A proposed data center near Garden of the Gods has become a flashpoint in Colorado Springs, where residents are questioning how the Colorado data centers could affect their neighborhoods, power grid, and monthly utility bills.

The debate is now moving beyond city limits.

On Oct. 21, Colorado’s Public Utilities Commission began evidentiary hearings over how Xcel Energy should charge data centers and other massive electricity consumers, weighing safeguards intended to prevent households and small businesses from subsidizing their expansion.

The hearings arrive less than two weeks before the Nov. 3 election, when voters in Colorado’s 5th Congressional District will choose between Rep. Jeff Crank (R-Colorado) and Democratic challenger Jessica Killin.

Could Colorado data centers raise electricity bills?

At the center of the local controversy is Project Taurus, a proposed data center that would repurpose a former Intel semiconductor facility near the Chelsea Glen neighborhood.

Developer Raeden plans to draw about 50 megawatts of electricity continuously during its first year, roughly one-quarter of the monthly electricity consumed by all Colorado Springs households combined, according to Colorado Public Radio’s analysis of utility data.

It would be by far the largest customer of Colorado Springs Utilities, Colorado Politics reported.

Like other Colorado data centers, these facilities operate around the clock, consuming electricity to run servers and keep equipment cool.” When utilities must expand generation or transmission infrastructure to accommodate large new customers, those investments can affect residential rates.

Colorado Springs Utilities, which serves Project Taurus, has established a process intended to make large electricity customers cover the infrastructure costs attributable to their projects. Raeden says it intends to pay those costs, although a final agreement has not been completed.

Meanwhile, Xcel’s separate proposal before state regulators would require data centers and other customers needing 50 megawatts or more to pay for new infrastructure and make long-term financial commitments.

The central question in both cases is whether those protections are sufficient.

Where does Jeff Crank stand?

Crank has framed data center expansion as an economic and national security issue, arguing that the US must remain competitive as AI technology develops.

But he has also acknowledged concerns about its impact on household expenses.

“I welcome discussions and debate on the federal level about our nation’s infrastructure needs to power innovation and maintain a competitive edge over rivals such as Communist China, but that should not come at the expense of higher utility bills for Colorado families,” Crank told The Gazette in September.

He co-sponsored the bipartisan Ratepayer Protection Act, which passed the House 417-3 in September and would direct state regulators to consider standards requiring large data centers to cover infrastructure costs associated with their electricity demand. The bill has since stalled in the Senate.

However, the legislation focuses on facilities drawing more than 100 megawatts, above Project Taurus’ proposed initial 50-megawatt demand.

Crank has also emphasized that individual development decisions, including whether Project Taurus should proceed, belong with local officials.

Where does Jessica Killin stand?

Killin agrees that technology companies should cover the costs associated with their electricity demand, but has called for stronger regulation, environmental safeguards, and greater transparency.

“We need to put a check on AI for all of humanity. I generally oppose government overreach, but in this area, strong regulation and oversight are essential,” she told The Gazette.

Killin supports federal requirements compelling data centers to disclose their electricity and water consumption, alongside protections to prevent utility costs from being shifted onto residents.

She has also supported a local pause on Project Taurus while officials examine its potential effects, including neighborhood noise, water use, and infrastructure demands.

Her position reflects skepticism on allowing large developments to proceed before their costs and consequences are fully understood.

Like Crank, Killin has said individual projects should be evaluated locally. The difference lies in how extensively she believes federal policymakers should regulate the industry’s growth.

What happens next?

The Colorado Springs City Council voted 7-2 Sept. 17 to postpone its consideration of Project Taurus appeals until April 13, 2027, allowing more time to examine utility agreements and development standards.

State regulators, meanwhile, continue weighing protections for Xcel customers as additional Colorado data centers seek access to the state’s grid.”

For voters in the 5th District, the question reaches beyond any single project: As tech companies demand more electricity, what will prevent the cost of powering AI from appearing on a family’s utility bill?

On Nov. 3, they’ll choose which candidate’s approach to that question will represent them in Congress.