An election fight over development
Cognetti's television ad challenges data center developers over electricity bills, water quality and local hiring while highlighting Bresnahan's financial ties to the industry. She closes a laptop displaying a news story about those ties and says: "Don't raise our electric bills. Don't poison our water. And hire local union labor. You can't meet that? Goodbye. Then get out." She adds: "This is our home. We are not for sale."
Bresnahan's campaign responded Tuesday by pointing to donations Cognetti received from attorneys at a firm representing a data center developer. It also accused her administration of taking too long to prepare Scranton's regulations. Her campaign says the donors do not work on that project and has challenged Bresnahan over his investments and earlier support for data center development.
The argument is unfolding in a competitive district. Pennsylvania's 8th covers Lackawanna, Wayne and Pike counties and portions of Luzerne and Monroe counties. Donald Trump carried it by 8.5 percentage points in 2024. The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that election-rating experts still classify it as a true toss-up, the only one of Pennsylvania's four competitive House races with that rating.
Two October surveys put Cognetti ahead. Emerson College's Oct. 12-14 poll of 396 likely voters showed a 52% to 48% lead. A New York Times/Philadelphia Inquirer/Siena University survey conducted Oct. 16-22 among about 400 likely voters found her leading 51% to 46%, within that poll's margin of error.
Donations and investments draw scrutiny
The Bresnahan campaign identified $13,000 in donations to Cognetti over the past two years from attorneys at Myers, Brier & Kelly. The Scranton firm, which has Democratic Party ties, represents DBT Data in its planned Jessup data center. Attorney Robert T. Kelly Jr., WVIA's board chairman until earlier this year, contributed $4,500 of that total.
Cognetti's campaign says none of those donors represents DBT Data. Neil Thatcher, the firm's attorney listed for the developer, has made no contributions to her campaign, according to federal campaign records. WVIA reported that attempts to reach the firm's attorneys Friday were unsuccessful.
Bresnahan's campaign, meanwhile, received more than $8,700 directly from data center developers, federal records show. Scott Linde, who plans a project in Wayne County, gave $1,500. James Marzolino contributed $7,260; he is involved in companies proposing data centers and natural gas power plants to supply them in Dickson City and Archbald.
Bresnahan's financial disclosures list holdings of $1,001 to $15,000 each in Digital Realty Trust, Iron Mountain and Equinix. They also show $15,001 to $50,000 in SBA Communications, whose subsidiary develops data centers, along with hundreds of thousands of dollars in companies that supply or depend on the facilities. Bresnahan has repeatedly said his financial advisers choose his investments and that he does not participate in those decisions.
His spokesperson, Samantha Bullock, also challenged Cognetti's own exposure to the industry through a retirement fund. Cognetti disclosed $1,001 to $15,000 in the BlackRock Large Cap Focus Growth Fund, a 401(k) investment with holdings in NVIDIA, Microsoft, Google and Amazon. Bullock said NVIDIA was the fund's largest holding and that nearly 40% of the fund was invested in AI and data center companies. Bresnahan's disclosures show holdings totaling $765,004 to $1.55 million in those four companies, including $250,001 to $500,000 in NVIDIA.
The campaigns also disagree over Cognetti's pledge to reject corporate political action committee donations. Bullock said Cognetti accepts money from PACs that themselves take corporate PAC contributions. Cognetti spokesperson Emma Mustion responded that Bresnahan had accepted more than $350,000 from corporate PACs. Mustion said Cognetti does not accept corporate PAC donations and supports a federal ban on them.
Scranton debates the pace of zoning changes
Cognetti has opposed data center proposals outside Scranton. In January, she attended a hearing in Ransom Township because she feared runoff from a proposed facility could contribute to flooding in neighboring Scranton. She subsequently attended several hearings in Archbald and testified against a proposal at one of them.
Her administration proposed data center zoning amendments in March. The changes would define the facilities, specify where they could operate, and set landscaping, architectural, noise and vibration requirements. They would also require studies addressing utility capacity, traffic, sound, water demand and water supply sources.
Council members initially welcomed the proposal and promised a public hearing. Councilperson Tom Schuster said the process would leave room for public comment and allow Scranton to assess pending state legislation. But by July 28, the council's final meeting before its month-long summer break, Councilperson Sean McAndrew was asking for a progress report. Bresnahan's campaign notes that Cognetti's data center ad began airing that same day.
At Tuesday's council caucus with city officials and the consultant preparing the amendments, Sean McAndrew complained that the administration had provided no summer updates. Councilperson Mark McAndrew questioned why the legislation was now being rushed toward December consideration during the city's busy budget season.
Consultant Carolyn Yagle said the work had been delayed while the team waited to see whether state lawmakers would pass data center legislation and assessed Gov. Josh Shapiro's executive order on the industry. City Solicitor Jessica Eskra said Tuesday was the earliest presentation date offered to the administration. She said final passage requires more than a month and that council members would have time to deliberate.
The city aims to adopt the amendments by Dec. 16. Eskra warned that failure to pass them before year's end would require restarting the process next year. No developer has brought a data center proposal before Scranton.
Bullock questioned why Cognetti was addressing the ordinance a week before the election after months of council criticism. Cognetti pointed to the hours she had spent with residents in other communities opposing projects and said Scranton would continue working with neighboring municipalities on protections.
State rules shape the local debate
The executive order cited by Scranton's consultant introduced new conditions for state permitting. Shapiro signed Executive Order 2026-05 on Aug. 18, directing the Department of Environmental Protection to consider proposed data centers' permit applications only after developers secure local approval and make a legally binding commitment to his Responsible Infrastructure Development, or GRID, Requirements.
The order removed all AI data center projects from Pennsylvania's PA Permit Fast Track Program and prohibited nondisclosure agreements for data center projects. It also requires developers, rather than other ratepayers, to cover the full cost of new electricity generation, transmission and distribution infrastructure.
Projects whose peak electricity demand exceeds 25 megawatts must sign a project-specific Consent Order and Agreement with DEP before the state processes their permits. Those agreements must incorporate the GRID Requirements and penalties for failing to comply.
The order cites the PJM Independent Market Monitor's finding that data centers accounted for $29.4 billion in charges to ratepayers across PJM's four most recent base residual capacity auctions, or 46% of total auction costs.
When the order was issued, DEP knew of more than 100 proposed projects listed in publicly sourced databases. Developers of 58 projects had contacted the department about permitting at some level of formality. Of those, 15 had sought at least one DEP permit, while only five had obtained every permit necessary for their first phase.
Bresnahan's federal proposal remains pending
As proposals multiplied across Northeast Pennsylvania in early 2025, Bresnahan welcomed the investment. In an April 2025 statement to The Times Leader, he said data centers "can serve as catalysts for economic growth and technological innovation for our region." With opposition growing over the following year, he moved to propose federal restrictions.
Bresnahan introduced the Local Control Protection Act, H.R. 9262, on June 11, 2026. It was referred to the House Ways and Means and Judiciary committees. Republican Reps. Thomas Kean of New Jersey and Dan Meuser of Pennsylvania's neighboring 9th District joined as cosponsors on Sept. 4 and Sept. 24, respectively. Congress has not acted on the measure.
The bill would prevent developers from challenging local data center decisions in federal court when those decisions were supported by a recorded vote and documented findings. It would also block federal permits for a developer pursuing a challenge to a local decision in any court.
To qualify for federal tax credits, developers would need an enforceable agreement with the local government covering tax obligations; mitigation of road, water, stormwater and utility impacts; and environmental and noise monitoring. They would also need a local hiring plan and a preference for qualified local contractors and subcontractors.
At an Oct. 23 Greater Scranton Chamber of Commerce forum, Bresnahan argued that communities should decide what they will accept. "Rob Bresnahan is not going to tell anyone what they're going to live next to, what they're going to tolerate," he said.
Cognetti has also criticized his vote for the original House version of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which would have prohibited state and local regulation of artificial intelligence for 10 years. That provision was removed before Bresnahan voted for the Senate version as well. Cognetti says she would pursue federal safeguards, including an AI regulator.
Bullock said Bresnahan supported the original bill to advance a working families tax cut while knowing it would not be the final version. She pointed to his support for the final bill without the AI provision and his subsequent local-control legislation.
