Coachella Valley Data Centers: Bans, Moratoriums & What Each City Decided
Track Coachella Valley data-center bans, moratoriums, canceled proposals and the decisions still ahead.
Four Coachella Valley cities have acted on data centers in 2026, but they have not made the same decision. Coachella adopted a permanent citywide prohibition. Indio, Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs are using temporary moratoriums while they study whether to prohibit or regulate future projects.
This living tracker separates adopted law from temporary policy, reconstructs the canceled Coachella proposal and follows what each city does next. It will be updated when ordinances take effect, moratoriums are extended or replaced, and new applications or utility commitments enter the public record.
- Coachella adopted Ordinance 1231 on August 26, 2026. The citywide prohibition took effect September 25, with limited exceptions for smaller or incidental technology uses.
- Indio’s temporary moratorium was extended through October 16, 2027. Local reporting confirms a unanimous October 7 vote. Permanent rules remain a separate step.
- Desert Hot Springs extended its moratorium for nearly two years. The pause gives the city time to study land-use, utility and environmental standards.
- Palm Springs extended its temporary moratorium on September 30. The pause now runs through August 25, 2028 while the city develops zoning standards; it remains a moratorium, not a permanent prohibition.
- IID approved a large-load electricity tariff September 15. Schedule LL establishes an application and evaluation process for qualifying large electric loads; applying does not guarantee capacity or service.
- There is no valleywide ban. These are separate municipal actions, and ordinary on-site server rooms and essential communications systems are generally treated differently from a large stand-alone data center.
Where the four cities stand now
The four documented policy actions below are separate from the research gaps in the jurisdiction explorer. Indio updated October 8, 2026 following the reported October 7 vote; other jurisdictions retain their individual source-review dates. A moratorium pauses new approvals; it does not by itself create a permanent ban.
Coachella
Permanent prohibition effectiveOrdinance 1231 prohibits data-center uses citywide, subject to defined exceptions for smaller or incidental systems.
Adopted August 26 · Effective September 25Indio
MoratoriumA temporary pause remains in place while staff prepares a permanent prohibition requested by the City Council.
Extended October 7, 2026 · Through October 16, 2027Desert Hot Springs
Long-term studyThe city extended its interim ban for 22 months and 15 days to study possible regulations and impacts.
Extension adopted July 7Palm Springs
Extended moratoriumThe council extended the temporary pause by 22 months and 15 days while the city writes data-center zoning standards. The action does not create a permanent prohibition.
Extended September 30 · Outside date August 25, 2028Ban, moratorium and regulation are not the same
Much of the confusion comes from using the word “ban” for every city action. The legal distinction matters because it determines whether a decision has an expiration date and what must happen next.
An ordinance removes the use from the city's permitted land uses without a built-in expiration. A future council or voters can still amend local law.
An urgency ordinance temporarily stops new applications or approvals while the city studies longer-term policy. It expires unless extended or replaced.
A city can allow the use subject to locations, size thresholds, utility studies, noise limits, setbacks, permits or other operating standards.
Each city is also defining what counts as a data center. The local actions generally distinguish a stand-alone, server-intensive facility from the ordinary technology rooms used inside offices, schools, hospitals, hotels, public-safety facilities and utility systems.
The Coachella proposal that changed the regional conversation
The debate began with a proposed technology campus connected to Stronghold Power Systems and the City of Coachella's effort to establish a municipal electric utility.
Coachella created the Coachella Municipal Utility in 2019. In February 2026, the city approved a public-private agreement with Stronghold to develop electric infrastructure. City staff later explained that the utility agreement and the technology-campus land-use application were legally distinct, even though the proposed campus represented the large customer load intended to support the new utility.
The development application did not reach approval. The city's June 4 staff report said the initial submittal was deficient, lacked required environmental documentation and had not been resubmitted for review. The council then terminated the utility agreement and paused data-center approvals.
Why the site is described as both 240 and 450 acres
The acreage is not consistent across the surviving public record. Coachella's June 4 planning report described four parcels totaling approximately 240 acres. Local reporting and public descriptions of the broader concept referred to six data centers across as much as 450 acres.
Because the application was incomplete and never advanced through environmental review, there was no approved project description fixing a final campus size. This tracker preserves both figures with their sources instead of treating either one as a constructed or approved footprint.
What each city decided
Coachella: from canceled agreement to permanent prohibition
After extensive public testimony in late May, the City Council adopted an initial moratorium and terminated the Stronghold agreement on June 4. It extended the pause on July 8 while staff prepared permanent legislation.
The council introduced Ordinance 1231 on August 12 and completed adoption on August 26. The ordinance adds a new chapter to the zoning code prohibiting data-center uses throughout the city. Its text includes exceptions for certain small-scale systems serving storage, security, electric or telecommunications functions. The ordinance took effect 30 days after adoption, on September 25.
“Permanent” means the ordinance has no automatic expiration. It does not mean the rule can never change. The mayor has discussed the possibility of asking voters to make the policy harder for a future council to reverse, but a ballot measure had not been adopted as of this update.
Indio: a preventive pause with a permanent ban being drafted
Indio adopted a 45-day moratorium on June 3. Its Planning Commission later voted to recommend a complete prohibition, and the Sustainability Commission also supported a ban. On July 15, the City Council extended the moratorium for 90 days and directed staff to prepare a permanent-ban ordinance.
The October 7 extension carries the temporary pause through October 16, 2027, according to local meeting coverage. City staff previously reported that Indio had received no data-center application, making this a preventive land-use decision rather than a response to a specific project. The moratorium's definition covers facilities primarily used for high-intensity computing, including cloud, colocation, artificial-intelligence, blockchain and cryptocurrency operations, while exempting customary systems incidental to another permitted use.
Desert Hot Springs: nearly two years for study
Desert Hot Springs first adopted an interim moratorium on June 16. On July 7, the council unanimously extended it by 22 months and 15 days, producing the maximum two-year study period allowed through the city's urgency-ordinance process.
The moratorium blocks new data-center and high-intensity-computing applications while staff studies land-use definitions, utility demand, environmental effects and possible regulations. The city reported no pending application when it acted.
Palm Springs: extended moratorium through August 25, 2028
Palm Springs adopted a 45-day urgency moratorium on August 26, then extended it on September 30 by 22 months and 15 days. The city’s municipal and zoning codes did not specifically define or regulate data centers when the pause began.
The temporary rule pauses new data-center applications, permits and approvals while Palm Springs develops zoning standards. Staff identified questions involving permitted locations, land and infrastructure demand, electricity and water, environmental impacts and the definition of a data center. Equipment that is secondary to another permitted use—such as servers supporting a hospital, office or hotel—is excluded from the city’s stand-alone data-center definition. The extension is a study window, not a permanent prohibition, and staff said it can be rescinded when the new zoning rules are adopted.
Jurisdiction explorer · Indio updated October 8, 2026
Compare all nine incorporated valley cities and Riverside County’s unincorporated valley. Dates below describe decisions or pending hearings; a review date does not turn a proposal into law.
10 jurisdictions · 4 documented policy actions · 6 research gaps
| Jurisdiction | Policy status | Decision / deadline | Next checkpoint | Evidence / review |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Palm Springs | Moratorium through August 25, 2028 | September 30, 2026 extension of Ordinance 2134; zoning rules may replace the pause earlier.Adopted September 30, 2026 | Watch for adopted zoning definitions and standards, or an earlier rescission. | City-filed CEQAnet notice · October 1, 2026Source checked October 7, 2026 |
| Coachella | Permanent prohibition · Ordinance 1231 | Adopted August 26; effective September 25, 2026. Defined accessory technology uses are exempt.Adopted August 26, 2026 | Watch for future amendments; the prohibition has no automatic end date. | Adoption reporting · August 26, 2026Source checked October 7, 2026 |
| Indio | Extended through October 16, 2027 · Temporary moratorium | Council unanimously approved a one-year extension on October 7, 2026, according to local reporting.October 7 decision · October 16, 2027 deadline | Watch for permanent zoning rules and the posted signed ordinance. A permanent prohibition is not established here. | NBC Palm Springs · October 8 meeting reportReviewed October 8, 2026. Signed ordinance not independently retrieved in this review. |
| Desert Hot Springs | Extended temporary moratorium | July 7, 2026 vote added 22 months and 15 days to the June 16 pause, bringing the total period to two years.Extension adopted July 7, 2026 | Confirm exact expiration against the adopted ordinance; monitor the study and permanent rules. | Extension reporting · July 23, 2026Source checked October 7, 2026 |
| Cathedral City | Status not established in this tracker | No jurisdiction-specific adopted data-center policy has been verified here. This does not mean the use is permitted.No verified policy date | Review adopted ordinances and planning records for this jurisdiction. | Official-record review required |
| Rancho Mirage | Status not established in this tracker | No jurisdiction-specific adopted data-center policy has been verified here. This does not mean the use is permitted.No verified policy date | Review adopted ordinances and planning records for this jurisdiction. | Official-record review required |
| Palm Desert | Status not established in this tracker | No jurisdiction-specific adopted data-center policy has been verified here. This does not mean the use is permitted.No verified policy date | Review adopted ordinances and planning records for this jurisdiction. | Official-record review required |
| Indian Wells | Status not established in this tracker | No jurisdiction-specific adopted data-center policy has been verified here. This does not mean the use is permitted.No verified policy date | Review adopted ordinances and planning records for this jurisdiction. | Official-record review required |
| La Quinta | Status not established in this tracker | No jurisdiction-specific adopted data-center policy has been verified here. This does not mean the use is permitted.No verified policy date | Review adopted ordinances and planning records for this jurisdiction. | Official-record review required |
| Riverside County — unincorporated valley | Status not established in this tracker | No jurisdiction-specific adopted data-center policy has been verified here. This does not mean the use is permitted.No verified policy date | Review adopted ordinances and planning records for this jurisdiction. | Official-record review required |
No jurisdictions match both filters. Reset the filters to see all entries.
How this stays current: DOI reviews new ordinances, meeting outcomes and source documents, then records meaningful changes in the update log below. This is a reviewed publishing record, not a live permit feed. Unknown statuses remain research gaps until supported by evidence.
The questions cities are trying to answer
“Data center” describes a wide range of facilities. A small enterprise server building and a multi-building artificial-intelligence campus do not have the same load, cooling system or public impact. Reliable review therefore requires a defined project rather than a generic industry average.
How large is the requested load, who pays for new generation and transmission, and could speculative demand distort long-term infrastructure planning? On September 15, Imperial Irrigation District approved Schedule LL, a service-request process for qualifying large or expanded electric loads. IID says an application does not reserve capacity, guarantee service or obligate it to build facilities. The tariff addresses electric service within IID's territory; it does not change any city's land-use policy. Review IID's tariff and application process.
Which cooling technology is proposed, how does it perform during extreme heat, and what water source and annual demand would the actual design require?
What would continuous mechanical equipment, cooling systems and backup generators mean for adjacent neighborhoods and workers?
Does the project use scarce industrial land efficiently, and how do construction jobs, tax revenue and permanent employment compare with alternative uses?
Can local fire, utility and emergency systems support a high-load facility, including battery storage or fuel-backed emergency generation?
Could a well-defined project diversify the economy, fund infrastructure or expand the tax base without shifting excessive cost or risk to residents?
Coachella Valley data-center timeline
The new municipal entity creates the institutional backdrop for the later Stronghold infrastructure agreement.
The agreement addresses electric infrastructure; it does not approve the separate technology-campus land use.
City staff says required materials, including environmental documentation, were missing and no formal review had begun.
Residents raise questions about water, electricity, noise, air quality, land use and the municipal-utility agreement.
The city pauses applications while it considers permanent policy.
The incomplete campus application does not advance.
The city starts a study of high-intensity-computing uses.
Desert Hot Springs adopts its long study period; Coachella extends its pause while drafting a prohibition.
The council also directs staff to prepare a permanent-ban ordinance.
The first reading moves the permanent citywide prohibition forward.
Two cities take different legal paths on the same night.
The tariff sets out how qualifying large-load service requests are evaluated.
The citywide prohibition becomes effective 30 days after final adoption.
The City Council approves an additional 22 months and 15 days, creating an outside date of August 25, 2028 while zoning standards are developed.
Local reports confirm a unanimous vote extending the temporary moratorium through October 16, 2027 while permanent rules are developed.
The extended temporary pause runs through this date unless ended or replaced earlier.
The extended pause can run through this date, although the city says it may rescind the moratorium earlier when new zoning standards are adopted.
What to watch next
Track whether the council advances a voter measure after Ordinance 1231 took effect September 25.
The October 7 extension is reported approved through October 16, 2027. Watch for the signed ordinance and subsequent permanent zoning action.
Watch for proposed definitions, permitted locations, development standards and environmental requirements. The September 30 extension is temporary and can be replaced by adopted zoning rules.
Track proposed definitions, thresholds, utility requirements and environmental standards during the extended moratorium.
Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, La Quinta and Riverside County could choose different approaches.
Future applications should identify acreage, electric load, cooling design, water demand, backup power, employment and infrastructure responsibility.
Tracker update log
October 8, 2026 — Indio extension approved
Updated Indio from pending to extended through October 16, 2027 following reports of the unanimous October 7 vote. It remains a temporary moratorium. The earlier pending entry is retained as a dated record. Sources: KESQ / City News Service and NBC Palm Springs. The City of Indio: October 7 agenda item 13.3, staff report and Ordinance 1838-Ext2 was reviewed; the signed final copy was not independently retrieved.
October 7, 2026 — Interactive jurisdiction explorer and pending Indio hearing
Added city and policy filters, separate entries for all nine valley cities and unincorporated Riverside County, evidence dates and explicit research gaps. Rechecked Palm Springs’ extension against its city-filed CEQAnet notice. Added the scheduled October 7 Indio extension hearing as pending; the proposed October 16, 2027 deadline is not treated as adopted.
October 4, 2026 — Sourced jurisdiction comparison
Refined the city comparison with decision dates, direct evidence links and explicit research gaps. Reconfirmed Palm Springs’ September 30 extension and the reported Indio October 16 deadline. No later Indio enactment is assumed from the planned schedule. Other valley cities and county areas remain unclassified pending official-record verification.
October 1, 2026 — Palm Springs extension adopted
Updated Palm Springs after the September 30 City Council vote. The city’s temporary moratorium now has an outside date of August 25, 2028 while zoning standards are developed. The tracker continues to distinguish this temporary pause from Coachella’s permanent prohibition.
September 26, 2026 — Effective date, Palm Springs hearing and IID tariff
Updated Coachella's September 25 effective date; added Palm Springs' then-pending September 30 hearing; and recorded IID's September 15 approval of Schedule LL.
September 2, 2026 — Tracker launched
Established the four-city status board, reconstructed the Coachella proposal record and added the next scheduled dates for Coachella and Indio.
August 26, 2026 — Coachella and Palm Springs act
Coachella completed adoption of Ordinance 1231. Palm Springs adopted a separate 45-day urgency moratorium.
July 15, 2026 — Indio extends its pause
The Indio City Council extended the moratorium for 90 days and directed staff to prepare a permanent prohibition.
July 7–8, 2026 — Desert Hot Springs and Coachella extend
Desert Hot Springs created a nearly two-year study period. Coachella extended its temporary pause while preparing permanent legislation.
June 3–16, 2026 — The regional moratorium sequence begins
Indio acted June 3, Coachella acted June 4 and Desert Hot Springs acted June 16. Coachella also terminated its Stronghold utility-development agreement.
February 2026 — Coachella signs the Stronghold agreement
The city approved an agreement related to municipal-utility infrastructure. The separate technology-campus application never became a complete or approved development plan.
Frequently asked questions
Are data centers banned throughout the Coachella Valley?
No. Land-use policy is being made city by city. Coachella has adopted a permanent prohibition. Indio, Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs are under temporary moratoriums, and other valley jurisdictions may take different approaches.
What is the difference between a ban and a moratorium?
A permanent prohibition has no automatic expiration, although local law can later be amended. A moratorium is a temporary pause used while a city studies and adopts longer-term rules. It expires unless extended or replaced.
Was the Coachella technology campus approved or under construction?
No. City staff said the initial land-use application was incomplete and lacked required environmental documentation. Formal review had not begun when the city terminated the related utility agreement and stopped the proposal from advancing.
Was the proposed Coachella campus 240 acres or 450 acres?
The official June 4 planning report described four parcels totaling approximately 240 acres. Broader public and media descriptions referred to six data centers across as much as 450 acres. Because no complete project application reached review, there was no approved final footprint.
Do all data centers use enormous amounts of water?
No single number applies to every facility. Water demand depends on cooling design, computing density, local weather and operating conditions. That is why project-specific water, power and cooling information is more useful than a generic industry estimate.
Related Desert Oasis Insider research
Bottom line
The Coachella Valley does not have one data-center policy. It has four municipal processes moving at different speeds. Coachella has completed a permanent prohibition after canceling an incomplete campus proposal. Indio is developing permanent rules while its temporary pause now runs through October 16, 2027. Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs now have longer study windows, with Palm Springs' temporary moratorium extending as far as August 25, 2028 while it writes zoning standards. IID has also adopted a process to evaluate qualifying large electrical loads.
The next phase is less about the canceled proposal and more about definitions: what qualifies as a data center, which ordinary technology uses remain exempt, and whether any future project can document its utility, land, environmental and economic effects well enough for public evaluation.
Sources and methodology
This tracker prioritizes city staff reports, adopted ordinances and official notices. Local reporting is used for meeting outcomes, public statements and context not yet presented in a searchable city document. The comparison table was reviewed October 4, 2026 against the linked decision reports; other research retains its October 1, 2026 review. Older outcomes are dated, and unresolved later actions are identified explicitly.
Electric utility
Coachella
- City staff report: interim data-center moratorium and preliminary project review
- City staff report: Stronghold agreement review and termination options
- City staff report: final adoption of Ordinance 1231
- KVCR: final Coachella vote and Palm Springs action
- KVCR: July Coachella moratorium extension
Indio
- City of Indio: October 7 agenda item 13.3, staff report and Ordinance 1838-Ext2 — agenda version, not a signed adoption record.
- NBC Palm Springs: October 7 extension approved through October 16, 2027 — published October 8, 2026.
- KESQ / City News Service: unanimous one-year extension.
- City of Indio: June 3 initial 45-day moratorium
- Riverside Record: July 15 extension and permanent-ban direction
- City of Indio Planning Commission meeting records
- MyNewsLA / City News Service: October 5 preview of Indio’s October 7 extension hearing — proposed October 16, 2027 deadline, not an adopted outcome.
Desert Hot Springs and Palm Springs
- City of Palm Springs: CEQAnet notice for extension of Interim Urgency Ordinance 2134 — filed October 1, 2026; confirms the 22-month, 15-day extension.
- City of Palm Springs: September 30 public hearing notice, reproduced from published notice
- Palm Springs Post: September 30 extension adopted through August 25, 2028
- KESQ: September 30 City Council vote and zoning-study context
- City of Desert Hot Springs: moratorium-extension hearing notice
- Riverside Record: Desert Hot Springs extension result
- Palm Springs Post: August 26 Palm Springs moratorium
- Riverside Record: Coachella prohibition and Palm Springs moratorium
Update and correction policy
The status board and update log will change when a city publishes a new ordinance, extension, staff report, application or meeting result. If an official record conflicts with earlier reporting, the official record will control and the change will be documented.
