Independent public-interest researchEvidence verified through August 10, 2026
Lost Pines WatchPublic records · Resident action
Resident action center

Ask for a pause, stronger rules, and a better site.

The countywide policy is now adopted. The immediate question is whether officials will publish the complete record and refuse to subsidize a 710 MW project before full-buildout impacts and site suitability can be publicly tested.

Show upAttend Commissioners Court August 109:00 a.m. · 804 Pecan Street, BastropSpeak upContact all five county officialsUse one fact and make one specific request.Add your nameSign the Pacifico anti-abatement petitionAsk the County to vote no on project tax breaks.MultiplyInvite three neighborsCopy a post, share a fact card, or print a flyer.
Confirmed agenda item

Bastrop County Commissioners Court · Monday, August 10

9:00 a.m. · Commissioners Courtroom, 2nd floor
804 Pecan Street, Bastrop, TX 78602

Official Agenda Item E.4 is a discussion-and-possible-action item sponsored by Commissioner Butch Carmack. The posted title would declare statutory limits on county development authority, outline environmental risks from unregulated large-scale industrial projects and petition the Texas Legislature for expanded county regulatory powers.

The item is relevant to the current data-center debate, but the draft does not name Pacifico or data centers. It is not a Pacifico tax-abatement vote, grading decision, moratorium, denial or project approval—and it does not create new county power by itself.

The practical ask: Support a strong request for real county authority, while making clear that waiting on the Legislature does not excuse the County from using the discretionary tools it already has. No large industrial project should receive a Chapter 312 abatement or Chapter 381 agreement without full-buildout disclosure, cumulative-impact review, public access to applications and enforceable protections.
Read the official August 10 agendaRead the draft resolutionDownload the participation formRead the public-comment rules
Ready-to-use opening

Say this in your own voice

“I support Item E.4 because Bastrop County needs meaningful power to protect residents from large industrial projects. But limited state authority does not require this Court to grant discretionary tax abatements. Please use the tools you already control: publish the complete Pacifico applications, require independent full-buildout and cumulative-impact review, and do not place a project-specific abatement on a future agenda until residents can evaluate the full record.”
How to participate: Arrive around 8:30–8:45 a.m. Complete the County's Public Participation Form, mark “specific agenda item,” enter E.4, indicate “For” if you support the resolution, and submit it to the County Clerk before the item begins. Posted rules allow up to three minutes per speaker. In-person participation is the verified route; no official remote-comment option appears in the posted materials. General Citizen Comments may address Pacifico, but the Court cannot deliberate on an unposted Pacifico abatement.
August public calendar

Eleven public meetings and policy events to watch

This complete calendar is automatically ordered by date and start time. Every item appears on an official schedule or event notice, but unless stated otherwise, Pacifico is not a confirmed agenda item. The featured August 10 county meeting is repeated here so no event is omitted.

Aug. 69:00 a.m.–4:30 p.m.
Official public summit · registration required

12th Annual Groundwater Summit

Caldwell Civic Center · 103 TX-21, Caldwell

Post Oak Savannah GCD says the program will directly cover data centers and industrial water use, future demand beyond the State Water Plan, aquifer planning, and legislative policy.

What to ask: Register promptly, ask how large industrial loads are incorporated into regional demand forecasts, and bring the answers back to Bastrop County's water-service debate.
Official summit and registration
Aug. 109:00 a.m.
Confirmed agenda item · Item E.4

Bastrop County Commissioners Court

Commissioners Courtroom, 2nd floor · 804 Pecan Street, Bastrop

The countywide resolution asks state leaders for stronger county authority over large industrial development. It is relevant to data centers but does not name or decide Pacifico.

What to ask: Support meaningful county authority while insisting the County use every discretionary incentive tool it already controls and require full-buildout disclosure before any project-specific agreement.
Official August 10 agenda
Aug. 107:00 p.m.
Agenda posted · no Pacifico item listed

Bastrop County ESD No. 1

Central Fire & Training Facility · 1965 FM 20, Red Rock

The agenda covers public comment, budget and tax-rate work, operations and a fire-station update. It does not list Pacifico. ESD 1 administers fire code, plan review, permits and inspections, and Pacifico's filing targets ESD 1 tax relief.

What to ask: During public comment, ask ESD 1 to publish any Pacifico correspondence and require a project-specific fire-water, access, staffing, apparatus and industrial-response review before considering any abatement.
Official August 10 agenda
Aug. 139:00–10:00 a.m.
Agenda posted · no Pacifico item listed

Bastrop County LEPC

Mike Fisher Building, Room 101 · 1501 Business Park Drive, Bastrop

The posted agenda includes citizen comments plus hazardous-materials, right-to-know and emergency-response committee reports, but no Pacifico-specific item.

What to ask: Ask when the 710 MW gas facility, gas supply, hazardous materials, fire-water, evacuation, and multi-agency response needs will receive public emergency-planning review.
Official August 13 agenda
Aug. 139:00 a.m.
Posted special session · budget only

Bastrop County Commissioners Court Special Session

Commissioners Courtroom, 2nd floor · 804 Pecan Street, Bastrop

The only action item is the proposed FY 2026–27 budget. Pacifico is not listed, although the agenda includes Citizen Comments. This meeting occurs at the same time as LEPC.

What to ask: If attending, ask during Citizen Comments for adequate county staffing, technical review and emergency-planning capacity for large industrial proposals; the Court cannot deliberate on an unposted Pacifico item.
Official special-session agenda
Aug. 135:30 p.m.
Agenda posted · no Pacifico/JETI item listed

Bastrop ISD Board of Trustees

Scheduled venue · Jerry Fay Wilhelm Center for the Performing Arts · 1401 Cedar Street, Bastrop

Bastrop ISD becomes the local JETI decision-maker if J0049 advances through state review. The posted August 13 agenda contains no Pacifico, J0049, reinvestment-zone, tax-limitation or data-center action.

What to ask: Sign up before the meeting. BISD permits comments on non-agenda topics at regular meetings and normally allows three minutes. Ask trustees to publish every J0049 filing, require a credible alternative-site showing, and commit to ample public review before considering any agreement.
Official August 13 agenda
Community-created guidance

Suggested one-page meeting guide

A community member prepared this printable overview of the JETI process, the Board's role, and possible questions for trustees. It is shared as suggested guidance, not as an official BISD or Lost Pines Watch publication.

Open the guidance PDFFact-check note (updated Aug. 9): the substantive JETI process, meeting details, and power-plant-only application scope align with primary sources. BISD has now posted the Aug. 13 agenda; it contains no Pacifico, J0049 or data-center action.
BoardBook meeting archivePublic-comment policy
Aug. 189:00 a.m.
Official board date · public attendance not confirmed

Bluebonnet Electric Board

Contact Bluebonnet to confirm attendance and meeting location

Bluebonnet’s public pages confirm the board date but do not clearly say whether residents or members may attend or comment. The agenda is expected Friday, August 14.

What to ask: Ask whether Pacifico, Black Chamber, or BCG Cedar Creek Campus has requested large-load service, interconnection facilities, a substation, or any member-funded infrastructure.
Watch the official board agenda
Aug. 199:00 a.m.
Official regular meeting · agenda pending

Bastrop County ESD No. 3

District administrative office · 627 State Highway 71 W., Bastrop

Pacifico’s filing targets ESD 3 tax relief, while the district is responsible for emergency medical service planning and capacity.

What to ask: Ask for publication of any abatement request and an independent assessment of EMS demand, access, response capacity, and developer-funded mitigation.
ESD 3 agendas
Aug. 193:30 p.m.
Official public hearing

Lost Pines GCD Desired Future Conditions Hearing

District office · 317 E. Hempstead Street, Giddings

Desired Future Conditions set the long-term groundwater-management targets used across Bastrop and Lee counties. The hearing is not Pacifico-specific, but the district says the region relies entirely on groundwater.

What to ask: Ask how emerging industrial and data-center demand is reflected in the assumptions and submit written comments on drought resilience, drawdown, recharge, and cumulative demand.
Official hearing notice
Aug. 206:00–9:00 p.m.
Community forum · organizer notice supplied

LIV Cedar Creek Community Information & Action Forum

Sacred Heart Catholic Church Parish Hall · 4045 FM 535, Rockne/Bastrop

The League of Independent Voters of Texas is hosting a Cedar Creek-focused information and action forum. This is a community-organizing event, not a government hearing or project decision.

What to ask: Attend to compare records, ask project and process questions, meet neighbors, and organize specific follow-up actions for permits, water, emergency planning, JETI and tax-abatement decisions.
Check LIV's event listings
Aug. 249:00 a.m.
Official schedule · agenda pending

Bastrop County Commissioners Court

Commissioners Courtroom, 2nd floor · 804 Pecan Street, Bastrop

The court must take separate future action on Pacifico’s project-specific reinvestment-zone and county tax-abatement requests. The August 24 agenda has not yet been posted.

What to ask: Attend citizen comments and tell the court that adopting countywide guidelines was not approval of Pacifico or a mandate to subsidize this location.
Official court schedule
Calendar verification

Dates above are ordered chronologically

Same-day events are ordered by start time. Meeting-specific agendas can still change the venue, time, public-comment process, or relevance to Pacifico, so follow each official link before attending.

Confirm before attendingAqua WSC · 512-303-3943Bluebonnet · 800-842-7708Bastrop ISD · 512-772-7100County officials and emails
Policy review

The policy adopted July 27 is a start—not an adequate guardrail

The signed 16-page county record confirms adoption for a two-year term. This review credits its safeguards and identifies provisions that still need strengthening. It is countywide policy—not approval of Pacifico.

Read the signed policy
Useful provisions

Keep and make enforceable

  • Environmental information covering water, stormwater, floodplains, wetlands, waste, noise, and air.
  • A 25% Bastrop County business-participation target for construction, supplies, and services.
  • A 25% county-resident target for new full-time jobs.
  • Annual compliance reporting, recapture provisions, a ten-year continued-operation requirement, and wind-down or cleanup security.
  • Authority to require an applicant-funded professional feasibility review.
Material gaps

Gaps that remain

  • Environmental disclosure is undefined and qualified by “to the extent practical and applicable”; no required methods, baselines, modeling, or independent certification.
  • No full-buildout or cumulative-impact rule covering affiliates, co-located generation, data centers, backup generators, pipelines, substations, or shared water demand.
  • No required online publication date, minimum public-review period, or mandatory hearing before the final abatement agreement.
  • A majority may grant variances, while the “extraordinary economic benefit” needed for a 100% abatement is not defined.
  • The 25-job threshold matches Pacifico’s projection despite a revised $2.237 billion investment and 710 MW facility; there is no benefits-per-job test.
  • No alternative-site analysis, residential or school buffer, drought test, emergency-capacity standard, or binding denial criterion for an incompatible site.
Requested amendments

Eight concrete asks for Commissioners Court

Residents can support stronger standards without conceding that Pacifico is suitable for this location.

01

Pause discretionary abatements

Do not approve new data-center or co-located generation abatements until sector-specific standards and cumulative-impact rules are adopted.

02

Require one full-buildout disclosure

Aggregate every phase, affiliate, host parcel, turbine, backup generator, data hall, substation, pipeline, water source, and reasonably foreseeable expansion.

03

Quantify community burdens

Require water and power demand, ratepayer effects, air emissions, noise, traffic, drainage, fire-water, hazardous materials, evacuation, and drought consequences.

04

Make independent review mandatory

Use applicant-funded experts selected by the county, publish their work, and require written resolution of material deficiencies before a hearing.

05

Guarantee public review

Post the full application and technical record online, allow at least 30 days for review, and require a hearing before every final agreement.

06

Add a site-suitability test

Require residential and school proximity, emergency capacity, water, road, wildfire, and alternative-site findings—and deny abatements where the site is incompatible.

07

Close exception language

Replace “to the extent practical” with defined minimums and require public written findings for any variance.

08

Define public value

Define “extraordinary economic benefit,” publish a benefits-per-job analysis, and prohibit a 100% abatement on vague or confidential assertions.

A focused public-comment outline

Use your own words, but cover these four points

  1. Who you are: your name and that you live, work, farm, attend school, or serve the community in Bastrop County.
  2. Your position: do not approve a Pacifico abatement at this location under the newly adopted policy.
  3. Your evidence: 710 MW and only 25 projected permanent jobs; 854 anonymous residential sites within one mile; or the missing fire, water, air, and cumulative-impact record.
  4. Your ask: pause project-specific abatements, add these safeguards, require an alternative-site analysis, and direct Pacifico to seek a more suitable industrial location.
Community proposal

The proposed Bastrop Bill of Rights

Elgin attorney Nick Lealos proposed this five-part agenda at the July 22 town hall. It is a community proposal—not adopted county law.

Credit: Nick Lealos

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.

  1. 1

    Require tax-abatement applicants to disclose projected water and electricity demand and effects on cost and availability.

  2. 2

    Publish applications and supporting documents online.

  3. 3

    Establish a citizen advisory committee.

  4. 4

    Pause new data-center abatements while standards are developed.

  5. 5

    Ask state leaders for a special legislative session and greater county regulatory authority.

Petitions and campaigns

Add your name, then take a record-making action

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.

Pacifico-specific

Protect Bastrop County: No Tax Abatements for the Pacifico Power Plant & Data Center

An independent petition asking the County Judge and commissioners to vote no on tax abatements for Pacifico's proposed 710 MW power plant and associated data-center campus in Cedar Creek.

Independent Change.org campaign · created August 8, 2026Sign the Pacifico petition
Bastrop County

Bastrop County Data Centers Bill of Rights

A local petition asking county officials to protect individual and community rights, prevent residents from absorbing data-center water and electricity costs, require transparency and citizen oversight, and use all available local authority.

Local Bill of Rights campaign · hosted by LIVRead and sign the petition
Bastrop County

No AI Data Center in Bastrop County!

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.

Independent countywide petition · created March 22, 2026Open the local petition
Texas

Put People Over Data Centers in Texas

A 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 petition
One campaign is Pacifico-specific; the others are broader.

The new August 8 petition specifically asks county leaders to vote no on Pacifico tax abatements. The Bill of Rights, older Change.org campaign and statewide pledge address broader data-center policy. Petitions show organized concern, but testimony, emails and formal permit comments create a separate public record.

Submit a petition or campaign
Community discussion

Where residents are comparing notes

These channels are useful for organizing and discovering leads. Social posts are not automatically treated as verified evidence by the Observatory.

Nextdoor · Cedar Creek

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 Nextdoor

Living in Bastrop County

Residents 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 group
Who to contact

Bastrop County Judge and Commissioners

Calling and emailing create a written record, but they do not replace the official participation form or any permit-specific filing instructions.

Permits and records

Use the right channel for the right decision

A general email may raise awareness. Formal permit comments, hearing requests, and public-information requests must follow the agency’s instructions.

State authority

Senator Charles Schwertner · Senate District 5

Bastrop County is in SD 5. Ask for the same local-control, disclosure, and cumulative-impact safeguards.

Capitol: 512-463-0105Official contact
Air-permit watch

Do not let a fragmented public record become a fragmented review

Statewide 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.

Watch the public list

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 applications

Ask the aggregation question

Request a written determination addressing every project phase, turbine, generator, affiliate, co-located operation, and shared industrial purpose.

EPA source-aggregation guidance

Preserve hearing rights

When 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 guide
Source note: The Texas Tribune / Floodlight article supplies the statewide investigation. EPA materials provide the federal permitting framework. The Observatory does not infer a Pacifico violation from another company’s conduct.Read the investigation
Records work

Current request queue

Statuses describe the Observatory’s working plan. They are not claims that an agency has received or answered a request.

REQ-001 · AirSubmitted by email · July 26, 2026

TCEQ

Full NSR application, supplements, correspondence, modeling, turbine data, stack parameters, and engineering drawings.

Next: Await and log the agency acknowledgment, tracking number, production schedule, and response milestones.
REQ-002 · Civil / siteHighest-priority draft

Bastrop County Development Services

Both complete mass-grading files, sealed civil and drainage plans, owner-agent forms, utility and ESD letters, review comments, access plans, receipts, and related OSSF or non-single-family applications.

Next: Key the request to every Pacifico and Black Chamber entity, BCG Cedar Creek Campus, B&W Ranch, RN102987831, both stormwater authorizations, the address, and all eight parcels.
REQ-003 · WaterHighest-priority draft

Aqua WSC / groundwater district

Original and revised feasibility studies, water application, demand and fire-flow calculations, preliminary site plan, engineering comments, fees, infrastructure requirements, and landowner authorization.

Next: Use the named June 3 large-volume-service agenda item and Pacifico Energy Development LLC as anchors.
REQ-004 · Traffic / right-of-wayDraft next

TxDOT

Encroachment, driveway, access design, utility crossing, and state right-of-way records.

Next: Identify district and project references.
REQ-005 · Fire / emergencyJurisdiction research

Fire jurisdiction / ESD

Fire-code review, water, hydrants, apparatus access, hazardous materials, staffing, mutual aid, and pre-incident planning.

Next: Resolve the primary responding jurisdiction before submission.
REQ-006 · JETI reviewDraft next

Texas Comptroller / Bastrop ISD

Non-confidential correspondence, deficiency notices, consultant questions, revised exhibits, and records concerning Supplement 1 and the compelling-factor determination.

Next: Prepare request keyed to J0049 and Pacifico Cedar Creek LLC.
REQ-007 · Alternative siteSource collection

Muhlenberg Township, Ohio

Zoning applications, minutes, recordings, moratorium ordinance, staff correspondence, and site-control records.

Next: Confirm exact effective and expiration dates and continuing site control.
REQ-008 · Construction stormwaterHighest-priority draft

TCEQ

Complete NOIs for TXR1551YV and TXR1565YW, Black Chamber’s July 15 Notice of Change and every changed field, correspondence, contacts, receiving waters, shared-operator arrangements, and any SWP3 maps or plans in agency possession.

Next: Include the apparent Brushy Creek / segment 1244 discrepancy in the Black Chamber record.
REQ-009 · Tax abatementsDraft next

Bastrop County / ESD 1 / ESD 3

Both project-specific abatement applications, draft agreements, fiscal analyses, applicant disclosures, consultant invoices, communications, proposed conditions, and cleanup or security-bond materials.

Next: Separate the power-side and data-center-side applications and quantify each proposed benefit.
REQ-010 · Large-load electric serviceSource and access research

Bluebonnet Electric Cooperative

Large-load service or interconnection requests, studies, deposits, facilities agreements, proposed substation or switchyard maps, and project correspondence.

Next: Determine the applicable public-record access route and preserve every known project identifier.