Why I Oppose Large AI Data Centers in Florida
Florida has always been defined by its natural resources. Our economy depends on clean water, healthy aquifers, productive agriculture, thriving tourism, and communities that can withstand hurricanes and rapid population growth. While I support technological innovation and economic development, I do not believe Florida should become the nation's hub for massive AI data centers. There are simply better places for these facilities than a state already facing significant challenges with water supply, energy demand, and infrastructure.
The first concern is water. Although modern data centers have become more efficient, many still require millions of gallons of water each year for cooling systems, depending on their size, design, and climate. Some operators have reduced water consumption through closed-loop cooling systems, recycled water, or air-cooled technology, but not every facility uses those approaches. Florida's aquifer is already under pressure from rapid population growth, agricultural demands, and commercial development. In many parts of the state, residents have experienced declining well levels, increasing saltwater intrusion near the coast, and growing concerns about long-term water availability. I do not believe adding another major industrial water user is in Florida's best interest.
Energy consumption presents another significant challenge. AI data centers consume enormous amounts of electricity because they operate around the clock running thousands of servers and sophisticated cooling equipment. A single hyperscale data center can use as much electricity as a small city. Florida already experiences some of the nation's highest summer electricity demand due to air conditioning, and our population continues to grow every year. Adding dozens of energy-intensive facilities would require substantial investments in power generation and transmission infrastructure, costs that ultimately find their way into the electric bills paid by Florida families and businesses.
Land use is another issue that deserves serious attention. These facilities often occupy hundreds of acres and require extensive supporting infrastructure, including substations, transmission lines, backup generators, fuel storage, and security perimeters. While they may create construction jobs during development, they generally employ relatively few permanent workers compared to manufacturing plants, distribution centers, or other major employers occupying similar amounts of land. Florida should prioritize projects that provide long-term employment opportunities while making efficient use of our limited developable land.
There is also the issue of tax incentives. Across the country, many states compete for data center projects by offering substantial tax exemptions on equipment, property, and electricity. Those incentives often shift the tax burden onto residents and existing businesses while producing relatively few permanent jobs in return. I believe Florida taxpayers should receive a measurable return on any economic incentive offered by the state. If a project cannot succeed without substantial taxpayer subsidies, we should carefully question whether it is truly in Florida's interest.
Another concern is resilience. Florida is one of the most hurricane-prone states in America. Even though modern data centers are engineered with backup generators, redundant systems, and hardened construction, hurricanes can still disrupt fuel deliveries, electric transmission infrastructure, transportation networks, and communications. Building critical national AI infrastructure in one of the country's highest-risk hurricane zones raises legitimate questions about long-term reliability and disaster planning.
Supporters correctly point out that many modern facilities now recycle cooling water, use reclaimed wastewater, or rely on advanced air-cooling technology. Those innovations are welcome and should continue to improve. However, they do not eliminate the enormous electricity requirements or the long-term infrastructure demands these facilities place on surrounding communities. Technology has made data centers better neighbors than they once were, but it has not made them free of environmental or economic impacts.
Florida should absolutely embrace technology companies, software development, cybersecurity firms, medical research, aerospace innovation, financial technology, and advanced manufacturing. These industries create high-paying jobs while generally placing fewer demands on our water resources and electric grid than large-scale AI server farms. Economic development should improve the lives of Floridians without compromising the natural resources that make our state unique.
As a candidate for Florida Chief Financial Officer, I believe government has a responsibility to consider not only today's economic opportunities but also tomorrow's financial liabilities. Infrastructure expansion, utility upgrades, environmental mitigation, and disaster resilience all carry significant costs. Those costs should be weighed honestly before Florida commits to becoming a destination for massive AI data centers.
Florida is growing faster than almost any state in the nation. We cannot approve every project simply because it promises investment. We must ask whether that investment protects our water, strengthens our electric grid, creates meaningful long-term jobs, and leaves our children with a stronger Florida than the one we inherited.
Innovation is important. Fiscal responsibility is important. Protecting Florida's natural resources is important. We can support technological progress without sacrificing the very things that make Florida worth calling home. That is why I oppose large-scale AI data centers in Florida.
