The immediate county decision is not whether every disputed impact is already proven. It is whether Bastrop County should adopt weak rules or subsidize a 710 MW project before the full-buildout record and site suitability can be publicly tested.
Bastrop County Commissioners Court Room, 2nd Floor
804 Pecan Street, Bastrop, Texas
The regular meeting begins at 9:00 a.m. The official agenda sets the tax-abatement-guidelines hearing for 9:30 a.m. Give the County Clerk a completed participation form before the item is discussed. Mark the relevant agenda item and whether you are for or against it.
This review credits the safeguards the draft actually contains and identifies the provisions residents can ask the court to strengthen.
Residents can support stronger standards without conceding that Pacifico is suitable for this location.
Do not approve new data-center or co-located generation abatements until sector-specific standards and cumulative-impact rules are adopted.
Aggregate every phase, affiliate, host parcel, turbine, backup generator, data hall, substation, pipeline, water source, and reasonably foreseeable expansion.
Require water and power demand, ratepayer effects, air emissions, noise, traffic, drainage, fire-water, hazardous materials, evacuation, and drought consequences.
Use applicant-funded experts selected by the county, publish their work, and require written resolution of material deficiencies before a hearing.
Post the full application and technical record online, allow at least 30 days for review, and require a hearing before every final agreement.
Require residential and school proximity, emergency capacity, water, road, wildfire, and alternative-site findings—and deny abatements where the site is incompatible.
Replace “to the extent practical” with defined minimums and require public written findings for any variance.
Define “extraordinary economic benefit,” publish a benefits-per-job analysis, and prohibit a 100% abatement on vague or confidential assertions.
Elgin attorney Nick Lealos proposed this five-part agenda at the July 22 town hall. It is a community proposal—not adopted county law.
The Observatory credits Lealos as the proposal’s author. We located a durable professional identity record and a link to the full-town-hall recording, but not a standalone document published by Lealos containing the complete text.
Require tax-abatement applicants to disclose projected water and electricity demand and effects on cost and availability.
Publish applications and supporting documents online.
Establish a citizen advisory committee.
Pause new data-center abatements while standards are developed.
Ask state leaders for a special legislative session and greater county regulatory authority.
Petitions demonstrate organized public concern. They do not replace comments filed in a permit proceeding, a county participation form, an email to a decision-maker, or testimony at a public meeting.
A local petition directed to the Bastrop County judge and commissioners. It began before Pacifico’s proposal became public and addresses additional data-center development countywide, so it should not be described as Pacifico-specific.
2,276 verified signatures shown July 26, 2026Open the local petitionA statewide pledge sponsored by Ground Game Texas calling for transparency, accountability, protection of land, water and power, and opposition to unchecked data-center expansion.
Statewide campaign · not project-specificOpen the statewide petitionThe widely circulated tinyurl.com/nobastropai link is publicly indexed with the countywide Change.org campaign above. We use the direct destination instead of the shortened link. If a Pacifico-specific or offline petition exists, send us the organizer, wording, recipient and signing instructions so it can be verified and added.
These channels are useful for organizing and discovering leads. Social posts are not automatically treated as verified evidence by the Observatory.
Current Pacifico and data-center discussion is visible in Cedar Creek neighborhood feeds. Nextdoor may require an account and neighborhood verification; treat posts as leads until their claims are checked against records.
Open Cedar Creek on NextdoorResidents are sharing meeting details, articles, petition links and local observations in this Facebook group. Group visibility and individual posts may require a Facebook account.
Open the Facebook groupCalling and emailing create a written record, but they do not replace the official participation form or any permit-specific filing instructions.
A general email may raise awareness. Formal permit comments, hearing requests, and public-information requests must follow the agency’s instructions.
Put the request summary in the email body; the county says it will not open an attachment-only request.
Ask to be placed on notice lists for relevant Bastrop County or ZIP-code air permits.
Use the instructions in the actual permit notice. Preserve hearing rights by raising specific issues during the comment period.
Reference J0049. This contact is not a substitute for any later school-district public-hearing process.
Ask for county siting authority, cumulative-impact standards, and a pause on discretionary incentives while the Legislature acts.
Capitol: 512-463-0682District: 512-321-3720Official contactBastrop County is in SD 5. Ask for the same local-control, disclosure, and cumulative-impact safeguards.
Capitol: 512-463-0105Official contactIf J0049 receives favorable state recommendations, the district must hold a noticed public hearing and may approve or decline the agreement. Watch agendas now.
District: 512-772-7100Trustee contactsMeeting scheduleOfficial JETI processStatewide reporting documents projects that started with minor authorizations and later sought much larger fleets. That history is a reason to demand Pacifico’s full buildout—not proof Pacifico has already used the same approach.
No Pacifico or Cedar Creek name match was located on TCEQ’s pending case-by-case and standard-permit posting on July 26. That is not proof that no application or authorization exists.
TCEQ pending applicationsRequest a written determination addressing every project phase, turbine, generator, affiliate, co-located operation, and shared industrial purpose.
EPA source-aggregation guidanceWhen a permit notice opens a comment period, raise specific air, modeling, receptor, and aggregation issues within that period and follow the notice’s hearing-request instructions.
TCEQ participation guideStatuses describe the Observatory’s working plan. They are not claims that an agency has received or answered a request.
Full NSR application, supplements, correspondence, modeling, turbine data, stack parameters, and engineering drawings.
Development, grading, drainage, OSSF, driveway, access, and right-of-way records identified in the JETI permit table.
Well, production, permit, and water-feasibility records associated with the site.
Encroachment, driveway, access design, utility crossing, and state right-of-way records.
Fire-code review, water, hydrants, apparatus access, hazardous materials, staffing, mutual aid, and pre-incident planning.
Non-confidential correspondence, deficiency notices, consultant questions, revised exhibits, and records concerning Supplement 1 and the compelling-factor determination.
Zoning applications, minutes, recordings, moratorium ordinance, staff correspondence, and site-control records.
Use your own words, but cover these four points