Ohio farmers fear land seizures as data center expansion sparks property rights battle
A controversial proposal tied to Ohio's data center boom is alarming farmers who fear their land could be taken before compensation is finalized.
Ohio farmers are raising concerns after a proposal backed by a powerful business lobbying group suggested changes to the state's eminent domain laws that could allow infrastructure projects linked to data centers to access private property before compensation disputes are fully resolved. The proposal emerged in June 2026 and has triggered a strong response from the Ohio Farm Bureau, which argues the measure could significantly weaken property rights protections at a time when demand for land and energy infrastructure is rapidly increasing.
The debate began after recommendations from the Ohio Business Roundtable suggested lawmakers adopt a system known as "deposit and build." Under this model, projects deemed necessary for public use could move forward immediately after a court ruling, even while compensation appeals continue.
For many landowners, the proposal raises concerns about losing access to their property while waiting months-or potentially years-for final payment decisions.
"Our farmers are definitely concerned about that," agricultural leaders have warned, emphasizing that landowners should receive full legal protection before any construction begins. The controversy arrives as Ohio becomes an increasingly attractive destination for data center investments, driven by growing demand for artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and digital infrastructure.
These facilities require enormous amounts of electricity, transmission capacity and supporting infrastructure. While data center companies themselves do not possess eminent domain authority, many of the utilities and infrastructure providers serving those facilities do. That distinction has fueled fears among rural communities that farmland could eventually become vulnerable to acquisition through projects justified as serving a broader public necessity.
The Ohio Farm Bureau has repeatedly stated it is not opposed to economic development or data centers, but strongly opposes any effort that could erode constitutional protections for private property owners. Agricultural advocates argue the proposal's language is broad enough to potentially impact farmland preservation, family farms, and long-term rural investment decisions.
Business groups backing the proposal argue Ohio's current eminent domain process can delay major projects for years. Today, utilities and government entities must first convince a court that a project is necessary before land can be acquired. If compensation is challenged, construction cannot begin until legal disputes are resolved.
Supporters of the deposit-and-build model argue that once a court establishes necessity, work should be allowed to proceed while compensation appeals continue independently. According to supporters, similar systems already operate in approximately 45 states, helping avoid costly delays on major infrastructure developments.
Backers say the approach is particularly important as states compete for investments tied to artificial intelligence, digital infrastructure, energy expansion, and technology development. The debate has also opened a broader political question: Should data centers be considered a public necessity?
Ohio State Senator Brian Chavez acknowledged the issue is becoming increasingly controversial as lawmakers evaluate how critical digital infrastructure has become in everyday life.
Supporters argue that everything from streaming services and cloud storage to artificial intelligence applications depends on data centers. Critics counter that expanding eminent domain powers under that logic could create a precedent that places additional pressure on rural landowners.
For farmers, the concern extends far beyond a single project.
The outcome could influence future decisions involving power lines, renewable energy projects, transmission infrastructure, and other developments increasingly competing for agricultural land across the United States.
The Ohio dispute reflects a growing national challenge as rural regions attract investments in data centers, renewable energy, and large-scale infrastructure projects. As competition for land intensifies, agricultural organizations are paying close attention to how policymakers balance economic development, private property rights, and farmland protection.
For producers already facing rising input costs, uncertain commodity prices, and ongoing pressure on margins, land ownership remains one of the most valuable assets they possess. That is why many farm groups argue that any proposal allowing construction before compensation is finalized could fundamentally reshape the relationship between rural landowners, utilities and government authorities.
