‘An imperfect solution’ gains traction in data center fight

Governors are turning to community benefit agreements as they scramble to address data center blowback without alienating tech giants.

Democratic governors have a new message for data center developers amid community backlash: Cut a deal.

Community benefit agreements are increasingly appearing in state strategies for handling the data center boom. In recent months, three Rust Belt governors — Pennsylvania’s Josh Shapiro, Illinois’ JB Pritzker and Michigan’s Gretchen Whitmer — have called on project developers to enter into legal agreements with communities that can cement pollution limits, hiring commitments and local investment promises.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

“My message to data center developers is clear: if you can’t agree to our strict requirements and get the community where you want to build to say ‘yes,’ you’re not going to have the Commonwealth’s support either,” Shapiro said in a statement when he signed an executive order last month that features CBAs. “These are some of the biggest companies in the world — they can afford to be good neighbors, follow the rules, and do this right.”

Policymakers are now mulling mandates for such agreements. Shapiro signed an executive order last month ordering his state’s Department of Environmental Protection to only review permit applications for data center developers that have agreed to sign a CBA with their local community, among other requirements. Otherwise, DEP will not begin review until after all local approvals, including for zoning and land use, are secured.

The move was the latest sign that Shapiro, a likely 2028 presidential contender, has gone from a data center cheerleader to a vocal skeptic. He’s not alone. Both Democrats and Republicans are grappling with how to address a growing public backlash to the energy- and water-guzzling facilities, which are cropping up faster than political leaders and regulators can keep up.

CBAs appeal to moderate Democratic governors who are scrambling to address data center blowback without alienating the tech giants they hope can provide a much-needed boost to their local economies. But even progressives who support moratoriums on data centers, like Michigan Senate Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed, have referenced CBAs as a way to protect communities from data centers’ possible impacts.

Click here to read the full article in Politico

Big Tech joins Big Oil as big CA politics spenders

Big Tech spent $39 million to influence state politics last year, making 2025 a blockbuster year of spending for Meta, Google and other technology companies that want to push their agenda to California officials.

As CalMatters’ Jeremia Kimelman explains, the upcoming election, disputes over artificial intelligence regulation and the growth of the cryptocurrency industry have prompted Big Tech to spend big bucks on political campaigns, donate to nonprofit organizations and hire lobbyists.

The $39 million makes the tech industry the top political spender in California, alongside the oil and gas industry, giving tech companies an outsized influence in Sacramento, critics say.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

  • Catherine Bracy, founder of the nonprofit TechEquity, which is in favor of AI regulation: “There’s a question of why (tech companies) have to spend so much money. And that’s because they’re on the wrong side of history, and people don’t like them very much.”

Since the current two-year legislative session began in December 2024, the state Legislature has considered more than 50 bills that would regulate AI. Meta spent nearly $30 million in 2025 to influence California politics, including $20 million toward a political committee it created that supports candidates who are in favor of AI deregulation. On lobbying state officials alone, the company spent at least $4.6 million — far more than any other year since 2010, when it began advocating at the state Capitol.

Crypto companies — which are fairly new tech players buying influence across the state — have also ramped up their spending. Coinbase spent $200,000 on state lobbying last year, including $60,000 to the California Democratic Party. 

The industry’s political spending has proven consequential before: Two years ago, it poured $10 million into a campaign blitz that helped knock out then-Rep. Katie Porter, a critic of the crypto industry, from the California Senate race.

Read more.


Join us in Fresno Wednesday at 5:30 p.m. to hear candidates for governor address the issues that are most important to the Central Valley. Register now for the Central Valley Gubernatorial Forum, moderated by CalMatters.

Click here to read the full article in CalMatters

California Bill Advances, Requiring Big Tech to Pay for News

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Big Tech companies such as Google and Meta might soon have to pay media outlets for posting and using their news content under a proposed California measure attempting to save local journalism.

The bill, which cleared an important Assembly Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday with bipartisan support, would require Google and Meta to share with California media companies their advertising revenue stemming from the news and other reported content. The amount would be determined through an arbitration process.

Supporters of the bill said it would provide a “lifeline” to local news organizations that have seen their advertising revenues nosedive in the digital era. Opponents, including trade groups and some journalism groups, said the legislation would be an unprecedented mandate that violates the First Amendment.

The bill would mandate that at least 70% of their revenue go to local news organizations to help pay for reporters’ salaries. Big Tech companies would also be prohibited from retaliating against a news outlet for demanding a fee by excluding their content on the platforms.

“As news consumption has moved online, community news outlets have been downsized and closing at an alarming rate,” said Assemblymember Buffy Wicks of Oakland, who authored the bill, said during the Tuesday hearing.

The Democrat said that California has lost more than 100 news organizations in the past decade.

“The dominant type platforms, both search engines and social networks, have such unrivaled market power that newsrooms are coerced to share the content they produce, which tech companies sell advertising against for almost no compensation in return,” she said, noting her bill is being backed by major journalism unions such as the News Media Alliance and Media Guild of the West, which represents The Los Angeles Times and other newsrooms.

But critics of the bill said the legislation is unconstitutional for requiring online platforms to post content from all news organizations. It would also reward clickbait content and limit the ability for Google and Meta to fight misinformation on their platforms as it could be seen as retaliation, said a representative from Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group.

Chris Krewson, executive director of LION Publishers, a national news group representing more than 450 independent newsrooms, said the bill is “fundamentally flawed” and wasn’t written with small newsrooms in mind.

The bill would mostly benefit newspaper chains and hedge funds that have gutted local newsrooms in the last few decades, he said. His group represents more than 50 local newsrooms in California, 80% of which are operations with five or fewer journalists. Most of those news outlets wouldn’t meet the requirements to benefit, he said.

“I applaud the lawmaker for getting bipartisan support on this,” Krewson said in an interview Tuesday. “But this is backward.”

Over the last two years, LION Publishers has received at least $1 million in funding from Meta but Krewson said he’s not speaking on the tech company’s behalf.

Similar efforts to bolster local news companies have been attempted across the United States, Australia and Canada, among others, with various levels of success. Australia adopted a law in 2021 that resulted in $140 million in payments to news companies from Google and Facebook last year.

U.S. lawmakers are also pushing for similar initiatives, reintroducing a bill in March that failed in the last congressional session and would have allowed news companies to jointly negotiate an advertising rate with tech giants such as Google.

Meta declined to comment on the California bill but pointed to a statement it made to the U.S. Congress in 2022 and another it made to the Canadian government this year when it threatened to pull all news content from its platform if the company would have to pay for news. Google didn’t respond to an email seeking comment on the California bill.

Despite clearing another hurdle Tuesday, questions remain about how the bill would be implemented. Some lawmakers noted that Meta’s Facebook and Google do not operate the same way. Google scrapes news websites and provides users with summaries of reported content, while Facebook shows content such as photos, videos and articles to users based on their activities on the platform.

Democratic Assemblymember Matt Haney of San Francisco said he’s also concerned with how the state would ensure the money goes to local journalists.

Click here to read the full article in AP News