Fresno Council moves to block large AI data centers, orders code rewrite

The Fresno City Council voted unanimously to direct staff to prepare a text amendment that would prohibit large AI and cloud data centers in the city and to pursue a 10‑year moratorium while the ordinance is drafted and reviewed. The motion, introduced by Councilmember Nick Richardson, passed 7‑0 after extended discussion about definitions, CEQA requirements and how the prohibition would affect annexations and existing county land.

Supporters of the resolution cited public health and resource concerns. “Data centers can use about 360,000,000 gallons of water per year,” public commenter Mariana Alvarenga told the council during the consent‑agenda public comment period, urging stronger language in the proposed ban. Councilmembers pressed staff on thresholds — e.g., power demand, building footprint and whether portions of an existing industrial building reconfigured for corporate cloud services would be considered a banned use. Director of Planning Jennifer Clark said the city will write specific code definitions and return with required CEQA analysis and suggested the council could see draft language by year end, depending on the level of environmental review required.

The adopted direction requires staff to draft code changes that define the prohibited uses (for example, facilities whose primary purpose is large‑scale cloud or AI compute and which exceed technical thresholds such as high power density or server floor area) and to bring the draft through the planning process, the airport land‑use body (where applicable) and the planning commission before returning to the council. The resolution also instructs staff to notify council offices promptly if an application that could be construed as a data‑center project is filed while the code work is underway.

Council members and the mayor said the ordinance is meant to buy time for a technical, evidence‑based review, not to shut off all computing or server rooms that are ancillary to other businesses. “We're trying to make that conversation more objective and fact‑based,” Richardson said when he introduced the item. The council emphasized the city retains discretion on annexations and could deny annexation of a site with a prohibited use under the new code once adopted.