Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hood County commissioners decline to withdraw conditional approval for Sailfish's Comanche Circle project, vote to table for revised attorney language
Summary
After hours of public comment and developer argument invoking a statutory 30‑day "shot clock," the commission considered withdrawing conditional approval of Sailfish's Comanche Circle but the motion failed 3–2. The court voted to table further action pending revised legal language from county counsel.
After extensive public comment and legal argument, the Hood County Commissioner's Court considered a motion to withdraw its conditional approval of the Comanche Circle concept plan submitted by Sailfish Investors but the motion failed. Residents urged the court to rescind approval and demand fuller engineering data, while the developer argued the plan was complete and had been approved by operation of law under Texas' "shot clock" rules.
Residents described environmental and quality‑of‑life risks if a hyperscale data‑center campus proceeds without stricter conditions. "Whenever somebody is done with the facility ... they're typically going to just walk away," said rancher Kenneth Meador, urging escrowed decommissioning funds for battery energy storage systems. Architect Kirk Teske told the court the plan "was cartoonish and lacked any useful information" and warned of runoff and nutrient pollution to the Paluxy River and downstream sites including Dinosaur Valley State Park.
Ryan Hughes, managing partner of Sailfish Investors, participated remotely. "Sailfish investors submitted a fully compliant application on December 3," Hughes said, invoking Texas Local Government Code procedures and HB 3167 and arguing the county's failure to issue a timely finding rendered the plan approved by operation of law. Hughes said Sailfish would seek and adhere to permits from the Opportunity Groundwater Conservation District and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) for emissions and wastewater.
Commissioner Dave Eagle moved to withdraw the conditional approval and seek to enjoin any further action by Sailfish until required information is provided. Commissioners debated legal exposure should the county deny or rescind approval, with multiple members warning of potential takings litigation and sovereign immunity risks.
The withdrawal motion failed on a vote announced in court as "3 to 2." Commissioners then voted 3 to 2 to table the matter until county counsel produces revised, defensible language for the conditional approval conditions. No formal rescission occurred at the meeting.
What's next: the court postponed further action to await attorney wording intended to strengthen conditions related to drainage, centralized water/wastewater, and other items the county asked Sailfish to provide before moving to the site‑development phase.
