San Marcos council sets hearing, approves annexation service agreement amid water and transparency questions over proposed data center

The San Marcos City Council on Feb. 18 heard a staff presentation and public comment about a request to change the comprehensive-plan preferred‑scenario map from “conservation cluster” to “commercial employment low” for approximately 200 acres near Francis Harris Lane, a step required to allow light‑industrial zoning the applicant says would permit a data center.

John Mayberry, the property owner who said he is selling acreage to a data‑center buyer, told council the facility would use a closed‑loop water system and generate relatively low on‑site traffic, and that electricity would come from Pedernales Electric. “We are working with the data center buyer to answer the questions as they arise,” Mayberry said. He also said the project would not be affiliated with media‑reported companies that some speakers identified in news accounts.

Amanda Hernandez, the city’s director of planning and development services, briefed the council on process: the preferred‑scenario map amendment must precede any zoning request; the property is partially in the city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction; and a future zoning application would specify setbacks, pervious cover and other technical requirements. Her staff and the applicant indicated the proposed data center’s cooling approach is a closed‑loop system that continuously reuses the same water, which the applicant said limits wastewater discharged to the city system.

Residents and nearby landowners asked detailed questions at the meeting and during the planning‑and‑zoning hearing. Jennifer Lindsey asked about noise and lighting standards, building size, estimated daily water use and whether the data center would rely on public drinking water. Gina Fleming and other residents raised concerns about references on a company website claiming a flagship Cloudburst data center in San Marcos and said public reporting tied the site to Energy Transfer LP; Fleming said she had found reporting about prior criminal convictions involving Energy Transfer in other states and asked about groundwater and long‑term water contracts.

Council members asked staff whether the city had any other active data‑center applications (staff said none), whether other landowners might be working with data‑center companies (staff confirmed there had been interest expressed), and whether the city could prevent a data center from being built if zoning and entitlements were later approved (staff explained council could deny rezoning at the zoning hearing stage). Council also discussed conflict‑of‑interest rules and recusal procedures after one councilmember raised potential ties public commenters had flagged.

Council approved a provision‑of‑services agreement and set a public hearing date for the annexation (Resolution 2025‑27R). The vote on the services agreement was 5–2. The preferred‑scenario map change itself requires a public‑hearing process and a subsequent council decision after planning and zoning and neighborhood commission hearings.

Ending: Staff said it will gather additional information requested by council and public commentators and include that information in the public‑hearing packets. Any zoning application would return to council later for a separate vote.