Claremore holds first public hearing on Project Mustang data center; residents demand answers on power, transparency and impacts

Claremore city officials and the developer behind Project Mustang presented the first of two statutorily required public hearings on May 4, explaining that the proposed data‑center campus could be built in up to three phases with each phase potentially representing $1 billion or more in private investment and eligible for a 25‑year ad valorem tax exemption under Oklahoma's Local Development Act.

Jess Daven, the city's economic development lead presenting the project plan, said the proposal provides for a 100% exemption of ad valorem taxes and special assessments for each increment district for up to 25 fiscal years once each phase is complete. He said the review committee and the planning commission recommended the project plan and that taxing jurisdictions are negotiating a pilot payment structure that would allocate payments to local taxing entities. “The requested exemption here … is a 100% exemption of the ad valorem tax and ad valorem special assessments within each increment district for a period of 25 years,” Daven said during the presentation.

The project team described a negotiated pilot payment currently estimated at $4.75 per square foot, plus a separate $250,000 annual community‑betterment payment to the city. Officials said pilot payments would be allocated to taxing jurisdictions proportionately to their effective millage for the 2025 tax year and would escalate about 1% annually after each phase begins paying. The team also said earlier review by a statutory review committee and the planning commission found the project eligible under state law.

Public commenters delivered sharply divided testimony. Several residents and civic activists urged the council to pause the process and investigate alleged procedural problems and potential Open Meetings Act violations, saying they had obtained texts and emails they contend show private meetings and coordination. One commenter argued the city had “already met a consensus” outside of public meetings and urged a hold on the project until alleged irregularities are resolved. Those allegations were described during public comment as evidence‑backed; council members and city counsel responded that legal counsel has reviewed the process and found no statutory non‑compliance so far and that confidentiality agreements used during developer briefings are common and themselves public records.

Concerns about energy and costs were frequent. Speakers asked who would pay for additional power capacity, noting earlier city staff texts referring to grid constraints. Developers and city staff said the project has contracted for bulk power and the developer is funding required substations and infrastructure work orders; Field Infrastructure representative Lauren Harvey said there is no agreement to build on‑site natural gas generation and that emergency backup generation is standard but that the project is being designed primarily for grid‑supplied power. “There is no agreement in place for this project with natural gas at all,” Harvey said.

Labor and business speakers framed the project as a source of durable local jobs. Sarah Gray, representing a local workforce coalition and building‑trades unions, asked the council to require local‑hire and apprenticeship commitments and said unions have built and maintained major data centers in Oklahoma. Jim Simmons, president of AXH Aircoolers, said the project would bring construction and supplier opportunities and help local employers.

Council members pressed for specifics on phase‑one size and timing; developer representatives said they are targeting roughly 400,000 square feet for the initial building and potentially up to about 850,000 in phase one depending on site fit and power allocation. The project team said supply‑chain lead times have prompted some early developer funding for infrastructure under separate work orders at the developer’s risk.

The council closed the public hearing after the comment period and set a second statutorily required hearing for May 18 at 6:00 p.m., at which the council may consider an ordinance to adopt the project plan and related incentive agreements if statutory conditions are met. City legal counsel said any final approval would be conditioned on consent by affected taxing jurisdictions and compliance with statutory windows and procedures.

What happens next: the city will collect written questions from the public and the council; developers and staff will publish responses before the May 18 hearing. If the council later adopts the project plan and the taxing jurisdictions sign the incentive agreement, each phase would become effective when construction is complete and a certificate of occupancy is issued.