Bloomington AI Ban Sponsor Eyes 350 Cities; Our Count: 464

The sponsor of Bloomington, Indiana’s ban on superintelligent AI wants it copied by about 350 US cities of its size or larger, according to his memo to the city council, which Reason reported on 10 November. By our count of Census Bureau estimates, 464 cities had 2024 populations at least as large as Bloomington’s 79,986, with about 111 million residents between them, by our arithmetic.

The ordinance the council passed on 4 November is also narrower than the version first introduced. An amendment removed the requirement that more than 95% of registered voters approve before the ban could be lifted, the meeting transcript shows, and another says the ban does not cover end-user access by residents.

Business Pill · Guardrails Explained

A short Business Engineer explainer on AI guardrails, the rules and controls placed around AI systems. It teaches the general idea only and does not discuss Bloomington’s ordinance.

What the Sponsor Wants Other Cities to Do

Councilmember Dave Rollo’s memo says the ordinance “could set a precedent and a template for other cities to follow”. It continues: “Over 100 million people live in U.S. cities of Bloomington’s size or greater”.

The memo then says: “If those (approximately 350) cities passed similar ordinances in the coming weeks or months, this would create a massive regulatory burden for companies creating ASI”. ASI stands for artificial superintelligence.

The memo names the group behind the push. “The SAFE AI Forever Institute and other non-profits are poised to encourage other municipalities to adopt their own prohibitions on ASI”, it says. The institute’s release on the vote says the ordinance “is intended as a practical model that other municipalities may adapt while awaiting state and federal action”.

What Was Posted on X

The AI commentator account @kimmonismus posted this on 14 November with an image of Reason’s 10 November headline on Bloomington’s ban and the 350-city aim, adding the account’s own view: “This is how a nation destroys its own future.” That line is the poster’s opinion. The piece takes the 350 figure from Councilmember Rollo’s memo and checks it against Census Bureau data.

What Changed Before the Vote

As introduced, Section 14.25.040 let the council lift the ban only if two conditions were met: broad scientific consensus on safety, and “an affirmative vote of more than 95% of registered voters”. Our report on the vote described that introduced text.

At the 4 November meeting, Rollo moved an amendment that removed the voter condition. “A colleague described the difficulty of determining a 95% confidence of the residents of Bloomington as being impractical and so I remove that”, he said, according to the transcript published by the city’s community access TV service, which is machine-made.

The Bloomingtonian reported that the revised text instead says the council may lift the ban by ordinance after finding broad scientific consensus that superintelligence can be developed safely and controllably, based on a catastrophic-risk assessment. Reason also reported that the voter condition was removed before the vote.

A second amendment narrowed who is covered. “An amendment adopted before the final vote says it does not cover ordinary end-user access by Bloomington residents”, the Bloomingtonian reported. In the transcript, Rollo says the change “focuses on the developer and deployer, not the residents of Bloomington”.

How Many Cities Fit the Template

We counted US incorporated places in the Census Bureau’s Vintage 2024 population estimates. 464 of them, including Bloomington, had a 2024 estimate of 79,986 or more, with a combined population of about 111 million, by our arithmetic. That is 114 more than the memo’s approximately 350; the memo does not say how it reached its figure.

Of the 464, 107 are in California, 53 in Texas and 38 in Florida, by our count. Seven are in Indiana: Indianapolis, Fort Wayne, Evansville, Fishers, South Bend, Carmel and Bloomington.

Bloomington is so far 1 of the 464, or 0.2%, by our arithmetic. In the sources we checked by 10:45 UTC on 15 November, we found no other city council that has introduced a copy; that is a limit of our search, not a finding that none exists.

The State and Legal Questions

The ordinance says it yields to Indiana. Section 14.25.070 says the chapter “shall be deemed preempted and shall automatically expire ninety- one (91) days after the effective date of such state law”, if the General Assembly enacts a comprehensive framework for Provably Safe Superintelligence.

A general preemption bill from Indiana’s 2026 session, House Bill 1416, proposed barring municipalities from ordinances in a field occupied by specified titles of the Indiana Code, unless a statute expressly authorised them. Its page lists a first reading and referral to the Judiciary committee on 8 January 2026. It is not specific to AI.

Adam Thierer, a senior fellow at the R Street Institute, told Reason that layering hundreds of municipal policies would create “a compliance hell”. Reason wrote that the ordinance could face challenges under the Dormant Commerce Clause and the First Amendment, and that “No lawsuit has yet been filed”.

In Washington, our coverage of the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act follows the federal bill introduced in September. Our fact-check of the viral claims checked five posts about Bloomington against the introduced text.

The Structural Read

As we read the Census data, the weight sits in a few states: 107 of the 464 cities are in California, by our count, so the memo’s template would have to pass many councils outside Indiana to reach its stated aim.

As we read the amendments, the passed version is easier to copy than the introduced one: the transcript and the Bloomingtonian say the 95% voter condition was removed and end-user access was excluded, and Section 14.25.070 says the chapter yields to a comprehensive Indiana framework.

Three Implications

FOR AI DEVELOPERS The memo says the SAFE AI Forever Institute and other non-profits are poised to encourage other municipalities to adopt their own prohibitions on ASI.

FOR CITY COUNCILS The institute’s release describes the ordinance as a model other municipalities may adapt while awaiting state and federal action.

FOR THE LEGAL TEST Reason wrote that the ordinance could face a Dormant Commerce Clause challenge, and Adam Thierer of the R Street Institute told Reason it could attract First Amendment lawsuits; Reason reported that no lawsuit had been filed.

FOR RESIDENTS The Bloomingtonian reported that an amendment says the ban does not cover ordinary end-user access by Bloomington residents.

FOR RELATED COVERAGE Our report on the 4 November vote covers the ordinance’s definitions and enforcement section.

The Business Engineer Lens

This story maps onto the Business Engineer framework Inside Anthropic’s Permission Layer.

The essay says: “The governance layer sits at the intersection of capability, regulation, national security, access control, and geopolitical alignment.”

As we read it, the Bloomington template tries to put access control at city level, one council at a time. The essay was published in June 2026 and does not discuss Bloomington or local ordinances.

What Is Not Established

We did not find the final amended ordinance text in the sources we read; the changes are described by the meeting transcript, the Bloomingtonian and Reason. The transcript is machine-made and does not label speakers. Whether the mayor has approved the ordinance is not stated in the sources we checked.

The 464 count uses incorporated places and the 2024 estimates; the memo’s method for approximately 350 is not stated, so the two figures may use different definitions.

The Bottom Line

Bloomington’s ban sponsor wants about 350 cities to pass copies, his memo says; by our count of Census data, 464 cities are at least Bloomington’s size, with about 111 million residents. The ordinance passed on 4 November without the 95% voter test in the introduced text, after an amendment, the meeting transcript shows.