Released under Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 — free to use, adapt, and share with attribution.  ·  Learn more
Version 1.2  ·  September 2026  ·  What's New
A Replicable Policy Framework

When data centers come to town,
communities should benefit.

The Community Grid Compact (CGC) turns a share of data center investment into solar, battery storage, and grid resilience for the communities that host them.

Focus states: Virginia · Texas · Georgia · Arizona · North Carolina

DATA CENTER contributes ~1% of investment invests $ COMMUNITY ENERGY FUND community-controlled 100% LMI · 75% Mod · 50% Mkt co-invests COMMUNITY VPP solar · battery storage · efficiency grid revenue returns to participants as bill credits
Who is this for?

Find your path in

The CGC package has materials for every stakeholder. Start where you are.

🏘️
Community Members & Advocates

Your community is facing a data center proposal. Here's how to negotiate real, lasting energy benefits, not just a tax check.

See what communities get →
🏛️
Policymakers & Legislators

A codifiable, replicable standard that addresses the two concerns constituents raise most: electricity rates and grid strain.

See the legislative framework →
🏗️
Data Center Developers

66% of protested projects were blocked or delayed in 2025. A 1% fund contribution is a bounded, predictable path to approval.

See the business case →
Utilities & Grid Operators

The CGC VPP combines battery+solar, battery+heat pump DR, and smart thermostat demand response into a layered grid asset that defers costly distribution upgrades and returns revenue to communities.

See the grid benefits →
The Challenge & The Solution

Opposition Is Real. Direct Benefits Are the Answer.

Opposition has surged to 70–75% nationally, crossing all party lines. The data is clear: communities oppose a bad bargain, not development itself. Direct benefits are the answer.

75% of registered voters oppose a data center near their community (Embold Research, Aug 2026) — up from 44% in 2025
70% of Americans oppose data centers in their neighborhoods — more than oppose living near a nuclear plant (Gallup, 2026)
+12pts opposition rose 12 points in just 4 months — the largest single shift on any AI question (Annenberg/Penn, Aug 2026)
$156B in data center projects delayed or canceled due to community opposition in 2025 alone

The opposition is to a bad bargain — not to development itself

74%
of registered voters support requiring data centers to fund rooftop solar and weatherization for local homes
Support crosses party lines: 88% liberal Democrats · 77% moderate Democrats · 71% liberal/moderate Republicans · 63% conservative Republicans
Yale Program on Climate Change Communication / Rewiring America, June 2026
+44
net favorability shift when voters learn data centers will fund solar and battery storage for the community
The strongest positive response of any message tested. Water recycling, ratepayer pledges, and community benefits all move voters toward support by double digits.
Rainey Center / Embold Research, May 2026 — 1,010 registered voters, all 50 states

The three leading community concerns

Rising electricity ratesGrid expansion costs socialized across all ratepayers. Validated by Brattle Group / NRDC analysis of Atlanta, Memphis, Kansas City, and Columbus (June 2026).
Grid strainConcentrated industrial loads stress local distribution infrastructure not built for this scale.
Public healthHeat island effects, diesel backup generator emissions, risks to medically vulnerable populations.

The legislative response is accelerating

300+
state data center bills filed across 30+ states in 2026 — a shift from incentives to accountability
7+
states have introduced legislation requiring community benefit agreements as a condition of data center approvals
18+
states have introduced bills creating special rate classes ensuring data centers bear their own infrastructure costs

Enacted Law Validation

New Jersey Data Center Fair Share Act (Signed July 7, 2026)

New Jersey became the first state in the nation to enact a comprehensive data center accountability law — creating a new ratepayer class, requiring cost ring-fencing, and mandating demand flexibility. The law validates the CGC's core cost causation principle. But it creates no direct community energy benefits. No solar. No batteries. No VPP revenue flowing to households. The CGC fills that gap.

Pennsylvania HB 2650 (passed House June 2026, pending Senate) goes further — requiring a community benefit agreement as a condition of state tax incentives. Even ALEC, the conservative free-market policy organization, published a model policy requiring data centers to bear costs rather than shift them to households. Watch this space.

The Strategic Reframe
"Data centers should compensate communities for the problems they create."
Data centers should help build the distributed energy infrastructure the grid they depend on needs.

This isn't about punishment. It's a co-investment in the grid, aligning developer, community, utility, and policymaker interests. Independently validated by The Brattle Group and NRDC (June 2026).

The Model

Four integrated components

One agreement. One fund. Deployed as community energy assets. Aggregated into a VPP.

1
Trigger

Community Energy Agreement

A legally binding agreement, negotiated with meaningful community representation, that requires the developer to contribute approximately 1% of total project investment to the Community Energy Fund. The contribution rate is negotiable.

2
The Fund

Community Energy Fund

An independently governed co-investment fund, nested in a state green bank where available. The developer has no governance role after contributing. Community-controlled. No developer strings.

3
Deployment

Four Packages. Battery is the Anchor.

Package 1: Battery + Solar. Flagship — maximum bill savings and VPP capacity.
Package 2: Battery + Heat Pump. Heat pump also provides demand response via pre-conditioning.
Package 3: Efficiency Package. Plug-in solar + smart thermostat + weatherization. For renters and structurally limited homes.
Package 4: Grid Flexibility. Smart thermostat + DR enrollment. No rooftop work. Renter-eligible. $80/kW-yr — lowest-cost VPP measure.

4
The Grid Asset

Community Virtual Power Plant

All systems — batteries, heat pumps, and thermostats — enroll in a community VPP. Third-party aggregator access ensures it works even where local utilities don't offer a program. 70% of grid services revenue returns to participants. 15% recycles into the fund.

Co-Investment Model

Tiered coverage. Maximum reach.

The fund covers more for households that need it most. By co-investing with market-rate participants, the same fund dollar deploys significantly more capacity.

100%
fund coverage

Low-to-Moderate Income Households

At or below 80% Area Median Income. $0 upfront. Categorical eligibility: SNAP, WIC, Medicaid, or utility assistance enrollment qualifies automatically. No paperwork required.

$0 upfront
75%
fund coverage

Moderate-Income Households

80% to 120% AMI. 25% participant contribution, covered through fund-administered financing or VPP revenue sharing. No upfront cost required if using revenue-share option.

financing available
50%
fund coverage

Market-Rate Participants

Above 120% AMI. 50% participant contribution: out of pocket, solar loan, or VPP revenue-sharing arrangement where the contribution is recovered over time from grid services income.

VPP revenue-share option
Why this matters for the grid: The co-investment model roughly doubles the systems deployed vs. a 100% subsidy approach at no additional developer cost. Battery storage anchors the Solar and Heat Pump packages. The Smart Thermostat DR Package adds thousands of additional VPP-enrolled homes at minimal cost ($80/kW-yr; Brattle Group / NRDC 2026), significantly expanding the community VPP. A $10M fund at blended co-investment deploys 390–560 homes and 3.1–5.6 MW of VPP capacity, vs. 250–350 homes and 2.0–3.5 MW under a full subsidy model.

Defined by who bears the cost.

One of the most important design decisions in any community benefit framework is who counts as "the community." The CGC defines it the right way: the people who actually bear the costs.

🏘️
Tier 1 Priority
Households within 5 miles of the facility — closest to noise, visual, health, and local grid impacts. First access to all packages.
Tier 2
All customers on the distribution circuits most stressed by the data center load — the households whose grid reliability is directly affected.
🏠
Tier 3 — The Key Insight
All residential customers of the serving utility within the relevant rate class — because ratepayer cost increases are socialized across the entire service territory, not just the nearest zip codes.

Why this matters: A household 25 miles from a data center still pays higher electricity rates because of it. Defining "the community" as utility customers within the affected rate class matches the actual distribution of harm — and dramatically expands the number of people who can benefit from the CGC fund. A 5-mile radius might encompass 500 households. The utility service territory might encompass 500,000. The VPP gets larger, the benefit is proportionate to the impact, and the definition is legally cleaner and harder to challenge.

Fund Sizing

What 1% actually buys

Co-investment model. Equal thirds: 33% LMI (100% coverage) · 33% moderate (75%) · 33% market-rate (50%).

Data Center Investment 1% Fund Systems Deployed VPP Capacity Est. Annual Savings / HH
$500M $5M 195–280 homes 1.6–2.8 MW $900–$1,400/yr
$1B $10M 390–560 homes 3.1–5.6 MW $900–$1,400/yr
$2B $20M 780–1,120 homes 6.2–11.2 MW $900–$1,400/yr
$3B $30M 1,170–1,680 homes 9.4–16.8 MW $900–$1,400/yr
$5B $50M 1,950–2,800 homes 15.6–28 MW $900–$1,400/yr

VPP participation revenue adds an estimated $150–$300/yr per household on top of direct energy savings. Market-rate participants using the VPP revenue-share option may recover their 50% contribution over time with no upfront cost. Package 4 (Grid Flexibility/smart thermostat DR) costs only $75–$500 per participant — adding thermostat enrollees to the mix significantly expands VPP capacity and community reach at minimal fund cost. Independent validation: Brattle Group / NRDC (June 2026). All figures illustrative. Not financial advice.

Impact Calculator

How big could your community's fund be?

Adjust the sliders to estimate the community impact of a CGC agreement for a data center in your area.

$1B
1.0%
$10M
Community Energy Fund
total contribution
370–540
homes with solar,
storage, or efficiency
3.0–5.4 MW
community VPP
capacity
$220K/yr
aggregate annual
energy savings

Co-investment model: equal thirds (33% LMI / 33% moderate-income / 33% market-rate). Battery storage anchors Solar and Heat Pump packages. Smart Thermostat DR Package deployable to additional households not counted here. All figures illustrative. Actual results depend on local costs, electricity rates, and utility market conditions.

Focus States

Five states. Ready now.

Each focus state already has the policy infrastructure to make the CGC work.

Virginia
650+
data centers
Largest data center concentration on Earth. 2025 VPP legislation provides direct regulatory infrastructure for CEF-funded systems. Highest-urgency state for CGC adoption.
→ Amend data center tax credit statute
Texas
300%
ERCOT interconnect
request increase
Deregulated ERCOT market creates strong VPP revenue opportunities. Third-party aggregators essential in rural co-op territory. CEF operates through nonprofit or CDFI.
→ Local ordinance tied to rezoning or tax abatement
Georgia
50 MW
PSC solar+storage
pilot approved
Georgia Power's 2025 IRP pilot is a direct programmatic fit for CEF deployments. Capitol protests signal political urgency. Interconnection reform critical in co-op territory.
→ PSC proceeding or county ordinance
Arizona
Unanimous
Tucson council
rejection 2025
Water and energy both primary concerns. CGC pairs energy fund with water recycling commitments and waste heat capture. Urban heat island framing essential.
→ Maricopa/Pima County zoning ordinance
North Carolina NEW
Task Force
Gov's Energy Policy
Task Force active
Governor's Energy Policy Task Force is actively addressing affordability and large load growth, making NC the most immediate near-term legislative opportunity. Use "Community Energy Fund" not "Clean Energy Fund."
→ Statewide mandate (Task Force recommendation)
Stakeholder Value

Why it works for everyone

The CGC aligns interests that are usually in conflict.

🏘️ Communities & Residents
  • LMI households: 100% coverage, $0 upfront, automatic SNAP/WIC eligibility
  • Battery + Solar: $900–$1,400/yr savings; Battery + Heat Pump: $800–$1,200/yr
  • Grid Flexibility Package (Package 4): smart thermostat DR, no rooftop work, renter-eligible
  • $150–$300/yr additional VPP revenue as bill credits across all packages
  • Renters included in Packages 3 and 4; 12-month rent increase prohibition
  • Community-controlled fund, no developer governance role
🏛️ Policymakers & Officials
  • Developer bears 100% of grid interconnection costs
  • Codifiable, replicable standard reduces ad hoc negotiations
  • Advances DER and grid modernization goals simultaneously
  • Visible constituent benefit reduces political risk of approvals
  • Model zoning language and ordinance templates available
  • NC: direct fit for Governor's Energy Policy Task Force
🏗️ Data Center Developers
  • 1% contribution unlocks approval vs. 66% chance of delay
  • Carrying costs on a delayed $1B project far exceed $10M
  • Bounded, predictable cost, not open-ended litigation risk
  • Grid partnership framing: not punitive, not a tax
  • Co-investment grows VPP at no additional developer cost
  • Reputational differentiation in environment of intense scrutiny
⚡ Utilities & Grid Operators
  • Battery VPP + heat pump DR + thermostat DR: multiple dispatchable layers
  • Grid Flexibility Package thermostats: 1 kW per home, 8% participation, deployable in months
  • Co-investment grows VPP ~50% larger than subsidy model
  • Third-party aggregator pathway works for co-ops and munis
  • Developer-funded interconnection ring-fences costs from ratepayers
  • Independent validation: Brattle/NRDC (2026) confirms 160–700+ MW firm capacity per MSA
The Full Package

11 documents. One framework.

Everything needed to understand, negotiate, implement, and legislate the CGC.

📄
Doc 1
Policy Brief
Full model, co-investment structure, stakeholder value, and state-specific notes for all 5 states.
⚖️
Doc 2
Model CEA Term Sheet
Fully drafted Community Energy Agreement with co-investment tiers, LMI eligibility, renter protections, and public health commitments.
🔋
Doc 3
VPP Implementation Framework
Operational playbook for community VPP design, procurement, third-party aggregator access, and revenue waterfall.
🏠
Doc 4
Deployment Framework
End-to-end community group purchase model covering all four package types, co-investment tiers, renter strategy, and outreach standards.
Doc 5
FAQ & Objections Guide
Honest answers to the hardest questions from developers, utilities, legislators, and advocates.
🏛️
Doc 6
Legislative Framework
Model statute with co-investment structure, categorical LMI qualification, third-party aggregator requirements, and state-specific adaptation notes.
📊
Doc 7
Community Impact Metrics
Investment-to-community-value translation table with participant cost breakdown by package type and income tier.
Doc 8
Grid Benefits Analysis
Ten grid benefit categories including urban heat island mitigation. Mechanisms, valuations, and the additionality nexus argument.
🎯
Doc 9
Executive Briefing Deck
11-slide visual overview of the problem, reframe, CGC mechanism, co-investment model, and key numbers. Start here for first meetings.
📑
Key Research
Brattle Group / NRDC — Hyperscaler Support for Community Energy Programs (June 2026)
Independent economic validation of the CGC model. 160–700 MW firm capacity per metro area. $50–$1,175/yr household bill savings. Smart thermostat DR: $80/kW-yr annualized cost. Covers Atlanta, Memphis, Kansas City, and Columbus.
💬
Doc 10
Plain Language Summary
The CGC in four plain-English steps. No jargon. For community members, media, and local elected officials.
📋
Doc 11
Document Index
Reader's guide with recommended reading order and audience-specific pathways through the full package.
🔬
Supporting Research
Brattle Group / NRDC (June 2026)
Independent validation: "Hyperscaler Support for Community Energy Programs." Models 4 metro areas including Atlanta. Confirms 160–700+ MW firm capacity per MSA, $50–$1,175/yr household savings, and $80/kW-yr for demand response — the lowest-cost VPP measure.

What's New

The CGC is updated as pilots develop, feedback arrives, and policy landscapes evolve. Major changes are documented here.

July 2026
Version 1.0
New Research

Initial Public Release + Brattle/NRDC Validation

The Community Grid Compact (CGC) is publicly released under Creative Commons CC BY 4.0. The Brattle Group's independent analysis for NRDC (June 2026) validates the core model across four metro areas including Atlanta, confirming 160–700+ MW firm peak capacity per MSA and $80/kW-yr annualized cost for demand response. North Carolina added as a fifth focus state following interest from the NC Sustainable Energy Association and alignment with the Governor's Energy Policy Task Force.

July 2026
Version 1.0
New

Grid Flexibility Package (Package 4) Added

Smart thermostat demand response added as a fourth deployment package alongside Battery + Solar, Battery + Heat Pump, and the Efficiency Package. Package 4 requires no rooftop work, is renter-eligible, costs ~$75–$500 per participant, and delivers VPP capacity at $80/kW-yr — the lowest-cost measure in the portfolio. Heat pump HVAC in Package 2 also recognized as a demand response asset via pre-conditioning and load shift.

July 2026
Version 1.0
Updated

Co-Investment Model: Equal Thirds (33/33/33)

Participant mix updated from 50/25/25 (LMI/moderate/market-rate) to equal thirds (33/33/33), reflecting broader community demographics and increasing the equitable reach of the fund. All fund sizing tables and calculator updated accordingly.

July 2026
Version 1.0
Updated

Peer Review from Four Organizations

Framework substantially shaped by substantive feedback from Georgia Solar Energy Association, Solar United Neighbors, NC Sustainable Energy Association, and the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy. Key additions: weatherization as precursor for LMI homes, categorical SNAP/WIC eligibility, third-party aggregator access requirements, green bank nesting, public health commitments, renter protections, and domestic content preference.

July 2026
Version 1.1
New Validation

New Jersey Data Center Fair Share Act — Enacted Law Validates CGC Approach

New Jersey became the first state to enact comprehensive data center accountability legislation (S731/A796, signed July 7, 2026), establishing a new ratepayer class, cost ring-fencing, and demand flexibility requirements. The law independently validates the CGC's core cost causation principle. Critically, it creates no direct community energy benefits — the CGC fills that gap. Water use reporting and recycling commitments elevated to a universal CGC baseline provision across all focus states.

September 2026
Version 1.2
Updated Research

Opposition Surges — And Community Definition Strengthened

Opposition to local data centers has risen to 70–75% nationally, up 12 points in four months (Annenberg/Penn, Gallup, Embold Research, August 2026). New Yale/Rewiring America research frames the opposition as "a bad bargain, not a rejection of development" — directly validating the CGC approach. Community definition upgraded: eligible households now defined as all customers of the serving utility within the affected rate class, not just a 5-mile radius — matching how ratepayer harm actually flows and dramatically expanding the number of beneficiaries. 300+ data center accountability bills filed across 30+ states; 7+ states now considering mandatory CBA requirements. Legislative landscape section added.

Coming
Version 1.3
Planned

First Pilot Negotiations + State Appendices

State-specific appendices for all five focus states. Documentation of first pilot Community Energy Agreement negotiations. Georgia PSC engagement notes. NC Task Force presentation materials.

Help Make This Better

The CGC is a living framework. If you are using it, adapting it, or negotiating with it — your experience makes it stronger for everyone. We want to hear from you.

Open Framework — Free to Use, Adapt, and Share

The Community Grid Compact (CGC) is not proprietary. It was developed to be used — by communities negotiating with data center developers, by advocates building policy campaigns, by legislators drafting statutes, and by anyone else working to ensure that data center growth delivers real benefits to the people who host it.

This framework was conceived and developed by Don Moreland, Georgia Solar Energy Association, with AI drafting assistance. The ideas, strategic direction, policy judgments, and community input behind it are human. AI was used as a drafting and structuring tool — the same way policy work uses every tool available to it. The four organizations that reviewed and substantially shaped this framework (Georgia Solar Energy Association, Solar United Neighbors, North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association, and the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy) engaged seriously with the substance. The Brattle Group's independent analysis for NRDC (June 2026) provides third-party validation of the core model.

You are free to: Use this framework in whole or in part. Adapt it for your state, community, or campaign. Share it with colleagues, legislators, or developers. Translate it. Build on it. You do not need to ask permission.

One request: If you use or adapt this work, a simple credit helps keep the community of users connected and allows improvements to flow back to everyone. Suggested citation:

Community Grid Compact (CGC). Conceived and developed by Don Moreland. Released under Creative Commons CC BY 4.0, 2026. Available at cgc.org

To share improvements, adaptations, or pilot results — or to get in touch about the framework — contact don@solarcrowdsource.com

🅭 CC BY 4.0 — Creative Commons Attribution

The model is ready.
The moment is now.

Data center development is not slowing. Community opposition is accelerating. New Jersey just enacted the first data center accountability law in the nation — and it creates no direct community energy benefits. The CGC fills that gap.

Download the Full Package Get in Touch