Dimmit County tables MOU with ISS Mining and Blue Mining Fiber after water, tax‑abatement concerns

ISS Mining and its regional partner Blue Mining Fiber returned to Dimmit County Commissioners Court seeking a nonbinding memorandum of understanding that would signal local interest and allow the companies to pursue grant funding and conduct site engineering for a proposed data‑center development.

Tom Flake, representing ISS Mining, told commissioners the project’s current best estimate for water use is about 300,000 gallons per day, and that the contracted site has more than 3,000,000 gallons per day of existing well capacity because it has been used previously to supply fracking and road‑construction water. Flake said the MOU is intended as a preliminary, nonbinding step so the firm can “get the answers” needed to finalize engineering and grant applications.

Commissioners and residents pressed the presenters on water‑resource impacts, the potential for local well depletion and how the companies would reuse or reclaim water. One commissioner said residents will ask what the court is doing to prevent water loss; another noted the court needs engineering‑level numbers before approving any incentives. The presenters acknowledged current estimates are provisional and committed to returning with engineered site‑specific figures once due diligence and design are complete.

County leadership also discussed language in the MOU that referenced a Chapter 312 tax abatement. The judge said prior abatements had created “concerns and issues” for the county and asked outside counsel to review legal implications. Company representatives said they were not seeking a permanent tax exemption but requested temporarily freezing the property valuation until the facility became operational so tax liabilities would align with revenue generation.

After extended discussion on water‑use projections, possible mitigation (on‑site reclaim systems) and the limits of nonbinding agreements, the court voted to table the MOU so the county attorney can further review legal language and the proposed tax‑abatement terms. The judge framed the MOU as an informational step that does not commit the county to permitting, abatements or other approvals; the companies will return with engineering data and refined proposals.

Next steps: the project’s proponents said they will continue site engineering and expect to return with detailed water‑use calculations. The court’s tabling action means no county tax incentive or formal endorsement was approved at this meeting.