A small, loud group of opponents can kill a project most people would otherwise support.
It happens at city council meetings and planning commission hearings, and it’s happening more and more around land use projects: data centers, the solar and wind energy needed to power them, affordable and multi-family housing. The people who show up to fight are motivated, organized, and vocal. The people who’d benefit from lower energy costs, jobs, tax revenue … who care about schools, roads, and public safety … are busy. They are not spending their Tuesday night at a zoning hearing.
The New Reality for Public Affairs Campaigns
That imbalance is becoming one of the defining dynamics in local politics, and data centers are the clearest example of it right now.
The numbers back this up. Deep Root Analytics surveyed 3,000 registered voters nationally this spring. Just 32% support data center development; 53% oppose. On AI regulation, 53% want strict rules or to slow AI down altogether; only 38% want a hands-off approach. “Skepticism of data center expansion and support for AI oversight are among the few positions that majorities in both parties share.” In such a polarized political environment, that should get the attention of anyone building energy or AI infrastructure right now.
And it’s already playing out. After New York became the first state to enact a moratorium on large-scale data center construction, the industry is bracing for impact. “The real worry in the industry isn’t New York specifically, it is the precedent,” Joseph Hoefer of Monument Advocacy told POLITICO. “If a state this economically significant can pause permitting by executive order overnight, every developer has to assume the same thing can happen anywhere.” Stephanie Justice of Americans for Responsible Innovation put her finger on the underlying issue: “the fact of the matter is that voters don’t want decisions being made by industry without their input.”
Why the Traditional Playbook Falls Short
Here’s the trap. The old playbook is top-down: a former official or a well-connected local name writes the op-ed, lends the endorsement, and everyone else is supposed to fall in line. Add an ad blitz and an open-to-the-public town hall and call it a strategy. Voters don’t take direction that way anymore.
Public meetings become magnets for the opposition. Comment periods fill up with the same handful of activists. The loudest voices dominate local headlines, and over time, that shapes how the quiet majority sees the project, even if they never had a strong opinion to begin with. The traditional approach can end up amplifying exactly the narrative a project is trying to avoid.
What Successful Campaigns Do Differently
CampaignHQ has tracked outcomes across dozens of land use and energy advocacy programs in which we’ve been involved over the past several years. Here’s what that data shows about the campaigns that hold up under pressure.
Identifying advocates early changes the math. In live blind ID / survey calls, roughly 35% of residents contacted answer within three or four attempts, and a meaningful share give definitive answers, enough to build a real picture of who supports a project, who’s genuinely undecided, and who’s already opposed. This isn’t like an election turnout project … you’re not chasing 50%. Think of it more like making a map. You’re determining who to mobilize, who to educate, and who to avoid. Text surveys also show strong take rates and can fill in gaps to collect more data.
Long-form formats outperform soundbites. Programs using telephone town halls to reach a broader audience typically see around 12% of a dial universe join and stay engaged for eight minutes or longer, rates that are difficult to match with a mailer or a digital ad. This is where you put your CEO and key leaders front and center. Voters are increasingly skeptical of anything that feels produced, and an unscripted, live conversation is one of the few formats people still trust. That’s why podcasts have surged in popularity, and this creates the same experience for your very specific audience. It also keeps a handful of vocal opponents from dominating the room while still giving supporters and undecideds a real forum.
Confirmed activation beats broad activation. Patch-through calls to local officials from confirmed supporters work best when they follow a consistent standard: explain the issue, confirm agreement, and only ask for action if the answer is yes. In one recent fight against a proposed development moratorium, we activated over 100 confirmed advocates to speak with county leaders in a single day.
Just as important is what you don’t do: never leave a voicemail or text someone whose support you haven’t confirmed. Only turn out your confirmed supporters to public meetings. Only educate those who are open to persuasion. And remove your known opponents from communication.
Start Earlier, Build Stronger Support
Data centers aren’t the first and won’t be the last flashpoint like this. Solar, wind, and housing developments have faced the same dynamic for years, and as Deep Root’s research shows, the underlying skepticism runs deeper than any single technology or project type. The common thread across all of it is the same: a small, organized minority shaping the narrative for a much larger, quieter group of people who were never given the opportunity to engage and form their own opinions.
The bottom line: the developers and advocates who treat this as a communications and research problem, not just a political one, are the ones who’ll still be building next year.
Nicole Schlinger is the Founder and President of CampaignHQ, a public affairs and political communications firm that has spent more than 30 years helping advocates and developers build durable public support through direct voter and constituent engagement.
Sources cited:
- Deep Root Analytics, “Data Centers and AI Regulation” memo, June 2026
- POLITICO Influence, “AI groups reel after NY setback,” July 14, 2026