Project Jupiter fuels hours of public outrage and calls for town halls at county meeting

Dozens of residents filled the Dona Ana County commission chambers on June 9 to press elected officials to reconsider the county’s handling of Project Jupiter, a proposed large AI data‑center complex. Speakers across the political spectrum described frustration with the process, asked detailed questions about water use and emissions, and urged the commission to hold substantive town‑hall‑style hearings before proceeding further.

The public‑comment period opened with Mark Veith of District 1 and several longtime residents who said the project threatens local water and air quality, citing a range of figures and permitting language that they said leave a wide legal ceiling for pumping. “Project Jupiter announced they are planning to only use about 20,000 gallons a day,” said a speaker who reviewed company documents, “however, according to Project Jupiter’s legal documents, they are technically allowed to pump 2,000,000 gallons of water a day.” Residents said that disparity, together with perceived use of nondisclosure agreements and limited public briefings, has eroded trust.

Supporters also testified. Organized labor representatives and business groups told the commission the project would create construction and permanent jobs and have a multiplier effect across Santa Teresa and the region. Davin Lopez of the local economic development alliance said Project Jupiter had helped draw several companies to the area and cited new leases and growing demand for industrial space. “There is economic opportunity, and it's happening in a fast way,” he said.

Why it matters: The comments underscored a split in the community between residents worried about long‑term environmental and public‑health effects and workers and employers who see a path to better local wages and infrastructure money. Commissioners said they heard both sides and outlined a two‑track approach: allow the company‑organized open house and career fair scheduled for June 17 while simultaneously developing a county‑led program to gather pre‑submitted questions and convene subject‑matter experts for a separate town‑hall meeting.

County response and next steps: Commissioners asked staff to publish a prominent web portal where residents can submit questions in advance, to compile those questions, and to recruit neutral technical experts from state universities and agencies to respond. County management said it would produce a framework for the portal within roughly two weeks, and commissioners signaled support for both the job‑fair format and a later, deeper public forum. Several commissioners said the county would also post answers and hold follow‑up sessions to ensure transparency.

The meeting did not change any contractual or permitting obligations for Project Jupiter. The project’s permitting, environmental review and the county’s incentive approvals remain separate processes; county officials said they would continue to evaluate rate‑case and water‑use issues as permitting and public records proceed.