From The District

The AbundanceIndex

Mapping America’s most welcoming—and resistant—cities for development

NIMBY57.7YIMBY
Scroll to explore
At a Glance
84
Cities Ranked
57.7
Avg Index Score
46
Pro-Growth Cities
Key Finding
The gap between most welcoming and most resistant cities is stark: an Abundance Index of 80 (Temple, TX) versus 12 (Fairfax, VA)\u2014a 68-point spread.

In Temple, Texas, the planning commission took just 12 minutes to approve a data center project. The staff recommendation was clear: “Data centers are very low traffic generators. Staff recommends approval.”

Three hundred miles east, in Copperas Cove, a resident stood at the podium with a different message: “I’m concerned about blackouts to support these data centers. When do the residents get priority?”

Both cities are in Texas. Both face the same economic pressures. Yet their attitudes toward development couldn’t be more different. One sees opportunity; the other sees threat.

We analyzed 84 cities with significant data center discussion, combining voting records with sentiment analysis to create something new: an Abundance Index that measures not just whether cities approve development, but how enthusiastically they do so.

0
National Average Abundance Index
84Cities Analyzed
46YIMBY (55+)
14NIMBY (45-)
The Methodology

Beyond Approval Rates

Most analyses of local government stop at approval rates. But a city that approves 80% of projects reluctantly, after contentious debate, is not the same as one that approves 80% with enthusiasm and speed.

Our Abundance Index combines two signals: the sentiment score—how positive or negative the discussion tone is—and the positive ratio—what percentage of mentions are favorable. Cities scoring above 55 are classified as “YIMBY” (Yes In My Backyard); below 45 as “NIMBY” (Not In My Backyard).

The split: 46 cities are welcoming, 14 are resistant, and 24 sit in the middle. Where the resistant pockets cluster could determine where the next wave of data centers actually gets built.

NIMBYNeutralYIMBY
14
24
46
46 of 84 cities (55%) show pro-development sentiment
The Champions

America’s Most Welcoming Cities

At the top of our index sits Temple, Texas, with an Abundance Index of 80.0—the highest score in our dataset. Every single mention of data centers in Temple’s municipal meetings was coded as positive.

Why Temple? Ask five layers deep and a pattern emerges. Temple grew from 82,000 residents in 2020 to over 102,000 by early 2025—nearly 4% annual growth even during the pandemic. The city’s Economic Development Corporation reported $122 million in capital investments in 2024 alone. When your population is growing that fast, you need infrastructure to support it. Data centers, in this context, aren’t a question mark—they’re part of the plan.

In Dubuque, Iowa (index: 78.6), officials called their data center “an example of the kind of economic development we want to see in our community.” A different context: a Midwestern city competing for investment against larger metros.

The YIMBY champions span the political spectrum: California (Hayward), the Midwest (Dubuque), the Mountain West (Rapid City), and the Sun Belt (Temple, Coolidge, Spring Hill). What they share isn’t ideology—it’s a growth posture, whether driven by population influx (Temple) or economic repositioning (Dubuque).

#1
Temple
TX
80Abundance Index
100%Positive
83,473Population
#2
Dubuque
IA
78.6Abundance Index
100%Positive
59,315Population
#3
Hayward
CA
77.2Abundance Index
100%Positive
160,602Population
#4
Rapid City
SD
76.9Abundance Index
100%Positive
75,632Population
#5
Coolidge
AZ
76Abundance Index
100%Positive
14,175Population
#6
Spring Hill
TN
75.5Abundance Index
100%Positive
51,319Population
#7
Fort Worth
TX
74.3Abundance Index
100%Positive
924,663Population
The Resistance

Where Development Faces Headwinds

At the opposite end sits Fairfax, Virginia—a wealthy suburb of Washington, D.C.—with an Abundance Index of just 12.0, the lowest in our dataset. Not a single mention in Fairfax was coded as positive toward data center development.

Fairfax’s resistance has competing explanations. Median household income exceeds $130,000—residents don’t need data center jobs; they need the quiet streets they have. But Northern Virginia is already America’s largest data center corridor. “With the data centers being built, infrastructure is not keeping pace,” a resident complained. When you’ve absorbed dozens of facilities, skepticism about the next one isn’t reflexive—it’s experience.

Not all NIMBY cities are wealthy suburbs. Copperas Cove, Texas (population 36,000), scored just 25.7, with 100% of mentions coded negative. The concerns there: grid reliability in a state where power failures make national news. Both interpretations might be valid simultaneously.

Fairfax, VAPop. 24,242
12
Copperas Cove, TXPop. 36,436
25.7
Norwalk, CTPop. 91,050
27.8
Franklin, TNPop. 83,630
28.8
Lansing, MIPop. 112,986
28.8
The Contrast

Hearing the Divide

The Abundance Index measures language—what officials and residents actually say in municipal chambers. Here’s the difference between an 80-point city and a 12-point city:

+Pro-Development

“This data center is an example of the kind of economic development we want to see in our community.”

— Dubuque, IA

“Data centers are very low traffic generators compared to other industrial uses. Staff recommends approval.”

— Temple, TX

“We are a data center developer and we're excited about the opportunity this site presents for job creation.”

— Hayward, CA
VS
−Anti-Development

“I'm concerned about blackouts to support these data centers. When do the residents get priority?”

— Copperas Cove, TX

“With the data centers being built, infrastructure is not keeping pace. Our roads can't handle it.”

— Fairfax, VA

“We need to decide if a data center fits here, but then what? More traffic, more strain on resources.”

— Norwalk, CT
The Geography

State-Level Patterns

State-level averages cluster in the neutral zone. Tennessee leads at 53.8 across 4 cities; North Carolina and Missouri trail at 47.3. No state is uniformly welcoming or resistant.

The real action is local. Temple and Copperas Cove are both in Texas. One scores 80; the other scores 26. State policy matters less than the specific city council you’re standing in front of.

TN4 cities
53.8
NV2 cities
53
PA2 cities
52
IA2 cities
51.8
MI4 cities
51.8
AZ13 cities
50.4
TX13 cities
50
OR4 cities
50
NC3 cities
47.3
MO3 cities
47.3
The Stakes

What This Means

Cities like Temple, Dubuque, and Hayward aren’t just approving projects—they’re actively seeking them. Regulatory processes there are streamlined; community opposition is minimal.

In NIMBY strongholds, resistance protects quality of life—or pushes economic opportunity to neighboring jurisdictions. When Fairfax says no, the project doesn’t vanish. It lands in a more welcoming county.

Fifty-five percent of cities in our dataset are classified as YIMBY. Despite headlines about opposition, most of America is prepared to build. These numbers show exactly where.

46
Cities actively welcoming development
14
Cities showing strong resistance
57.7
Average Abundance Index (above 55 = YIMBY)
Methodology

How We Calculated the Index

Data Source: Municipal meeting transcripts from 84 cities across the United States, collected via public records and council streaming services. Only cities with 10+ mentions of “data center” in their transcripts were included.

Sentiment Analysis: Transcript segments were analyzed using natural language processing to classify mentions as positive, negative, or neutral. The sentiment score (0-100) reflects the overall tone of discussion.

Abundance Index Calculation: The index combines sentiment score (60% weight) with positive mention ratio (40% weight). This weighting emphasizes overall tone while still accounting for the balance of favorable vs. unfavorable mentions. Alternative weightings would shift rankings modestly but preserve the general pattern.

Classification: Cities with Abundance Index ≥55 are classified as YIMBY; ≤45 as NIMBY; between 45-55 as Neutral. These thresholds are analytical conventions, not bright lines—a city at 54 is functionally similar to one at 56.

Sample Size Variation: Mention counts vary significantly by city (from 10 to 300+). Cities with fewer mentions should be interpreted with more caution, as a single heated meeting can skew their scores.

Selection Bias: These 84 cities self-selected into our dataset by having active data center discussions. They are not a random sample of American cities and likely skew toward areas with existing tech infrastructure or active development proposals.

Limitations: Sentiment analysis has inherent limitations in capturing sarcasm, irony, or complex positions. This analysis measures how cities discuss data centers, which may differ from how they ultimately vote. Population data from U.S. Census Bureau estimates.

Date Range: Transcripts analyzed span January 2023 through January 2025, with the majority from 2024-2025.

📬

Enjoying The District?

Get data-driven local government stories in your inbox every week. Free, no spam.

Primary Sources

Sources & Data

All claims in this article are grounded in public records, government data, and independent reporting.

Continue Reading
Democracy

The Vote Tracker

1,524 local officials. 25,219 recorded votes. See who's voting yes.

6 min read