BROWNSVILLE PAUSES DATA CENTERS IT DOESN'T HAVE, AS RESIDENTS POINT TO SPACEX'S 444 ACRES

BROWNSVILLE — The Brownsville City Commission voted Wednesday to put a 90-day freeze on data center applications. Commissioners did it without debate, as one line on a consent agenda, and the city's own legal counsel confirmed on the record that there was nothing to freeze.

"As of earlier today, when I checked with planning and zoning, they had not received any applications or permit requests," counsel told commissioners during the Nov. 4 special meeting.

The ordinance passed 6-0. It takes effect Thursday, Nov. 5.

For the residents who packed the chamber, the moratorium was not the point. The point was the land the city no longer controls.

THE LAND OUTSIDE THE LINES

On Aug. 29, after a six-hour special meeting, Brownsville commissioners unanimously voted to disannex roughly 444 acres near the city landfill and the Port of Brownsville. SpaceX had asked for the land to be removed from both the city limits and the city's extraterritorial jurisdiction. In exchange, the company offered up to $220 million for Brownsville water and wastewater projects under a deal called Project Quantum. Regional reporting said the offer was only available if the city acted that day. The city of Starbase later scheduled a hearing to consider annexing the same land.

Nothing said from the dais Wednesday indicated that the new moratorium reaches those 444 acres.

Public speakers said plainly what they believe is being built there.

"Now that same land is being used for a data center project," said John Culver, a District 3 resident. He told commissioners SpaceX had "pressured our city into an agreement" that left "Brownsville with less control over what happens on that property."

Jacqueline Morales, an attorney born and raised in Brownsville, said she supported the moratorium but would not let the commission off the hook.

"The moratorium will not make us forget," Morales said. She reminded commissioners that at an earlier meeting they had said they "could not speculate" about what SpaceX planned to build. "I told you to use common sense to make an educated guess. Now that the news has broken, are you truly surprised? Because we are not."

SpaceX and the city have not publicly confirmed that a data center is being built on the 444 acres. SpaceX representatives told the commission in August that the land would not be used for rocket launches or testing.

THE CLAIMS ON THE RECORD

Several speakers brought specific allegations to the podium. They are reported here as the speakers' claims.

A speaker who identified herself as a Brownsville resident named Rosas told the commission that state permit filings show what is planned.

"We have ample evidence from TCEQ permit requests that the recently annexed land belonging to SpaceX is being used to build a data center of at least 750 megawatts, powered by 35 natural gas fired turbines," he said. He called it potentially "one of the largest sources of emissions in the county, if not the largest." He added that the filings "contain no modeling" of how those emissions would spread toward Brownsville or Matamoros neighborhoods.

Dr. Christopher Bazaldua of the South Texas Environmental Justice Network and the Comecrudo Tribe of Texas said the site already has "portable gas turbines" generating power. "People are going to start getting sick really fast if they're downwind," he said.

Rebecca "Becca" Hinojosa, also with the South Texas Environmental Justice Network, described what she saw herself. She said she attended a Performance Contractors hiring fair where the listing read "data center address." She said she scanned the QR code and it "took me to that warehouse site."

"It is frankly terrifying that we don't know what they're building," Hinojosa said. She urged commissioners to "put pen to paper and demand answers from Starbase." She also told them, "Do not allow Starbase to be Elon Musk's secret city."

Two speakers, Leah Hollingshead and Uriel Gavito, said a new agenda item, which Hollingshead identified as Resolution 2026-141, shows SpaceX seeking more water from the Brownsville Public Utilities Board for its expansion.

"Just yesterday, you guys received an agenda item where it literally states that SpaceX is going to need more water for their expansion," Gavito said.

"IT'S A LIE"

The anger in the room went well beyond policy.

Hollingshead delivered her three minutes in rhyme. "The robber barons are building a cage that's exempt from our rules," she said. "A real new Gilded Age."

Hugo Eyzaguirre was blunter.

"They talked about this vote as if it's a gesture of goodwill, but it's false. It's a lie," he said. "There's already a data center being built in Cameron County, in Brownsville. It's in that land that they decided to give away."

Eyzaguirre called the commission "this court of rats" and said its members were "bought and sold." Nancy Guevara described local leaders as "corrupt" and "unqualified." Both statements are their opinions, delivered during public comment. The 956 Report does not adopt them.

Gavito said he believed commissioners were avoiding the words "data center" because they had signed nondisclosure agreements. "It's probably because you all signed NDAs," he said. He then challenged them: "If it's not because of that, I welcome you to just declare that it is a data center and it was part of the deal." The 956 Report has seen no evidence that commissioners signed NDAs related to the SpaceX deal.

Several speakers criticized empty seats on the dais. The meeting record shows Commissioner Linda Macias was noted present partway through public comment, and Mayor John Cowen Jr. was noted present about an hour into the meeting. Both final votes were 6-0.

Morales delivered the line that may outlast the meeting: "If SpaceX asks for another expedited special meeting, you will abide. If SpaceX asks for more water, you will abide."

WHY ONLY 90 DAYS

Speakers repeatedly asked for 180 days, the length a coalition of local groups demanded two months ago. The answer came only after public comment had closed.

City legal counsel said state law allows an initial 90-day moratorium and one 90-day extension, for a 180-day maximum, and does not allow a single 180-day vote. Counsel said the city would begin the extension process in late December or early January.

One commissioner said the clarification mattered "so that people don't think that we're not doing the 180 days on purpose, to, I guess, hide something."

Asked whether data centers could be banned outright after 180 days, counsel said yes, if the city's Environmental and Conservation Task Force recommends it. "They could accept that recommendation and ban data centers in the city and ETJ," counsel said, citing San Marcos as an example.

Counsel also hedged. Changes at the state level could affect "how we are able to govern ourselves with zoning power," counsel said, adding that cities' local powers "have been stripped in the last 10, 12, 15 years." The Texas Legislature convenes in January.

A key legal question remains open. Texas law sharply limits what cities can regulate in their extraterritorial jurisdiction, and landowners can now petition to leave it. Whether a ban covering the ETJ would hold up is a question for the courts. The 444 acres already sit outside both the city and its ETJ.

WHAT THE COMMISSIONER SAID ONLINE

After the vote, Commissioner Tino Villarreal announced the moratorium on social media. He wrote that before the pause, data centers on Heavy Industrial property "could move forward through regular permitting WITHOUT requiring City Commission approval." He also wrote that this "includes the Heavy Industrial portion of the controversial 444 acres recently deannexed behind Brownsville's landfill."

Neither statement about the 444 acres was made during the meeting. The post does not make clear whether it means the land could have qualified before it was deannexed, or that the moratorium applies to it now. Based on the deannexation as reported, the land is outside the city's jurisdiction. The 956 Report is seeking clarification from Villarreal.

Villarreal also wrote that he is prepared to support another 90-day extension. That matches the timeline counsel described.

THE TWELVE-MINUTE CLOSED DOOR

At 5:28 p.m., commissioners went into executive session on a single item: Project Fortress.

The posted legal grounds were Texas Government Code sections 551.071, 551.072 and 551.087. Those provisions cover consultation with attorneys, real property deliberations, and economic development negotiations with a business prospect. Taken together, the law the city cited describes a deal involving land and a company the city is negotiating with.

Commissioners returned at 5:40 p.m. No action was taken. The city has not publicly identified who or what Project Fortress is.

"Rather than masking them with secretive code names like Project Quantum or Project Fortress that keep them in the dark," Rosas said during public comment, residents want "clear, timely and transparent information."

ALSO APPROVED: A NEW DRAINAGE FEE

On a 6-0 vote, commissioners also adopted a citywide drainage utility fee on second and final reading, Ordinance 2026-1825. It will appear on utility bills starting May 2027.

Most homes will pay $6.25 a month. The smallest 10 percent of homes, those with less than 2,200 square feet of impervious cover, will pay $3. Nonresidential properties pay based on impervious area. Public and charter schools, tax-exempt religious institutions, and city and county property are exempt.

The fee is projected to raise about $6.2 million a year. About $1.2 million of that goes to capital projects. City staff put the backlog of identified drainage projects at around $310 million. The Four Corners detention project alone is estimated at $33 million for its first phase and $42 million for its second.

One commissioner said she had been asking residents at H-E-B, Walmart and the farmers market about the fee. "People are hurting right now," she said. "People can't even fill their tank up with gas."

The fee passed anyway. Commissioners pushed the start date from February to May to allow more public outreach.

WHAT COMES NEXT

The moratorium clock started Thursday. The extension vote is expected around the new year. The task force's recommendation will decide whether Brownsville moves toward a permanent ban.

None of that changes what is happening on the 444 acres.

"We're at the beginning," Gavito told commissioners.

Residents in the chamber made clear they intend to keep coming back.