(Seguin) – Although the county’s newest data center got the green light, it still brought with it plenty of public protest. More than 35 people filled the Guadalupe County Courthouse on Tuesday to protest the proposed CloudBurst data center project and the tax abatement package tied to it.
The development is planned in northern Guadalupe County near State Highway 123. The project is expected to include multiple AI-ready data center buildings.
Prior to the meeting, residents were given various options to have their voices heard whether in person, online or via phone. Their concerns covered various areas including water usage, electrical demand, noise, air, topsoil disruption and other long-term environmental impacts. For others, they questioned why the county was willing to offer tax incentives to a company they believe would build in Guadalupe County regardless.
Among those speaking was Jennifer Lindsey. Lindsey questioned why the item returned to court after commissioners two months ago declined to act on it.
“Why is this being brought to the commissioner’s court two months after being denied? Why does CloudBurst have millions of dollars to buy an additional 700 plus acres, but not enough money to meet the tax responsibilities associated with it? If any one of us were to go into a store, put something on the counter, we had enough money for the item, but not the taxes, and then walked around the store and buy five more items and place them on the counter, and say, can you just please give them to me without the taxes? The person will look at you like you’re crazy. No, get out of my store. You have to have enough money for the entirety of it. Why (do) they not have enough money for the entirety of it?” said Lindsey.
Lindsey also criticized the county for what she described as giving away too much authority over development decisions.
“Why would Guadalupe County relinquish all of its regulatory powers to this private company? A year ago, my sister and I personally met with a commissioner and the judge who were troubled by the fact that the state of Texas was continuing to limit the county’s abilities to regulate development within their jurisdiction. That’s two of you today on this court. And yet today, this proposal before this court seems to have the support of those two individuals — taking away your power — what little power you have. It’s strange,” said Lindsey.
Also speaking before a packed courthouse was Melissa Tovar. Tovar urged commissioners to consider whether their vote reflected the wishes of those who elected them.
“It’s up to y’all to determine if you’re going to listen to us, if you’re going to represent us like you say you will. Commissioner Germann, you’re facing a runoff here real soon. You know, are you going to represent us? Commissioner Wolverton, you just won your seat recently. Are you going to tell your constituents that you’re going to represent what you said that they wanted? For the others, Commissioners Ott, Engelke, Judge Kutscher, same for y’all. We elect y’all to represent us and this is what the people are saying they want. Voting in favor of this abatement today and the development agreement is going against all of your constituents and what they want. And by doing that, you’re telling us that our voice doesn’t matter and what we want doesn’t matter because you know better than us,” said Tovar.
Those chiming in online was Teresa Garcia. Garcia says she believes the proposal benefited technology companies more than local residents.
“The only people that I can see helped, as far as I’ve read in this proposal, is big tech. And last time I checked, Guadalupe County is populated by tech executives. So, who are you trying to help with this? Not us, not your children, not my children, not farmers like me, or citizens who badly need clean water and money to pay our bills. So, by voting for this, you’re voting for big tech, to take us all for the biggest ride of our lives, not for our families, and we will remember you for it,” said Garcia.
The public frustration did not stop with those speaking in person. Several interruptions also came from residents listening online or by phone, with participants repeatedly shouting their opposition during the meeting. County officials warned the callers several times before eventually disconnecting the line because of the outbursts.
Others in attendance questioned the transparency of the process, the integrity of the court and whether the county had done enough to protect itself before approving the deal. Some residents also expressed disappointment that CloudBurst officials had not been more visible or responsive to community engagement.