San Angelo Data Center Citizen Coalition Press Releases
8/5/2026
PRESS RELEASE
CONTACT INFORMATION:
SAN ANGELO DATA CENTER CITIZEN COALITION
[email protected]
RELEASE DATE:
For Immediate Release
The San Angelo Data Center Citizens Coalition (SADCCC) provides the following statement in response to Tuesday morning's City Council Meeting and the comments made by Mayor Thompson and City Attorney Brandon Dyson.
In response to Mayor Thompson's remarks that SADCCC affiliates and volunteers were making claims and statements that are untrue and a case for slander and libel:
The City's Home Rule Charter does not require a reason for the recall of a sitting Council Member. The procedures within Section 48 of the Charter simply states:
"A petition, demanding that the question of removing such officer be submitted to the voters, shall be filed with the City Clerk. Such petition for the recall of any such elective officer shall be signed by at least thirty (30) percent of the number voting to fill the office of the incumbent sought to be recalled, in the last regular municipal election to fill that office. In the event the petition for recall is of a Council Member representing a single member district, the signers of the petition must all be from that single member district in order to qualify."
SADCCC volunteers, by gaining signatures, is in compliance with the City Charter.
In terms of making slanderous statements, Mayor Thompson provided no examples or evidence of such statements.
Our recall campaign has never been about the character of the council members we have petitioned. The Affidavit accompanying the petition for Council Member Thomas' removal outlined experiences shared by many of the SADCCC members, as well as a large number of San Angelo residents - that Mr. Thomas (along with other Council Members) failed to respond to constituent concerns regarding infrastructure, transparency, and zoning.
At the January 13 City Council meeting, after over an hour and a half of public comment, most expressing opposition and concerns from residents about noise, vibration, screening, setbacks and water issues, Mr. Thomas, along with the Mayor and 5 other council members, supported rezoning the Skybox property to Light Manufacturing (ML) without any safeguards.
January 13 was the first Council meeting following the Council’s initial vote to rezone the early December 2025 Council meeting, which was when the community learned about this Data Center project.
Mr. Thomas (along with other Council Members) failed to respond to the constituent concerns expressed, and voted in favor of re-zoning. This vote was damaging to the public trust of the people.
Finally, in response to Mr. Dyson's comment about a process being followed, Mr. Dyson should be familiar with Section 48 of the City Charter. It is the only recourse for citizens when all other options have been exhausted. Repeated failure to listen to residents and community concerns has left the only option to recall to allow Council Members who are more concerned about their constituents’ needs to be elected. SADCCC has followed the process in Section 48 of the Home Rule Charter and the City Secretary can verify this is the case as all documents were filed within the appropriate timeframes.
For a full timeline of COSA and SADCCC actions, please visit sanangelodccc.com
PRESS RELEASE
CONTACT INFORMATION:
SAN ANGELO DATA CENTER CITIZEN COALITION
[email protected]
RELEASE DATE:
For Immediate Release
The San Angelo Data Center Citizens Coalition (SADCCC) provides the following statement in response to Tuesday morning's City Council Meeting and the comments made by Mayor Thompson and City Attorney Brandon Dyson.
In response to Mayor Thompson's remarks that SADCCC affiliates and volunteers were making claims and statements that are untrue and a case for slander and libel:
The City's Home Rule Charter does not require a reason for the recall of a sitting Council Member. The procedures within Section 48 of the Charter simply states:
"A petition, demanding that the question of removing such officer be submitted to the voters, shall be filed with the City Clerk. Such petition for the recall of any such elective officer shall be signed by at least thirty (30) percent of the number voting to fill the office of the incumbent sought to be recalled, in the last regular municipal election to fill that office. In the event the petition for recall is of a Council Member representing a single member district, the signers of the petition must all be from that single member district in order to qualify."
SADCCC volunteers, by gaining signatures, is in compliance with the City Charter.
In terms of making slanderous statements, Mayor Thompson provided no examples or evidence of such statements.
Our recall campaign has never been about the character of the council members we have petitioned. The Affidavit accompanying the petition for Council Member Thomas' removal outlined experiences shared by many of the SADCCC members, as well as a large number of San Angelo residents - that Mr. Thomas (along with other Council Members) failed to respond to constituent concerns regarding infrastructure, transparency, and zoning.
At the January 13 City Council meeting, after over an hour and a half of public comment, most expressing opposition and concerns from residents about noise, vibration, screening, setbacks and water issues, Mr. Thomas, along with the Mayor and 5 other council members, supported rezoning the Skybox property to Light Manufacturing (ML) without any safeguards.
January 13 was the first Council meeting following the Council’s initial vote to rezone the early December 2025 Council meeting, which was when the community learned about this Data Center project.
Mr. Thomas (along with other Council Members) failed to respond to the constituent concerns expressed, and voted in favor of re-zoning. This vote was damaging to the public trust of the people.
Finally, in response to Mr. Dyson's comment about a process being followed, Mr. Dyson should be familiar with Section 48 of the City Charter. It is the only recourse for citizens when all other options have been exhausted. Repeated failure to listen to residents and community concerns has left the only option to recall to allow Council Members who are more concerned about their constituents’ needs to be elected. SADCCC has followed the process in Section 48 of the Home Rule Charter and the City Secretary can verify this is the case as all documents were filed within the appropriate timeframes.
For a full timeline of COSA and SADCCC actions, please visit sanangelodccc.com
4/30/26
PRESS RELEASE
CONTACT INFORMATION:
San Angelo Data Center Citizen Coalition
Richard Summers
[email protected]
RELEASE DATE:
For Immediate Release
AG ruling requires release of San Angelo data center records
Dateline: [SAN ANGELO, TEXAS, April 29, 2026 ]
A ruling issued April 28, 2026 by the Texas Attorney General's Office has clarified that the majority of records requested regarding the proposed San Angelo data center project must be released to the public.
The ruling permits the City to withhold only limited attorney-client communications. All remaining responsive information, including materials related to economic development discussions, must be disclosed. The request, submitted under the Texas Public Information Act, has been pending for nearly three months. However, the City has indicated it will now begin releasing the records identified as subject to disclosure.
“This ruling confirms that the public is entitled to see the substance of what has been discussed regarding this project,” said Richard Summers, a San Angelo resident. “We are now expecting full and prompt production of all non-exempt records.”
The forthcoming analysis of released records is expected to provide new insight into communications, planning, and decision-making related to the data center proposal, as well as any roles played by non-public organizations in shaping or advancing the project, including entities such as Skybox Data Centers and other local business and economic development organizations.
Additional updates will be provided as records are received and reviewed.
PRESS RELEASE
CONTACT INFORMATION:
San Angelo Data Center Citizen Coalition
Richard Summers
[email protected]
RELEASE DATE:
For Immediate Release
AG ruling requires release of San Angelo data center records
Dateline: [SAN ANGELO, TEXAS, April 29, 2026 ]
A ruling issued April 28, 2026 by the Texas Attorney General's Office has clarified that the majority of records requested regarding the proposed San Angelo data center project must be released to the public.
The ruling permits the City to withhold only limited attorney-client communications. All remaining responsive information, including materials related to economic development discussions, must be disclosed. The request, submitted under the Texas Public Information Act, has been pending for nearly three months. However, the City has indicated it will now begin releasing the records identified as subject to disclosure.
“This ruling confirms that the public is entitled to see the substance of what has been discussed regarding this project,” said Richard Summers, a San Angelo resident. “We are now expecting full and prompt production of all non-exempt records.”
The forthcoming analysis of released records is expected to provide new insight into communications, planning, and decision-making related to the data center proposal, as well as any roles played by non-public organizations in shaping or advancing the project, including entities such as Skybox Data Centers and other local business and economic development organizations.
Additional updates will be provided as records are received and reviewed.
4/22/26
PRESS RELEASE
CONTACT INFORMATION:
San Angelo Data Center Citizen Coalition
Richard Summers
[email protected]
RELEASE DATE:
For Immediate Release
Ethics Complaint Filed Regarding City Leadership and Data Center Process
Dateline: [SAN ANGELO, TEXAS April 22, 2026 ]
A formal ethics complaint has been filed concerning senior levels of City of San Angelo leadership, citing concerns related to transparency, communication practices, and public process in connection with the proposed Skybox data center project and related City actions.
This filing follows the initiation of a mayoral recall effort announced April 22, which cited similar concerns regarding transparency, communication practices, and public process in connection with recent City actions. While the recall petition is directed specifically at the Mayor’s role, the ethics complaint reflects broader concerns regarding how information has been managed and decisions have been advanced at multiple levels within City government.
The complaint, submitted to the appropriate authorities for review, outlines a series of documented concerns involving the handling of public information, limitations on meaningful citizen engagement, and procedural actions that may have affected the completeness and clarity of information available to decision-makers and the public.
“This filing reflects a growing concern that process integrity has not kept pace with the scale and speed of decisions being made,” the group stated. “At this level of impact, the public deserves full transparency, clear communication, and a process that is both open and accountable.”
The complaint is supported by a structured evidence portfolio documenting:
- Patterns of process sequencing and acceleration during key decision periods
- Centralized control over information dissemination
- Pre-decisional positioning by staff prior to formal deliberation
- Repeated instances of unanswered public clarification requests
- Delays in the production of non-exempt public records
Organizers emphasized that the filing is not directed at individual outcomes alone, but at ensuring that governance processes meet established standards expected in matters of significant community impact.
“San Angelo is entering a period of hyperscale development with high uncertainty, increasing friction, and growing public scrutiny,” the group stated. “That’s not speculation. That is already occurring.”
The group indicated that the complaint process is intended to provide an independent review of the documented concerns and to clarify whether current practices align with applicable standards of transparency, fairness, and open governance. This filing follows earlier public calls for a structured pause and the implementation of comprehensive governance frameworks for large-scale development projects within the City.
Additional information and supporting materials will be made available as the review process proceeds.
For more detailed documentation on why the group considers this a matter of public urgency, please go online and visit https://www.sanangelodccc.com/press-releases.html
PRESS RELEASE
CONTACT INFORMATION:
San Angelo Data Center Citizen Coalition
Richard Summers
[email protected]
RELEASE DATE:
For Immediate Release
Ethics Complaint Filed Regarding City Leadership and Data Center Process
Dateline: [SAN ANGELO, TEXAS April 22, 2026 ]
A formal ethics complaint has been filed concerning senior levels of City of San Angelo leadership, citing concerns related to transparency, communication practices, and public process in connection with the proposed Skybox data center project and related City actions.
This filing follows the initiation of a mayoral recall effort announced April 22, which cited similar concerns regarding transparency, communication practices, and public process in connection with recent City actions. While the recall petition is directed specifically at the Mayor’s role, the ethics complaint reflects broader concerns regarding how information has been managed and decisions have been advanced at multiple levels within City government.
The complaint, submitted to the appropriate authorities for review, outlines a series of documented concerns involving the handling of public information, limitations on meaningful citizen engagement, and procedural actions that may have affected the completeness and clarity of information available to decision-makers and the public.
“This filing reflects a growing concern that process integrity has not kept pace with the scale and speed of decisions being made,” the group stated. “At this level of impact, the public deserves full transparency, clear communication, and a process that is both open and accountable.”
The complaint is supported by a structured evidence portfolio documenting:
- Patterns of process sequencing and acceleration during key decision periods
- Centralized control over information dissemination
- Pre-decisional positioning by staff prior to formal deliberation
- Repeated instances of unanswered public clarification requests
- Delays in the production of non-exempt public records
Organizers emphasized that the filing is not directed at individual outcomes alone, but at ensuring that governance processes meet established standards expected in matters of significant community impact.
“San Angelo is entering a period of hyperscale development with high uncertainty, increasing friction, and growing public scrutiny,” the group stated. “That’s not speculation. That is already occurring.”
The group indicated that the complaint process is intended to provide an independent review of the documented concerns and to clarify whether current practices align with applicable standards of transparency, fairness, and open governance. This filing follows earlier public calls for a structured pause and the implementation of comprehensive governance frameworks for large-scale development projects within the City.
Additional information and supporting materials will be made available as the review process proceeds.
For more detailed documentation on why the group considers this a matter of public urgency, please go online and visit https://www.sanangelodccc.com/press-releases.html
4/22/26
PRESS RELEASE
CONTACT INFORMATION:
San Angelo Data Center Citizen Coalition
Richard Summers
[email protected]
RELEASE DATE:
For Immediate Release
SAN ANGELO RESIDENTS INITIAL RECALL EFFORT FOR MAYOR THOMPSON
Dateline: [San Angelo, Texas April 22, 2026]
A coalition of San Angelo residents today announced the initiation of a formal recall effort targeting Mayor Tom Thompson, citing concerns over transparency, public process, and access to information in connection with recent City actions, including those related to the proposed Skybox data center project.
The recall effort follows the filing of a Recall Affidavit with the City Clerk, formally requesting issuance of petition materials in accordance with the San Angelo City Charter. Organizers state that the action is not based on a single decision, but on what they describe as a pattern of conduct affecting public confidence in City governance.
"This is not about disagreement over policy," the groups stated. "It is about process - whether the public is being fully informed, fairly heard, and properly included in decisions of significant long-term impact."
The stated grounds for recall include:
- Concerns regarding incomplete or delayed disclosure of information related to major development activity
- Limitations on meaningful and timely public engagement
- Use of communication practices that may restrict or control the flow of information
- Public statements that may not filly reflect underlying circumstances or access to information
- Broader questions regarding adherence to established standards of transparency, fairness, and open governance
Residents involved in the effort emphasize that the recall process is a formal civic mechanism provided within the City Charter and is intended to allow voters to determine whether continued leadership reflects community expectations.
"When transparency and confidence in processes break down, there are established remedies," the group stated. "This is one of them."
The group indicated that, upon issuance of official petition forms by the City Clerk, they will begin lawful circulation of signatures in accordance with Charter requirements. They also emphasized that the recall effort exists alongside ongoing requests for improved public process, including more complete information disclosure, clearer communication practices, and structured governance approaches for large-scale development projects.
"We believe San Angelo can move forward in a way that is both forward-looking and accountable," the group concluded. "This action is about ensuring that the public remains part of that process."
Additional information regarding the recall process and supporting documentation will be made available as the petition circulation begins. For more detailed documentation on why the group considers this a matter of public urgency, please go online and visit: https://www.sanangelodccc.com/press-releases.html
PRESS RELEASE
CONTACT INFORMATION:
San Angelo Data Center Citizen Coalition
Richard Summers
[email protected]
RELEASE DATE:
For Immediate Release
SAN ANGELO RESIDENTS INITIAL RECALL EFFORT FOR MAYOR THOMPSON
Dateline: [San Angelo, Texas April 22, 2026]
A coalition of San Angelo residents today announced the initiation of a formal recall effort targeting Mayor Tom Thompson, citing concerns over transparency, public process, and access to information in connection with recent City actions, including those related to the proposed Skybox data center project.
The recall effort follows the filing of a Recall Affidavit with the City Clerk, formally requesting issuance of petition materials in accordance with the San Angelo City Charter. Organizers state that the action is not based on a single decision, but on what they describe as a pattern of conduct affecting public confidence in City governance.
"This is not about disagreement over policy," the groups stated. "It is about process - whether the public is being fully informed, fairly heard, and properly included in decisions of significant long-term impact."
The stated grounds for recall include:
- Concerns regarding incomplete or delayed disclosure of information related to major development activity
- Limitations on meaningful and timely public engagement
- Use of communication practices that may restrict or control the flow of information
- Public statements that may not filly reflect underlying circumstances or access to information
- Broader questions regarding adherence to established standards of transparency, fairness, and open governance
Residents involved in the effort emphasize that the recall process is a formal civic mechanism provided within the City Charter and is intended to allow voters to determine whether continued leadership reflects community expectations.
"When transparency and confidence in processes break down, there are established remedies," the group stated. "This is one of them."
The group indicated that, upon issuance of official petition forms by the City Clerk, they will begin lawful circulation of signatures in accordance with Charter requirements. They also emphasized that the recall effort exists alongside ongoing requests for improved public process, including more complete information disclosure, clearer communication practices, and structured governance approaches for large-scale development projects.
"We believe San Angelo can move forward in a way that is both forward-looking and accountable," the group concluded. "This action is about ensuring that the public remains part of that process."
Additional information regarding the recall process and supporting documentation will be made available as the petition circulation begins. For more detailed documentation on why the group considers this a matter of public urgency, please go online and visit: https://www.sanangelodccc.com/press-releases.html
San Angelo Citizens Group Calls for Data Center “Pause to Be Sure”
Dateline: [SAN ANGELO, TEXAS, April 9, 2026] — A coalition of San Angelo residents today called
on the City of San Angelo (COSA) to institute an immediate one-year pause on new data center
development approvals, citing unresolved concerns involving transparency, infrastructure
capacity, financial stability, and community impact.
The group stated that recent COSA proposals and regulatory movements have advanced more
quickly than public information dissemination necessary to evaluate them responsibly.
Public information requests, submitted months ago, remain incomplete, and key details
regarding infrastructure demands, financing structures, and long-term operational impacts have
not been fully disclosed.
“We are not blanketly opposing technology or economic development,” the group emphasized.
“We are calling for a pause to be sure decisions of this scale are made with full information, sound
planning, and meaningful public participation. Once fully informed, we should remain prepared
to cancel the data center project if the evidence to do so is clear.”
Residents point to multiple areas of concern, including:
Infrastructure strain — Rising electricity demand and limited grid capacity, alongside
long-term drought concerns, raise questions about whether large-scale facilities can be
supported without inflated costs or significant risk to the public.
Housing impact — Large construction projects trigger a rapid influx of temporary
workers, placing immediate pressure on already significantly limited affordable short-term
housing options across the city which in turn provoke rapid rental increases.
Financial and operational risk — Public records indicate financial instability and
compliance issues among national entities associated with the proposed local data center
development. Together, these factors raise more concerns about long-term project
viability and enforceability of agreements.
Planning inconsistency — Shifting approaches to zoning in the absence of a clearly
defined, unified, citywide framework or an updated Comprehensive Plan have increased
the likelihood that high-impact siting decisions currently could be made almost anywhere
across large swathes of San Angelo.
Emerging unknowns — Key technical and environmental factors, including cooling
demands, thermal impacts, and cumulative effects across both multiple local sites and
across the Concho Valley region itself, remain insufficiently clarified, much less addressed.
The group stressed that these issues are not isolated but tightly interwoven.
Lacking much more transparency on these issues, piecemeal governance decisions risk
committing the City to long-term repercussions from inadequate safeguards.
Even where global investment trends remain strong, poorly structured local projects can fail--
leaving communities to bear the cost and the consequences.
Call to Action
The group formally requests that the San Angelo City Council and Planning Commission:
Adopt a one-year minimum pause on applications and approvals for new or proposed
data center projects
Complete full infrastructure, water, and grid impact assessments on the current proposal
Establish clear, enforceable standards for developer financial viability and tax compliance
Implement clear, two-way public engagement and transparency processes prior to any
future approvals
Develop a comprehensive, citywide governing framework that manages location, scale,
and cumulative impact over five- to ten-year timeframes
Recent national industry reporting cites local opposition as currently--and increasingly—most
responsible for data center project cancellations—often rooted in concerns over transparency,
infrastructure strain, and community impact.
“We believe a one-year pause to be sure is a minimum reasonable, responsible step,” the group
concluded. “It allows San Angelo to move forward purposefully—while protecting residents,
infrastructure, and the long-term quality of life of the community.”
For more detailed documentation on why the group considers this a matter of public urgency,
please go online and visit https://www.sanangelodccc.com/press-releases.html
Dateline: [SAN ANGELO, TEXAS, April 9, 2026] — A coalition of San Angelo residents today called
on the City of San Angelo (COSA) to institute an immediate one-year pause on new data center
development approvals, citing unresolved concerns involving transparency, infrastructure
capacity, financial stability, and community impact.
The group stated that recent COSA proposals and regulatory movements have advanced more
quickly than public information dissemination necessary to evaluate them responsibly.
Public information requests, submitted months ago, remain incomplete, and key details
regarding infrastructure demands, financing structures, and long-term operational impacts have
not been fully disclosed.
“We are not blanketly opposing technology or economic development,” the group emphasized.
“We are calling for a pause to be sure decisions of this scale are made with full information, sound
planning, and meaningful public participation. Once fully informed, we should remain prepared
to cancel the data center project if the evidence to do so is clear.”
Residents point to multiple areas of concern, including:
Infrastructure strain — Rising electricity demand and limited grid capacity, alongside
long-term drought concerns, raise questions about whether large-scale facilities can be
supported without inflated costs or significant risk to the public.
Housing impact — Large construction projects trigger a rapid influx of temporary
workers, placing immediate pressure on already significantly limited affordable short-term
housing options across the city which in turn provoke rapid rental increases.
Financial and operational risk — Public records indicate financial instability and
compliance issues among national entities associated with the proposed local data center
development. Together, these factors raise more concerns about long-term project
viability and enforceability of agreements.
Planning inconsistency — Shifting approaches to zoning in the absence of a clearly
defined, unified, citywide framework or an updated Comprehensive Plan have increased
the likelihood that high-impact siting decisions currently could be made almost anywhere
across large swathes of San Angelo.
Emerging unknowns — Key technical and environmental factors, including cooling
demands, thermal impacts, and cumulative effects across both multiple local sites and
across the Concho Valley region itself, remain insufficiently clarified, much less addressed.
The group stressed that these issues are not isolated but tightly interwoven.
Lacking much more transparency on these issues, piecemeal governance decisions risk
committing the City to long-term repercussions from inadequate safeguards.
Even where global investment trends remain strong, poorly structured local projects can fail--
leaving communities to bear the cost and the consequences.
Call to Action
The group formally requests that the San Angelo City Council and Planning Commission:
Adopt a one-year minimum pause on applications and approvals for new or proposed
data center projects
Complete full infrastructure, water, and grid impact assessments on the current proposal
Establish clear, enforceable standards for developer financial viability and tax compliance
Implement clear, two-way public engagement and transparency processes prior to any
future approvals
Develop a comprehensive, citywide governing framework that manages location, scale,
and cumulative impact over five- to ten-year timeframes
Recent national industry reporting cites local opposition as currently--and increasingly—most
responsible for data center project cancellations—often rooted in concerns over transparency,
infrastructure strain, and community impact.
“We believe a one-year pause to be sure is a minimum reasonable, responsible step,” the group
concluded. “It allows San Angelo to move forward purposefully—while protecting residents,
infrastructure, and the long-term quality of life of the community.”
For more detailed documentation on why the group considers this a matter of public urgency,
please go online and visit https://www.sanangelodccc.com/press-releases.html
4/8/2026
Article: SAN ANGELO DATA CENTER: LET'S PAUSE TO BE SURE
by Richard Summers
Article: SAN ANGELO DATA CENTER: LET'S PAUSE TO BE SURE
by Richard Summers
How foreboding the near-term consequences of the proposed data center development may be, no San Angelo resident can say with certainty—not because the risks are unknowable, but because the information required to evaluate them has not been fully disclosed.
When residents are left without sufficient transparency from their representatives, they naturally fill that knowledge gap by assembling an assuredly faulty picture from media fragments, developer sales pitches, anemic public disclosures, independent findings--and rumors!
A Call for Pausing
San Angelo is being asked to move quickly on a development of enormous scale and consequence. Yet the information provided to the public remains incomplete, fragmented, and in some cases absent altogether.
Before committing to long-term structural changes, the City therefore should pause for a minimum of one year--not to reject opportunity, but to attain a full, transparent grasp of the data center commitment.
If that clarity—true consensus between the governed and their governance—cannot be achieved, or if serious risks identified prove unmanageable, then the City must be prepared to reconsider whether this project should proceed at all.
This is not a single-issue decision. It is the convergence of multiple systems—zoning, infrastructure, finance, water, energy, and governance —each carrying its own uncertainties and long-term implications. Decisions of this magnitude cannot be made responsibly through segmented review or scant public disclosure. The issues that warrant a moratorium are numerous--and compelling.
Transparency and Process Gaps
Notification efforts surrounding zoning changes were limited in scope. Residents directly adjacent to proposed ML zones and city ETJ were not adequately informed, and opportunities for meaningful public participation were insufficient. Requests made under the Texas Public Information Act nearly four months ago remain yet overwhelmingly incomplete for far too long. This unexplained failure to provide statutorily mandated and timely response raises serious questions about inexplicable City resolve to withhold from the public critical data center impact factors.
Meanwhile, the City continued approving substantially irreversible decisions while keeping the public “in the dark” about the appropriateness of those moves. Even where additional information is ultimately released without a new Attorney General request, prolonged delay during critical decision periods still undermines meaningful public review. This affects more than just the public. The Planning Commission itself has been asked to evaluate zoning and design standards tied to this development. If relevant data—on infrastructure demands, financial structure, and operational scope—is not fully available during those deliberations, then both the Commission and the public are being asked to respond without full visibility. This is not simply an access issue--it is a governance failure at the point decisions must be made. It happens through institutional capture, a broadly recognized result when governing bodies get “caught up” in procuring exaggerated rewards.
Financial Structure and Stability Weaknesses
Public records show that multiple Skybox-branded entities have experienced franchise tax forfeitures, with some reinstated and others remaining forfeited. This pattern raises serious questions about internal corporate oversight and consistency.
At the same time, large-scale data center development increasingly ties itself to private credit and infrastructure investment strategies operating at a national level. In the last six months an alleged principal funding affiliate for the San Angelo data center has become, in the words of the New York Times, a poster child for a broader “private credit” lender crisis. Its capitalization fell more than 40%. Its shares currently trade at record lows. And just this week it was compelled quickly to protect its capital position by limiting investor withdrawals to 5% on its AI and data center financing funds.
Yet, cities do not contract with brand names—they contract with legal entities. If those entities lose standing, dissolve, or shift, accountability and enforceability become uncertain. Food for thought: What becomes of the City and the data center if the financial backer mentioned suddenly shutters its data center developer funds. These developments do not determine the outcome of any specific project. However, they underscore a broader reality: the financial structures supporting rapid expansion in this sector are restructuring in real time with little regard for the effects on individual data centers. When local commitments intersect with financing models that remain in flux, uncertainty heightens. Deals with potentially unstable entities risk leaving the City with agreements that may be unenforceable when it matters most. Just last week, Bloomberg estimated that nearly half of 2026 data center projects will be cancelled!
Construction Influx and Housing Shock
Large-scale data center construction does not arrive alone. It brings a construction workforce that must live somewhere—often for extended periods, and often in exactly the housing categories San Angelo is least prepared to accommodate: affordable rentals, low-end units, motels, extended-stay rooms, and other short-term housing.
That matters, because the City’s own housing discussions have already made clear that, even without the data center currently, San Angelo is under growing strain in these categories. If a major construction influx arrives before additional housing capacity exists, the effect will not be theoretical. It will be immediate: tighter rental availability, upward pressure on rents, greater competition for lower-cost housing, and persisting displacement pressure on residents who are already economically vulnerable. In fact, zoning for more short-term temporary housing conceivably thwarts any improvement in low-cost housing for permanent San Angelo residents urgently needing such. Nor would the impact be limited to one neighborhood. A large temporary workforce competes across the full short-term and low-cost housing market, affecting workers, seniors, families in transition, and residents already struggling with affordability.
A one-year minimum moratorium might give the City time to assess projected construction workforce impacts, identify realistic housing demand scenarios while still accounting for resident needs, and determine whether any responsible mitigation plan exists before those temporary housing pressures are imposed on the community. A city already short on affordable and short-term housing should not invite a construction surge first—then be forced to face down avoidable housing issues later.
Documented Energy, Water, and Infrastructure Cumulative Constraints
Regional outlooks for both power and water raise additional concerns. ERCOT projections indicate increasing strain on supply, while TWDB regional water planning documents show increasing long-term stress on water sources extending through 2050. These are not abstract considerations. Hyperscale data centers require sustained, high-volume power and water inputs. Even under ideal conditions in our West Central Texas area, infrastructure must be expanded carefully to meet such demand.
At the same time, national reporting highlights shortages in critical electrical equipment—transformers, switchgear, and smart interconnection components-- required to support these large-scale projects. Lead times for such infrastructure demand replacement can extend to months or years. This creates a practical mismatch: projects may be approved faster than they can be physically built out.
Emerging Unknowns with Increasing Risks
Even at this stage, additional engineering concerns continue emerging. Thermal load management, cooling requirements, and associated water demand are not trivial factors in hyperscale design yet have not been fully considered in public discussions.When new technical questions surface during the approval process, it signals that a full operational profile for the project is not yet clearly defined. That is not a stable basis for entering long-term public commitments of this scale!
Planning Inconsistencies and Uncertain Expansion of Scope
Earlier discussions indicated that data center development would be guided within a defined overlay district in the northeast portion of San Angelo, with specific planning standards to follow. That framework now appears to have been set aside without clear public explanation. Current proposals would instead allow data centers as a conditional use across existing industrial zones throughout the city.
At the same time, other significant parcel zoning changes continue to move forward across the city, further underscoring the absence of a clearly articulated, integrated land-use strategy to replace a Comprehensive Plan, not fully revised since 2009. Hence, virtually all current zoning revisions seem to require a parallel revision of the existing CP. Without a defined high-impact project location strategy, the City risks creating a fragile dispersed pattern of development—isolated facilities scattered across multiple zones rather than coordinated within a planned district.
Such a pattern multiplies infrastructure demands. Instead of a single, managed investment, the City may face repeated expansions of substations, water systems, roadways, and service networks across multiple areas. The result is not efficiency—it is fragmentation and ongoing headaches.
Additional Broader and Variable Structural Risks
Beyond local considerations, broader structural risks remain unaddressed. Supply chains for critical infrastructure are global. While sourcing details have not been disclosed, the absence of clear procurement standards introduces additional uncertainty in areas ranging from product reliability to long-term system integrity. Depending on foreign sourcing, as likely will be the case soon, unanticipated national security concerns will likely emerge. Also, the timing of key decisions raises concern. Advancing major agreements before full information becomes publicly available increases the likelihood of incomplete decision-making and the potential for procedural challenges.
These are not hypothetical risks. When decisions advance ahead of full information transparency, the risk is not just uncertainty—it is staged irreversible commitment.
A System, Not Just a Project
Taken together, these factors point to something larger than a single development project. Hyperscale data centers are not simply buildings—they are self-contained operational environments requiring dedicated power, cooling, water, and infrastructure systems at a scale comparable to small industrial ecosystems. When deployed with unclear boundaries, coordination, and full, enforceable transparency, they do not integrate quietly into a city--the cumulative presence of each new project continually reshapes it.
Conclusion: San Angelo Requires a Reasonable Pause. This is not a call to reject development.
But neither should the City proceed by default. If, during a period of full transparency and evaluation, the project cannot demonstrate clear, enforceable alignment with San Angelo’s long-term interests, then cancellation must remain a legitimate outcome. This halt in the process, therefore, provides a necessary period of civic reflection—invoked to avoid committing the City to long-term obligations before full implications are clarified, particularly as each successive approval multiplies the difficulty--and the expense—of reversing course.
Since the City presses inexorably forward on the Skybox data center, while key information for public clarity remains undisclosed, a pause becomes necessary to restore transparency, to ensure informed governance, and to maintain public trust. Ignoring increasingly obvious, broad resident opposition will never serve San Angelo well. The concerns outlined here are not abstract. They translate directly into cost—through infrastructure investment, utility demand, system strain, and long-term financial exposure. And if development is no longer confined to a defined area, those impacts will not remain isolated. Instead, they will be intensified across adjacent neighborhoods and, ultimately, will echo throughout the city, like the mysterious, ostensibly sickening low hum many data center communities report experiencing.
A temporary moratorium would allow the City to gather and transparently produce complete information, evaluate system-wide impacts, and make decisions, grounded in full understanding, before binding the public to consequences not yet fully visible.
In sum, when high-impact project scope keeps expanding, when information is incomplete, and when decisions are advanced under uncertainty for all, a 1-year moratorium is not obstruction—it is core responsible governance. And responsible focus on community well-being is precisely what democratic elections mandate from local officials.
When residents are left without sufficient transparency from their representatives, they naturally fill that knowledge gap by assembling an assuredly faulty picture from media fragments, developer sales pitches, anemic public disclosures, independent findings--and rumors!
A Call for Pausing
San Angelo is being asked to move quickly on a development of enormous scale and consequence. Yet the information provided to the public remains incomplete, fragmented, and in some cases absent altogether.
Before committing to long-term structural changes, the City therefore should pause for a minimum of one year--not to reject opportunity, but to attain a full, transparent grasp of the data center commitment.
If that clarity—true consensus between the governed and their governance—cannot be achieved, or if serious risks identified prove unmanageable, then the City must be prepared to reconsider whether this project should proceed at all.
This is not a single-issue decision. It is the convergence of multiple systems—zoning, infrastructure, finance, water, energy, and governance —each carrying its own uncertainties and long-term implications. Decisions of this magnitude cannot be made responsibly through segmented review or scant public disclosure. The issues that warrant a moratorium are numerous--and compelling.
Transparency and Process Gaps
Notification efforts surrounding zoning changes were limited in scope. Residents directly adjacent to proposed ML zones and city ETJ were not adequately informed, and opportunities for meaningful public participation were insufficient. Requests made under the Texas Public Information Act nearly four months ago remain yet overwhelmingly incomplete for far too long. This unexplained failure to provide statutorily mandated and timely response raises serious questions about inexplicable City resolve to withhold from the public critical data center impact factors.
Meanwhile, the City continued approving substantially irreversible decisions while keeping the public “in the dark” about the appropriateness of those moves. Even where additional information is ultimately released without a new Attorney General request, prolonged delay during critical decision periods still undermines meaningful public review. This affects more than just the public. The Planning Commission itself has been asked to evaluate zoning and design standards tied to this development. If relevant data—on infrastructure demands, financial structure, and operational scope—is not fully available during those deliberations, then both the Commission and the public are being asked to respond without full visibility. This is not simply an access issue--it is a governance failure at the point decisions must be made. It happens through institutional capture, a broadly recognized result when governing bodies get “caught up” in procuring exaggerated rewards.
Financial Structure and Stability Weaknesses
Public records show that multiple Skybox-branded entities have experienced franchise tax forfeitures, with some reinstated and others remaining forfeited. This pattern raises serious questions about internal corporate oversight and consistency.
At the same time, large-scale data center development increasingly ties itself to private credit and infrastructure investment strategies operating at a national level. In the last six months an alleged principal funding affiliate for the San Angelo data center has become, in the words of the New York Times, a poster child for a broader “private credit” lender crisis. Its capitalization fell more than 40%. Its shares currently trade at record lows. And just this week it was compelled quickly to protect its capital position by limiting investor withdrawals to 5% on its AI and data center financing funds.
Yet, cities do not contract with brand names—they contract with legal entities. If those entities lose standing, dissolve, or shift, accountability and enforceability become uncertain. Food for thought: What becomes of the City and the data center if the financial backer mentioned suddenly shutters its data center developer funds. These developments do not determine the outcome of any specific project. However, they underscore a broader reality: the financial structures supporting rapid expansion in this sector are restructuring in real time with little regard for the effects on individual data centers. When local commitments intersect with financing models that remain in flux, uncertainty heightens. Deals with potentially unstable entities risk leaving the City with agreements that may be unenforceable when it matters most. Just last week, Bloomberg estimated that nearly half of 2026 data center projects will be cancelled!
Construction Influx and Housing Shock
Large-scale data center construction does not arrive alone. It brings a construction workforce that must live somewhere—often for extended periods, and often in exactly the housing categories San Angelo is least prepared to accommodate: affordable rentals, low-end units, motels, extended-stay rooms, and other short-term housing.
That matters, because the City’s own housing discussions have already made clear that, even without the data center currently, San Angelo is under growing strain in these categories. If a major construction influx arrives before additional housing capacity exists, the effect will not be theoretical. It will be immediate: tighter rental availability, upward pressure on rents, greater competition for lower-cost housing, and persisting displacement pressure on residents who are already economically vulnerable. In fact, zoning for more short-term temporary housing conceivably thwarts any improvement in low-cost housing for permanent San Angelo residents urgently needing such. Nor would the impact be limited to one neighborhood. A large temporary workforce competes across the full short-term and low-cost housing market, affecting workers, seniors, families in transition, and residents already struggling with affordability.
A one-year minimum moratorium might give the City time to assess projected construction workforce impacts, identify realistic housing demand scenarios while still accounting for resident needs, and determine whether any responsible mitigation plan exists before those temporary housing pressures are imposed on the community. A city already short on affordable and short-term housing should not invite a construction surge first—then be forced to face down avoidable housing issues later.
Documented Energy, Water, and Infrastructure Cumulative Constraints
Regional outlooks for both power and water raise additional concerns. ERCOT projections indicate increasing strain on supply, while TWDB regional water planning documents show increasing long-term stress on water sources extending through 2050. These are not abstract considerations. Hyperscale data centers require sustained, high-volume power and water inputs. Even under ideal conditions in our West Central Texas area, infrastructure must be expanded carefully to meet such demand.
At the same time, national reporting highlights shortages in critical electrical equipment—transformers, switchgear, and smart interconnection components-- required to support these large-scale projects. Lead times for such infrastructure demand replacement can extend to months or years. This creates a practical mismatch: projects may be approved faster than they can be physically built out.
Emerging Unknowns with Increasing Risks
Even at this stage, additional engineering concerns continue emerging. Thermal load management, cooling requirements, and associated water demand are not trivial factors in hyperscale design yet have not been fully considered in public discussions.When new technical questions surface during the approval process, it signals that a full operational profile for the project is not yet clearly defined. That is not a stable basis for entering long-term public commitments of this scale!
Planning Inconsistencies and Uncertain Expansion of Scope
Earlier discussions indicated that data center development would be guided within a defined overlay district in the northeast portion of San Angelo, with specific planning standards to follow. That framework now appears to have been set aside without clear public explanation. Current proposals would instead allow data centers as a conditional use across existing industrial zones throughout the city.
At the same time, other significant parcel zoning changes continue to move forward across the city, further underscoring the absence of a clearly articulated, integrated land-use strategy to replace a Comprehensive Plan, not fully revised since 2009. Hence, virtually all current zoning revisions seem to require a parallel revision of the existing CP. Without a defined high-impact project location strategy, the City risks creating a fragile dispersed pattern of development—isolated facilities scattered across multiple zones rather than coordinated within a planned district.
Such a pattern multiplies infrastructure demands. Instead of a single, managed investment, the City may face repeated expansions of substations, water systems, roadways, and service networks across multiple areas. The result is not efficiency—it is fragmentation and ongoing headaches.
Additional Broader and Variable Structural Risks
Beyond local considerations, broader structural risks remain unaddressed. Supply chains for critical infrastructure are global. While sourcing details have not been disclosed, the absence of clear procurement standards introduces additional uncertainty in areas ranging from product reliability to long-term system integrity. Depending on foreign sourcing, as likely will be the case soon, unanticipated national security concerns will likely emerge. Also, the timing of key decisions raises concern. Advancing major agreements before full information becomes publicly available increases the likelihood of incomplete decision-making and the potential for procedural challenges.
These are not hypothetical risks. When decisions advance ahead of full information transparency, the risk is not just uncertainty—it is staged irreversible commitment.
A System, Not Just a Project
Taken together, these factors point to something larger than a single development project. Hyperscale data centers are not simply buildings—they are self-contained operational environments requiring dedicated power, cooling, water, and infrastructure systems at a scale comparable to small industrial ecosystems. When deployed with unclear boundaries, coordination, and full, enforceable transparency, they do not integrate quietly into a city--the cumulative presence of each new project continually reshapes it.
Conclusion: San Angelo Requires a Reasonable Pause. This is not a call to reject development.
But neither should the City proceed by default. If, during a period of full transparency and evaluation, the project cannot demonstrate clear, enforceable alignment with San Angelo’s long-term interests, then cancellation must remain a legitimate outcome. This halt in the process, therefore, provides a necessary period of civic reflection—invoked to avoid committing the City to long-term obligations before full implications are clarified, particularly as each successive approval multiplies the difficulty--and the expense—of reversing course.
Since the City presses inexorably forward on the Skybox data center, while key information for public clarity remains undisclosed, a pause becomes necessary to restore transparency, to ensure informed governance, and to maintain public trust. Ignoring increasingly obvious, broad resident opposition will never serve San Angelo well. The concerns outlined here are not abstract. They translate directly into cost—through infrastructure investment, utility demand, system strain, and long-term financial exposure. And if development is no longer confined to a defined area, those impacts will not remain isolated. Instead, they will be intensified across adjacent neighborhoods and, ultimately, will echo throughout the city, like the mysterious, ostensibly sickening low hum many data center communities report experiencing.
A temporary moratorium would allow the City to gather and transparently produce complete information, evaluate system-wide impacts, and make decisions, grounded in full understanding, before binding the public to consequences not yet fully visible.
In sum, when high-impact project scope keeps expanding, when information is incomplete, and when decisions are advanced under uncertainty for all, a 1-year moratorium is not obstruction—it is core responsible governance. And responsible focus on community well-being is precisely what democratic elections mandate from local officials.
© 2026 Richard Summers. All rights reserved.
May be shared with attribution and without modification.
May be shared with attribution and without modification.
