Hood County’s data center fight hit a legal wall

Hood County’s – In Hood County, Texas, residents have packed meeting rooms to stop a rush of proposed data centers—projects they say could permanently reshape their rural landscape. But county officials say state law limits what they can do, and multiple lawsuits now loom as

When Brian Crawford steps out behind his home in Hood County. the view is supposed to be simple: a gentle hill. live oaks. and the Paluxy River Valley. About 600 yards away from the couple’s 118-acre property. though. that calm is threatened by a construction plan that calls for thousands of computing servers—warehouse-like buildings meant to process the digital world.

The plans center on “Comanche Circle. ” a developer’s project described publicly as spanning almost six times the size of the University of Texas at Austin’s main campus. Its eventual operator has not been publicly revealed. Even without knowing who will run the operation. the scale is already clear in the paperwork circulating locally: Hood County officials and residents say developers have proposed eight data centers covering more than 7. 600 acres—about 12 square miles.

For the Crawfords, it is not an abstract debate. Their property includes two enormous donkeys, Little Joe and Hoss; chickens; and an inherited herd of African antelope. What they’re hearing about in meeting after meeting is that their scenic horizon could become industrial.

County officials, however, say their ability to stop it is severely constrained. Hood County residents have pressed for moratoriums. filled commissioners court meetings and town halls with opposition. and helped spark a nonprofit movement to fight the projects. Two efforts by Hood County commissioners to pass a moratorium on data centers failed. County officials say a state lawmaker warned they were acting outside of their authority.

While residents say they want answers—especially on power. water. traffic. and public safety—commissioners say the legal clock keeps moving. “I was elected by the people to represent their opinion,” Hood County Commissioner Kevin Andrews said in an interview. “But I also have to follow the law … and not get the county sued.”.

The Comanche Circle project is tied to figures that local officials and residents say they can’t fully verify or plan around. The developer says the combined Comanche Circle data center and two other smaller projects it has proposed could use up to 3 gigawatts of electricity at full capacity—enough. the developer said. to power about 3 million homes. The project concept plan says some power could come from a new on-site gas plant. while some would likely come from the state’s power grid.

Water is another point of contention. Comanche Circle is described in local materials as requiring an initial one-time “flush and fill” starting next year of 95 million gallons of water for its seven-year buildout. then 150. 000 gallons per day—equivalent to the average use of 500 U.S. households—according to minutes from a local water district board meeting where the developer made its request.

But in an email to The Texas Tribune, the developer said the number submitted to the district board was incorrect and that his three data centers combined would use “less than 50,000 gallons per day of groundwater” at full build out.

Those shifting numbers have added to the sense among residents that they are being asked to approve something without enough information. At a meeting where residents pressed for details. one of their arguments was framed by the simplest possible question: how can a community make an “intelligent decision” when key facts are missing?.

The county’s predicament reflects a broader pattern in Texas. Data center developers. experts say. are increasingly turning to rural. unincorporated areas where zoning rules typically do not apply the way they do in cities. Texas counties. land-use and environmental planning professor Robert Paterson of UT-Austin said. have long been treated as lacking full powers in practice—“rural toddlers that can’t be trusted with full powers.”.

Hood County is not the only place feeling the pressure. The surge in projects across Texas has outpaced regulation. A Tribune analysis says Texas has 335 existing data centers, with more than 248 in the works. In addition. by May. ERCOT—Texas’s main grid operator—reported that large projects requesting to connect to the grid totaled 439 gigawatts of power capacity. five times larger than the state’s all-time peak demand. ERCOT reported that about 89% of those projects were data centers. though energy experts say it’s unlikely that all will be built.

Much of the momentum comes from what industry insiders call “hyperscalers. ” data centers built to support artificial intelligence computing facilities with thousands of servers. The report notes that Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Open AI are behind planned projects in West Texas and Central Texas. Dan Diorio. vice president of state policy with the Data Center Coalition. said: “Texas is a great state to do business. All of that really has come together to help make Texas, again, one of the national leaders in digital infrastructure.”.

Developers counter that data centers can bring billions of dollars in property value and new economic activity. One company told Hood County commissioners it could potentially increase the county’s tax base anywhere from $5 billion to $20 billion. Supporters also point to training opportunities, job creation and private investment.

But skepticism persists inside the county. Commissioners and residents say the benefits are uneven and that many jobs disappear after the construction phase ends. One Hood County data center proposal shows a peak construction workforce of 2. 000 dropping to a permanent workforce of 220. according to the project’s concept plan.

Hood County Commissioner Dave Eagle said there are “too many unanswered questions” and that commissioners were being asked to greenlight plans with incomplete information about their impact on the community. In its review. The Texas Tribune said it examined hundreds of pages of concept plans and lawsuits and reviewed hours of testimony from commissioners court meetings. The reporting says all but one of the seven data center proposals submitted to Hood County omitted estimates for power use; only four noted a potential power source. Just five of the concept plans included projections for water consumption. and six listed options for where they would get their water. The eighth project was annexed into the City of Granbury. which had not received any development plans. according to a spokesperson.

Commissioners who want to slow things down have found that tightening rules can trigger legal risk just as quickly as granting approvals does. In February, Eagle said he felt intense pressure from constituents: “The people who voted me in. They demand that me. as their elected official. do what I can to slow this down.” He proposed a six-month moratorium on new industrial development. including data center projects. and both he and Commissioner Nannette Samuelson believed the county needed time to understand what was coming.

That moratorium vote became a public flashpoint. The day of the vote, the commissioners meeting lasted eight hours, with standing-room-only crowds. Commissioner Andrews and County Judge Ron Massingill repeatedly warned that Texas counties have little authority to restrict development and that a moratorium could lead to lawsuits the county could not afford to fight.

A state lawmaker’s threat arrived in the middle of that moment. Before the vote, the county attorney revealed a letter from Sen. Paul Bettencourt of Houston—asked the same day—to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. The letter asked Paxton to “investigate” counties seeking to implement moratoriums and “explore any necessary legal actions.”.

Bettencourt. chair of the Senate Committee on Local Government. later defended the letter in an interview. arguing Texas cannot allow counties to block growth with what he described as a “crazy patchwork quilt” of regulations. “The point is simply that counties don’t have the constitutional authority to issue building moratoriums. ” he said in a social media post about Hood County.

Inside the commissioners court, Bettencourt’s message had an immediate effect. Eagle said before the vote that he was “disappointed.” Momentum “vanished instantly,” he said. The moratorium was killed 3-2, with Eagle and Samuelson voting for it.

In the months that followed, the county tried to find other levers short of a moratorium. Commissioners passed a resolution asking Gov. Greg Abbott to call a special legislative session to address concerns about the industry’s electricity and water demands. They also directed staff to ask Paxton to clarify whether Hood County has legal authority to temporarily halt development under its watershed protection law.

Abbott did not respond to questions about a special session. but spokesperson Andrew Mahaleris said. “Meeting the water and energy needs of Texans remains the Governor’s top priority. and these facilities are required to bring their own water and to disconnect if Texans don’t have what they need. Governor Abbott will continue to work with the Legislature to protect Texans and ensure their voices are heard.” Paxton did not respond to requests for comment.

Then came a series of procedural moves that residents celebrated and developers challenged.

In March, commissioners voted unanimously to amend their development regulations, adding stricter requirements for large industrial projects, including data centers. They expanded concept plan requirements to include detailed disclosures on water sourcing. energy use and infrastructure. and environmental and drainage impacts. They also shrank the footprint of a new development: buildings. parking lots and other structures could cover only 10% of a property. down from 50%.

Long, a member of the development commission who helped craft the rules, admitted the intent: strict enough “so none of them come, no more come in.”

Those changes hit at least one project immediately. “Fort Spunky. ” an 862-acre campus that had requested to pull 100 megawatts from the grid and required up to 20. 000 gallons of water per day. had previously had its concept plan approved by the commissioners. But the plan was brought back after the local water utility board denied the developer’s request for water. Commissioners said without a guaranteed water source the project needed reconsideration.

Kevin Pratt, an executive with the developer Pacifico Energy, told the meeting: “The fears … are all detached from reality,” and added that “the court, through political pressure, keeps moving those goal posts over and over.”

Commissioners revoked “Fort Spunky’s” previously approved concept plan in a 3-2 vote. Massingill warned, though, that “we’re all in for litigation.”

That warning became a reality. About three weeks later, a lawsuit was filed by the company. The company claimed the county lacked legal power to deny the project based on concerns about water. Husch Blackwell represented Pacifico. stating in the lawsuit that the commissioners’ decision was “unlawful and premature.” The company asked the court to block the county’s actions and sought monetary relief of no less than $250. 000.

Commissioners faced more legal threats as additional projects rolled in. Commissioners twice delayed voting on two other projects—“Project Red and Project Yellow”—covering 677 acres neighboring two existing power plants. The commissioners demanded more transparency about operations and required compliance with the county’s new development regulations before voting. The county was then hit with another lawsuit accusing it of illegally delaying the data centers.

Hood County’s fight reached another flashpoint after the Comanche Circle project received conditional approval. On April 6. Hughes—whose Comanche Circle data center had already received conditional approval—joined other legal threats with a letter arguing the county should never have been forced to submit a proposal for review. In that letter. Hughes wrote that Texas counties only possess powers explicitly granted by the Legislature and that Hood County did not even have powers to require a concept plan. “Political opposition to data centers does not create new county powers,” Hughes said in an email to The Texas Tribune. The lawsuits remain pending.

For residents like Laura Crawford, the legal limitations are part of why the fight feels so relentless. After a white sign appeared on a barbed-wire fence near the Crawfords’ home in October—notice from an energy company seeking a state air permit to build a power plant—the couple worried it was tied to rumors they had heard about a data center nearby. Their fears were confirmed when the Comanche Circle project was attempting to locate next to their property.

“We felt gut punched,” Laura Crawford said. “We felt gut punched. … How can this even be?”

A photo of the sign went up on Facebook. and within days ranchers. retirees and longtime residents built an information network. They knocked on doors and warned people about industrial buildings and massive electricity and water demands that nobody could quantify. They flooded Facebook groups with comments and banners reading “Don’t data center my Hood County” along their property fencelines.

The online effort became a nonprofit called Protect the Paluxy Valley. Laura Crawford, a retired accountant, said she works around the clock most days researching data center proposals and organizing local opposition, including urging residents to call commissioners.

At a January meeting to consider the Comanche Circle concept plan. residents feared grid strain and aquifer drain. and commissioners heard concerns about traffic. roads. public safety. the watershed and noise. At that same meeting. commissioners reviewed a recommendation by the development commission—a citizen advisory group—to pause data center projects while the county studied impacts and accompanying power plants. At the time, two other data center proposals had already been submitted.

Matt Long told the hearing: “I’d rather deal with a lawsuit, than destruction of our land.” Long, who lives with his wife and nine children in Pecan Plantation, added, “You were elected to make hard decisions.”

But commissioners tabled the temporary moratorium discussion and voted to grant Comanche Circle conditional approval, with Eagle as the lone dissenting vote.

Eagle later said the need for more information has been urgent from the start. At a town hall in February, he said: “[Data centers] snuck up on us. We don’t understand it and we need more information.”

The process began months earlier. in July 2025. when Hood County officials first learned about a secretive economic development pitch described on a commissioners’ agenda as “a proposed large capital investment” tied to the creation of 60 “high-wage permanent” jobs. County Judge Ron Massingill asked commissioners for a nonbinding vote signaling officials wanted the business and would waive its property taxes.

At the meeting, commissioners received little information about the company, according to the report. It was never referred to as a data center. An economic development official for the city of Granbury—later annexing the project into its city limits—told commissioners she was under a nondisclosure agreement and could not answer questions.

Massingill argued the county had limited oversight authority and that negotiating a local tax exemption might be the only leverage available. The county, he said, could ask for “beautification of the building site” and minimize impact to neighbors.

The court voted 3-1 in favor of the letter of support, with Commissioner Nannette Samuelson dissenting. Samuelson said, “we are setting ourselves up for big industry, losing that small town feel.”

Weeks later, Eagle was invited to meet privately with data center representatives from a different project. Eagle said marketing representatives and engineers “razzle and dazzle” him. pitching something transformative and asking again for a property tax waiver. Eagle said he became suspicious, describing “coded language” and missing details.

“They were trying to take advantage of country bumpkins,” Eagle said in an interview. He told the representatives he would not support the tax waiver, saying his worry was the unknown scale of the data centers.

Other commissioners faced similar private contacts. In October, Commissioner Jack Wilson placed the tax break on the agenda, but it was pulled before the court could vote. Wilson did not respond to interview requests.

Proposals kept coming, and developers used playful code names such as “Fort Spunky” and “Project Panther” to mask tech-company identities that would run the facilities.

By the time the debate reached the commissioners court again and again, residents had concluded that Hood County was trapped in a cycle: pushing for oversight invited lawsuits, while approving plans without fuller answers deepened their fear of irreversible change.

Last month. more than 160 people filled a ballroom in Hood County overlooking the Brazos River for another town hall hosted by Mark Lowery. a Republican running for county judge. Lowery is unopposed and describes himself as “a solid no” for data centers. unlike Massingill. who chose not to seek reelection. Residents said they are not giving up. and the meeting’s discussion turned to brainstorming ways to “right this ship. ” including exploring options to stop data centers.

For now, counties like Hood appear to be stuck waiting for state policy to catch up. Many believe changes won’t come until at least 2027, when lawmakers reconvene in Austin. The development commission has recommended reviving the Hood County data center moratorium proposal. but those efforts have not succeeded in being added to the commissioners’ agenda.

The contrast with Hill County, approved May 12, has also sharpened the stakes. Hill County commissioners approved a one-year pause on construction of new data centers in unincorporated areas. citing public safety and public health concerns. Hill County Commissioner Jim Holcomb said. “I think it’s imperative … that we tap the brakes and we get our arms around what we’re faced with.” The action already prompted a lawsuit against Hill County and its three commissioners by a data center developer seeking $100 million in damages.

Back in Hood County, the disappointment is now personal and political. Hood County clerk Christine Leftwich said the county’s failure to do the same has “been the biggest disappointment,” and added, “Hood County should have been the tip of the spear.”

The message from the ground here is blunt. Residents want a say. Commissioners want time and more information. Developers want permission and predictable rules. State law—at least as reflected in threats from the Texas attorney general’s office pathway and the warning from Sen. Paul Bettencourt—keeps narrowing the space for local leaders to maneuver.

So the fight continues. not as a debate that ends in a vote. but as a series of conditional approvals. tightened regulations. delayed actions. and pending lawsuits—each step taken under the shadow of the same question: how much power can a rural county actually use when a new kind of industry arrives fast enough to outrun the rules?.

Hood County Texas data centers Comanche Circle ERCOT water permits moratorium Paul Bettencourt Ken Paxton Greg Abbott Protect the Paluxy Valley zoning authority