Backlash Over Proposed Midwest Data Center, OpenAI Parent Claims $100 Billion Stake as AI Expands Into Daily Life

Residents of a Midwestern city known for natural beauty and outdoor recreation are raising alarms about a proposed $1.6 billion data center planned for local farmland, part of a wider wave of infrastructure projects and corporate moves that are reshaping the U.S. artificial intelligence landscape.

Neighbors and local officials have voiced concerns about the scale, environmental impact and opaque ownership of the project, which has been described in local reports as a mystery company's proposal. The plan has prompted public debate over land use, tax implications and whether the benefits touted by developers—such as job creation and increased tax revenue—justify the trade-offs for a rural community.

The local opposition in the Midwest echoes other community disputes nationwide. In Tarboro, North Carolina, residents urged municipal leaders to reject a separate proposal by Energy Storage Solutions LLC for a 50-acre, 300-megawatt energy storage site that backers say would bring about 500 jobs and millions in tax revenue. Opponents in Tarboro described the project as “notorious” and warned of long-term impacts on the town's character.

Against this backdrop of local controversy, OpenAI disclosed a major corporate restructuring move, with its nonprofit parent reportedly securing an equity stake worth more than $100 billion while retaining control of the company. The announcement, described by OpenAI as a measure to maintain the entity’s guiding influence, represents one of the most significant governance and financial developments in the AI sector in recent months and raises questions about how control, capital and public interest intersect as AI firms scale.

The political and industrial environment for AI development is also in flux. An executive from a major player in the global semiconductor and AI industries praised the Trump administration’s approach to advancing U.S. leadership in AI, calling it “really proactive.” The comment underscores growing alignment between some technology companies and federal policy priorities aimed at accelerating domestic chip manufacturing and AI research amid geopolitical competition.

At the same time, the spread of AI into everyday workflows is prompting scrutiny over privacy and surveillance. Meeting platforms such as Zoom and Google Meet increasingly offer AI-powered notetaking tools that can listen, record and summarize conversations. While users appreciate the convenience of automated summaries, privacy advocates and some meeting participants caution that such tools can capture remarks not intended for wider distribution, complicating consent and data-handling practices.

The scope of AI’s penetration extends beyond office software to transportation and household services. Autonomous trucking companies continue to pursue pilot programs and regulatory approvals to operate driverless trucks on highways. Startups say fully driverless commercial trucks could soon operate in states such as Texas, where companies have run tests; critics counter that commercial pressures may be hastening deployments before systems are thoroughly proven.

Meanwhile, American manufacturer Oshkosh Corp. unveiled HARR-E, an autonomous trash-collection robot that operates on a rideshare-like model. The company says the device will come to residents’ doors on demand to remove waste, a step that highlights how robotics and AI are being framed as labor-saving consumer services that could change municipal operations and labor needs.

Economic gains linked to AI and related technologies have also reshuffled the ranks of wealthy tech founders. Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison saw a recent surge in net worth after a jump in Oracle’s stock price, briefly placing him ahead of another tech billionaire. Changes in executive fortunes reflect how market movements in software, cloud services and enterprise AI continue to concentrate financial rewards among major investors and founders.

The rapid expansion of AI capabilities has also surfaced ideological tensions. Advocates of “effective altruism,” a movement focused on minimizing existential risks and prioritizing global-scale interventions, have clashed with political efforts that frame rapid AI development as a tool for national competitiveness. Some observers warn that these differing priorities—domestic industrial dominance versus cautious global stewardship—could produce friction in policy debates over regulation, research funding and safety protocols.

Local disputes over data centers and energy projects, corporate governance shifts at major AI firms, and the steady rollout of AI-driven consumer and logistics technologies together illustrate a central tension: communities, regulators and companies are racing to adapt to technological change while grappling with environmental, economic and ethical trade-offs. As projects move from proposal to construction and prototypes move into public use, oversight, transparency and community engagement are likely to become central battlegrounds in how the next phase of AI infrastructure is deployed across the United States.