Starr County authorizes negotiations for 160‑MW Falcon Lake battery storage project

The Starr County Commissioners Court voted to authorize staff to begin negotiations with Falcon Lake Storage LLC on a proposed 160‑megawatt battery storage facility and to explore a potential tax abatement for the project.

County staff presented the proposal during the start of the meeting and asked the court to authorize the Industrial Foundation to begin exploration and negotiations with the company. "We're here to bring before you a... battery storage facility, for a 160 megawatts," said Rose Benavides, a staff member who introduced the project. Benavides said the project would occupy roughly 800 acres near Las Lomas/Loma Blanca Road and is being presented as a $50,000,000 development with construction expected to begin in early 2026. She also said the company was considering two alternate sites elsewhere in the county.

The court approved the motion to begin negotiations. The motion was made by Commissioner Garza and seconded by Commissioner Velasquez; the court voted to pass the motion. No formal abatement ordinance or final tax action was adopted at the meeting; commissioners authorized only the start of negotiations and exploration by county economic development partners and staff.

Why it matters: a 160‑megawatt battery storage facility of the size described would be among larger energy storage projects in the region and could affect county land use, tax revenue estimates and permitting coordination with state and local agencies. County officials said the project is in the western part of the county and described the site as "between 5 to 7 miles... north on Loma Blanca Road," according to Benavides. The developer briefly met with county staff before the court action and requested an expedited answer so they could proceed with a separate meeting the same day.

Supporting details: county staff said the company expects to begin construction in early 2026 and that negotiations would include terms typically discussed for economic development projects, including possible tax abatement. Commissioners did not adopt an abatement; they authorized staff negotiations only. Commissioners returned to related economic development business after an executive session and approved a follow‑up authorization to allow Benavides and county staff (including a named county contact) to continue abatement negotiations.

Next steps: county staff will enter exploratory negotiations and report back to the commissioners if and when a proposed abatement ordinance or definitive agreement is prepared for formal consideration.