Meeting
Where is the Report? Berkeley Heights Withholds ‘Draft’ Used to Push Recreation Takeover
