A sign on a property about three miles from the site of a proposed Microsoft data center off of I-96 at Covenant Business Park in Lowell Charter Township expresses opposition to the project.
(Ed. Note: This story was originally published by Bridge Michigan, a nonprofit and nonpartisan news organization. Visit the newsroom online: bridgemi.com.)
By Ron French
Bridge Michigan
Less than 1 in 5 Michigan local government officials believe large-scale data centers are worth their costs, and a majority want tighter statewide regulations, according to a survey released Sept. 22.
Most skeptical are leaders in rural Michigan, where the centers are typically built, according to the survey by the University of Michigan’s Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy.
Among officials from rural communities, only 12% agree that data centers’ benefits outweigh their costs, compared with 40% of officials from urban areas.
Those sentiments reflect a backlash to the mega projects originally hailed as economic boons. At least 18 local governments around Michigan have voted or have proposed temporary halts to new data centers. Laws against exclusionary zoning, however, make it difficult to ban data centers altogether.
Rural Michigan communities “are more likely to be targets for large-scale data center development because they typically have more inexpensive available land,” said Stephanie Leiser, director of the U-M center that conducted the survey of 1,328 jurisdictions across the state.
“While they acknowledge the potential benefits of data centers in terms of economic competitiveness, they don’t believe it’s fair that they will bear a disproportionate share of the costs of hosting them in their communities.”
Data centers have become a major, bipartisan issue in Michigan and nationwide in the midterm elections. More than 16% of respondents singled it out as a top issue in Bridge Listens, Bridge Michigan’s election-year survey.
The U- M survey indicated that nearly 6 in 10 local government leaders believe regulation of hyperscale data centers by Michigan’s state and local governments should be a very high priority.
Both candidates for governor, Republican John James and Democrat Jocelyn Benson, have called for a moratorium on the centers, as have the major party candidates for Senate, Democrat Abdul El-Sayed and the GOP’s Mike Rogers.
A recent poll found nearly two-thirds of Michigan residents opposed the building of data centers in the state.
“Data centers are polling about as well as herpes right now,” said Eric Paul Dennis, research associate at Citizens Research Council of Michigan. “We’ve got an election coming up, and there’s a lot of tough talk. It’ll be interesting to see what happens after the election.”
Two years ago, lawmakers in Lansing narrowly agreed to exempt large data centers from sales and use taxes in an effort to lure the industry to Michigan.
But with backlash growing, lawmakers now are considering a flurry of new bipartisan proposals, tax-break rollbacks, and potential moratoriums.
Rep. Joey Andrews, D-St. Joseph, authored the bill to provide tax breaks to data centers two years ago and remains a proponent of the projects.
He said he’s not surprised that local officials have soured on the centers, likening sentiment to a backlash against about battery plants and wind energy projects.
“No one wants a room full of activists showing up and yelling at them,” Andrews told Bridge. “(But) this mood we’re in where we’re rejecting growth is not healthy for the state. We have to figure out how to get back to being pro-growth.”
The U-M’s Leiser said local officials “feel like they’re between a rock and a hard place.”
“On one hand, they’re facing vocal opposition or outright revolt from their residents who are demanding they stop any data centers from being built. On the other, they’re facing the daunting prospect of fighting expensive and protracted legal battles with deep-pocketed data center developers.”
Among the U-M survey’s findings:
• Metro Detroit officials are the most likely to have a positive view of data centers, with 27% saying they are worth the cost. Northern Michigan (10%) and the Upper Peninsula (13%) are the least likely to have positive views of the projects.
• Local leaders believe residents are even more opposed to data centers. Statewide, just 2% thought that the majority of the people they represent favored data centers, while 13% said that they themselves held a favorable view.
• A majority of local leaders believe that development of data centers in their communities would have a negative impact on water supply (60%), utility costs (57%), public health (55%) and overall quality of life (53%).
By Ron French
Bridge Michigan
Less than 1 in 5 Michigan local government officials believe large-scale data centers are worth their costs, and a majority want tighter statewide regulations, according to a survey released Sept. 22.
Most skeptical are leaders in rural Michigan, where the centers are typically built, according to the survey by the University of Michigan’s Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy.
Among officials from rural communities, only 12% agree that data centers’ benefits outweigh their costs, compared with 40% of officials from urban areas.
Those sentiments reflect a backlash to the mega projects originally hailed as economic boons. At least 18 local governments around Michigan have voted or have proposed temporary halts to new data centers. Laws against exclusionary zoning, however, make it difficult to ban data centers altogether.
Rural Michigan communities “are more likely to be targets for large-scale data center development because they typically have more inexpensive available land,” said Stephanie Leiser, director of the U-M center that conducted the survey of 1,328 jurisdictions across the state.
“While they acknowledge the potential benefits of data centers in terms of economic competitiveness, they don’t believe it’s fair that they will bear a disproportionate share of the costs of hosting them in their communities.”
Data centers have become a major, bipartisan issue in Michigan and nationwide in the midterm elections. More than 16% of respondents singled it out as a top issue in Bridge Listens, Bridge Michigan’s election-year survey.
The U- M survey indicated that nearly 6 in 10 local government leaders believe regulation of hyperscale data centers by Michigan’s state and local governments should be a very high priority.
Both candidates for governor, Republican John James and Democrat Jocelyn Benson, have called for a moratorium on the centers, as have the major party candidates for Senate, Democrat Abdul El-Sayed and the GOP’s Mike Rogers.
A recent poll found nearly two-thirds of Michigan residents opposed the building of data centers in the state.
“Data centers are polling about as well as herpes right now,” said Eric Paul Dennis, research associate at Citizens Research Council of Michigan. “We’ve got an election coming up, and there’s a lot of tough talk. It’ll be interesting to see what happens after the election.”
Two years ago, lawmakers in Lansing narrowly agreed to exempt large data centers from sales and use taxes in an effort to lure the industry to Michigan.
But with backlash growing, lawmakers now are considering a flurry of new bipartisan proposals, tax-break rollbacks, and potential moratoriums.
Rep. Joey Andrews, D-St. Joseph, authored the bill to provide tax breaks to data centers two years ago and remains a proponent of the projects.
He said he’s not surprised that local officials have soured on the centers, likening sentiment to a backlash against about battery plants and wind energy projects.
“No one wants a room full of activists showing up and yelling at them,” Andrews told Bridge. “(But) this mood we’re in where we’re rejecting growth is not healthy for the state. We have to figure out how to get back to being pro-growth.”
The U-M’s Leiser said local officials “feel like they’re between a rock and a hard place.”
“On one hand, they’re facing vocal opposition or outright revolt from their residents who are demanding they stop any data centers from being built. On the other, they’re facing the daunting prospect of fighting expensive and protracted legal battles with deep-pocketed data center developers.”
Among the U-M survey’s findings:
• Metro Detroit officials are the most likely to have a positive view of data centers, with 27% saying they are worth the cost. Northern Michigan (10%) and the Upper Peninsula (13%) are the least likely to have positive views of the projects.
• Local leaders believe residents are even more opposed to data centers. Statewide, just 2% thought that the majority of the people they represent favored data centers, while 13% said that they themselves held a favorable view.
• A majority of local leaders believe that development of data centers in their communities would have a negative impact on water supply (60%), utility costs (57%), public health (55%) and overall quality of life (53%).
Slagh Introduces Bill to Clarify E-Bike Laws
State Rep. Brad Slagh (R-Zeeland Twp.) has introduced bipartisan legislation to improve safety standards surrounding electric transportation devices by distinguishing traditional e-bikes from higher-powered electric mopeds and motorcycles.
Michigan law currently defines three classes of electric bicycles. Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes are limited to 20 mph, while Class 3 e-bikes may provide pedal assistance up to 28 mph. All three classes are limited to electric motors of no more than 750 watts.
Slagh’s legislation would clarify that electric mopeds are subject to the state’s existing definition and regulations for mopeds and that electric motorcycles are subject to those of motorcycles.
The distinction is important as electric devices have become increasingly more powerful and faster on Michigan roads, sidewalks and trails.
“We must keep pace with the growing use of the vastly different types of electric-powered devices throughout our Michigan neighborhoods,” Slagh said. “High-powered electric devices capable of high speeds should not be treated the same as a bicycle just because it has pedals or looks similar to an e-bike. We need clear rules so riders, parents, and law enforcement have a clear understanding of what these devices are and where they should be operated.”
Slagh said bringing electric mopeds and motorcycles under the state’s existing vehicle classifications would establish clearer requirements governing their operation, including restrictions that apply to motor devices and their use on sidewalks and nonmotorized trails. It also would help ensure that age and other existing requirements associated with mopeds and motorcycles apply to electric versions of those devices.
Slagh’s legislation would address a growing safety concern without restricting the proper use of e-bikes for transportation, recreation and mobility.
“E-bikes have become an important transportation option for many Michiganders,” Slagh said. “This plan won’t take those opportunities away, it simply ensures we have common-sense rules that match the capabilities of the devices. We can support advancing technology while also making sure Michigan’s laws keep people safe.”
The legislation is part of a broader bipartisan package to improve safety surrounding e-mobility devices. Rep. Veronica Paiz (D-Harper Woods) also has a bill in the plan that would address battery and electrical-system safety for e-bikes, which would require e-bikes and e-bike batteries sold and used by Michigan consumers to meet specified safety standards and establish penalties for selling noncompliant products. The measures address fire risks associated with unsafe batteries, aftermarket conversion kits and e-bikes that do not meet applicable safety standards.
“As e-bikes grow in popularity, we need to be especially sure they are safe to use. Like my constituents, I am concerned that e-bikes can be sold without meeting established safety standards,” Paiz said.
The bills are House Bills 6339 and 6340.
Michigan law currently defines three classes of electric bicycles. Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes are limited to 20 mph, while Class 3 e-bikes may provide pedal assistance up to 28 mph. All three classes are limited to electric motors of no more than 750 watts.
Slagh’s legislation would clarify that electric mopeds are subject to the state’s existing definition and regulations for mopeds and that electric motorcycles are subject to those of motorcycles.
The distinction is important as electric devices have become increasingly more powerful and faster on Michigan roads, sidewalks and trails.
“We must keep pace with the growing use of the vastly different types of electric-powered devices throughout our Michigan neighborhoods,” Slagh said. “High-powered electric devices capable of high speeds should not be treated the same as a bicycle just because it has pedals or looks similar to an e-bike. We need clear rules so riders, parents, and law enforcement have a clear understanding of what these devices are and where they should be operated.”
Slagh said bringing electric mopeds and motorcycles under the state’s existing vehicle classifications would establish clearer requirements governing their operation, including restrictions that apply to motor devices and their use on sidewalks and nonmotorized trails. It also would help ensure that age and other existing requirements associated with mopeds and motorcycles apply to electric versions of those devices.
Slagh’s legislation would address a growing safety concern without restricting the proper use of e-bikes for transportation, recreation and mobility.
“E-bikes have become an important transportation option for many Michiganders,” Slagh said. “This plan won’t take those opportunities away, it simply ensures we have common-sense rules that match the capabilities of the devices. We can support advancing technology while also making sure Michigan’s laws keep people safe.”
The legislation is part of a broader bipartisan package to improve safety surrounding e-mobility devices. Rep. Veronica Paiz (D-Harper Woods) also has a bill in the plan that would address battery and electrical-system safety for e-bikes, which would require e-bikes and e-bike batteries sold and used by Michigan consumers to meet specified safety standards and establish penalties for selling noncompliant products. The measures address fire risks associated with unsafe batteries, aftermarket conversion kits and e-bikes that do not meet applicable safety standards.
“As e-bikes grow in popularity, we need to be especially sure they are safe to use. Like my constituents, I am concerned that e-bikes can be sold without meeting established safety standards,” Paiz said.
The bills are House Bills 6339 and 6340.
Social Security Adds New Online Tool and Notices For Filing Disability Claims
By Hillary Hatch
Social Security Public Affairs Specialist
Social Security recently announced major enhancements to My Social Security - expanding self-service options and the notices available to individuals navigating the disability claims and appeals process. The new tools provide you with greater visibility, faster access to information, and more efficient case processing throughout the lifecycle of a disability claim.
If you have not created your personal My Social Security account yet, get started today at ssa.gov/my account.
—————
What’s New in My Social Security?
Submit Disability Adjudication Forms Online: You can now complete and submit disability adjudication forms directly through your personal my Social Security account, including:
• Form HA-4631, Recent Medical Treatment.
• Form HA-4632, Medication Information.
• Form HA-4633, Work Background.
Online submission helps ensure adjudicators receive information quickly and supports more efficient case processing.
Track Disability Claim Status Online: If you have a pending disability claim, appeal, or recently adjudicated claim—you can now view the status of your case online at the Hearings and Appeals levels. The Claim Status Tracker provides real-time updates, processing time estimates, and key milestones throughout each level of adjudication. Features include:
• Notification when the hearing office receives a Request for Hearing.
• Status updates as the hearing office reviews information and prepares the case for hearing.
• Status updates when a hearing decision is issued.
• Appeals Request for Review status updates, receipt of review requests, and completion of actions.
Access Proffer Letters Securely: You can securely access proffer letters in the my Social Security Message Center. A proffer letter is a notice sent when new evidence is added to a case after a hearing, allowing claimants to review and respond before a decision is made.
Access 26 Additional Social Security Notices in my Social Security Message Center: You can view electronic copies of your hearing-related notices by logging into your personal account. The following notices are among those now available for digital release to accountholders:
• Notice of Hearing.
• Request for Good Cause for Late Filing.
• Request to Withdraw a Hearing Request.
• Postponement of Hearing.
• Amended Notice of Hearing.
You may opt to receive email or text notifications when new documents are available. We will continue to mail paper notices to you and your appointed representatives. This enhancement supports faster case processing and timely communications.
We continue to increase the functionality of My Social Security to ensure that the more than 100 million Americans with accounts have a seamless experience when accessing their personal information. With an account, you have 24/7 access to your personalized retirement benefits and 1099 forms, can receive tailored notifications, request a replacement card, manage benefits or estimate future benefits, request replacement documents, check the status of pending applications, and conduct other services anytime, anywhere, without needing to visit an office or wait on the phone.
Please visit ssa.gov/myaccount to create a personal my Social Security account. For more information about our services, visit ssa.gov.
Social Security Public Affairs Specialist
Social Security recently announced major enhancements to My Social Security - expanding self-service options and the notices available to individuals navigating the disability claims and appeals process. The new tools provide you with greater visibility, faster access to information, and more efficient case processing throughout the lifecycle of a disability claim.
If you have not created your personal My Social Security account yet, get started today at ssa.gov/my account.
—————
What’s New in My Social Security?
Submit Disability Adjudication Forms Online: You can now complete and submit disability adjudication forms directly through your personal my Social Security account, including:
• Form HA-4631, Recent Medical Treatment.
• Form HA-4632, Medication Information.
• Form HA-4633, Work Background.
Online submission helps ensure adjudicators receive information quickly and supports more efficient case processing.
Track Disability Claim Status Online: If you have a pending disability claim, appeal, or recently adjudicated claim—you can now view the status of your case online at the Hearings and Appeals levels. The Claim Status Tracker provides real-time updates, processing time estimates, and key milestones throughout each level of adjudication. Features include:
• Notification when the hearing office receives a Request for Hearing.
• Status updates as the hearing office reviews information and prepares the case for hearing.
• Status updates when a hearing decision is issued.
• Appeals Request for Review status updates, receipt of review requests, and completion of actions.
Access Proffer Letters Securely: You can securely access proffer letters in the my Social Security Message Center. A proffer letter is a notice sent when new evidence is added to a case after a hearing, allowing claimants to review and respond before a decision is made.
Access 26 Additional Social Security Notices in my Social Security Message Center: You can view electronic copies of your hearing-related notices by logging into your personal account. The following notices are among those now available for digital release to accountholders:
• Notice of Hearing.
• Request for Good Cause for Late Filing.
• Request to Withdraw a Hearing Request.
• Postponement of Hearing.
• Amended Notice of Hearing.
You may opt to receive email or text notifications when new documents are available. We will continue to mail paper notices to you and your appointed representatives. This enhancement supports faster case processing and timely communications.
We continue to increase the functionality of My Social Security to ensure that the more than 100 million Americans with accounts have a seamless experience when accessing their personal information. With an account, you have 24/7 access to your personalized retirement benefits and 1099 forms, can receive tailored notifications, request a replacement card, manage benefits or estimate future benefits, request replacement documents, check the status of pending applications, and conduct other services anytime, anywhere, without needing to visit an office or wait on the phone.
Please visit ssa.gov/myaccount to create a personal my Social Security account. For more information about our services, visit ssa.gov.
