Fort Worth delays vote on tax break for $1.1B data center as concerns grow

The Fort Worth City Council delayed a vote Tuesday, March 31, on a tax agreement for developers proposing a $1.1 billion data center in west Fort Worth that has stirred fear and confusion in residents, and prompted a larger discussion about how the city navigates the data center boom.

[–>

Edged Data Centers, a subsidiary of the sustainable infrastructure company Endeavor, plans to develop an AI data center near the intersection of Interstate 20 and Chapin School Road, near the Veale Ranch development owned by Dallas-based PMB Capital.

[–>

The council first discussed a tax agreement for Edged at its work session on March 10. Fort Worth’s economic development department proposed a 50% break on property taxes for the equipment owned by the developer for 10 years.

[–>

In exchange, Edged must invest $1.1 billion for the construction of the data center and create 50 jobs with an average salary of $73,000.

[–>

Fort Worth District 3 council member Michael Crain, whose district is where the data center would be located, added the following requirements to the proposed agreement: the company will comply with the city’s residential noise ordinance, agree to water limits included in a study performed by Kimley-Horn, provide an annual report detailing its compliance with the tax agreement, and comply with lighting and setback requirements set by the city.

[–>

The requirements also say that the company must comply with state and federal environmental standards, and — a major demand from residents — it must maintain a website with contact information and post regular updates about the construction process.

[–>

[–>

The property Edged wants to develop was rezoned for medium industrial use in 2025, and a map of the Veale Ranch development designated it for industrial use. Fort Worth’s 2023 Comprehensive Plan officially designated the area as a “growth center.”

[–>

Developers and representatives from the city of Fort Worth met with residents on March 24 to give an overview of the development and answer questions from residents, who had a laundry list of concerns about the project.

[–>

Over 20 people registered to give public comment on the data center at the City Council meeting on Tuesday. Many of them are involved with the 2871 Community Coalition, a neighborhood group that has formed in the past few weeks ahead of Tuesday’s expected vote.

[–>

“As you consider this vote today, we ask that you also consider what our community will live with permanently once this development is operational, and what protections need to exist, not just for this data center, but for every one that follows it in Fort Worth,” saidJulie Ebbert, who lives in the Markum Ranch development.

[–>

During meetings ahead of the vote, residents said that although the city sent notifications about the rezoning to residents within 300 feet of the development, that was not comprehensive enough because of the impact they feel the data center would have on their neighborhoods.

[–>

“The notification system was a failure, which led to flawed decisions that came afterward,” Judy Williams of Fort Worth told the council. “I consider it an insult to residents nearby this location.”

[–>

Crain has said that the city and developers met with residents in the Skyline Ranch and Ventana developments in the city of Fort Worth, and Markum Ranch, which is just outside city limits. Markum Ranch is named on the list of neighborhood associations notified about the rezoning in the 2025 application.

[–>

In that zoning application, the word “data center” is included in reference to a parking lot, but not otherwise listed in the application.

[–>

Residents, though, disagree, and say the city did not do enough to create transparency about the upcoming development.

[–>

In addition to their concerns about this specific data center, residents said that this case represents a larger issue for Fort Worth in how the city ensures that data center developments built in the city’s tendrils of suburban sprawl come with the best interests of residents in mind.

[–>

“As you consider this vote today, we are asking you to pursue a data center overlay district and citywide ordinance that includes noise standards, pre-construction sound modeling requirements, and advanced notice for generator testing, and have established an ongoing inspection and compliance function with independent noise monitoring so that our community is protected,” Ebber told the council.

[–>

After residents spoke, Taylor Baird — a partner at PMB Capital — took to the microphone.

[–>

“We would not sell 187 acres of 5,000 acres if we felt like we were diminishing the value of the rest of our investment,” Baird said.

[–>

Baird said that the development received approval to connect to the state’s power grid about two years ago, after completing a lengthy review process.

[–>

To get that approval, Edged agreed that in case of a major power emergency, the data center would have its own backup power and would not need to add further strain to the state’s power grid. Bill Greenwood, director of development at Edged, said that the data center’s generators would need to run for about 15 minutes per month for maintenance purposes, in addition to running in case of a major power outage.

[–>

This process has now been formalized by Senate Bill 6, passed in 2025, which requires large data center projects to shoulder their own energy costs and maintain a plan for ensuring they will not strain the state’s power grid during emergencies.

[–>

After the council debated the development, Crain made a motion to withdraw the motion to approve the tax agreement, saying the city needs more time to discuss it and provide residents with some answers.

[–>

The decision was good news for Krista Erbe, a member of the 2871 Community Coalition who has been at the forefront of residents questioning the development.

[–>

“I’m very encouraged by what happened in there,” Erbe told the Star-Telegram. “I feel like the council heard our concerns. “I do worry about not having that a tax abatement, because that was our only way to get some provisions in writing from the data center, but in reality, there needs to be more rules and regulations that would do that anyways, without requiring a tax abatement to get that in place.”

[–>

Baird declined to comment after the meeting.

[–>

The council agreed to postpone the vote until its meeting on May 12.