State Rep. Hickland fires back at Temple blaming state for data center inaction
State Representative Hillary Hickland has challenged Temple officials' claims that state law limits their ability to impose a data center moratorium. Temple's Mayor Tim Davis and City Manager Brynn Myers argue that recent state legislative changes have weakened local authority, making moratoriums largely ineffective. Residents are urging the city council to pause data center projects due to concerns over water and electricity usage.
State Representative Hillary Hickland, a Republican from Belton, has publicly disputed claims by Temple city officials that state law restricts the city's ability to enact a moratorium on data center development. This exchange follows a May 7 presentation by Temple City Manager Brynn Myers, who explained to the City Council and the public that current state law, specifically House Bill 2559, prevents the city from effectively halting proposed data center projects, even if a moratorium were deemed necessary. Myers stated that the state's required process does not allow for such immediate halts.
Hickland countered Myers' claims in a letter, asserting that municipalities still possess "several tools available under existing law to address growth, infrastructure concerns, and development impacts at the local level." Days later, Temple Mayor Tim Davis responded, outlining how the state Legislature has systematically weakened local authority over the years, arguing that additional tools are needed from the Legislature, not continued reductions in local control. He specifically pointed out that HB 2559 removed a temporary moratorium mechanism and did not suspend "vesting rights" during the expanded process, effectively rendering moratoriums impractical for projects already in the pipeline.
The ongoing dispute centers on interpretations of HB 2559 and Local Government Code Chapter 245 regarding vesting rights and the process for implementing moratoriums. While Hickland emphasizes the transparency promoted by HB 2559's public hearing requirements and the continued validity of Chapter 245, Davis and Myers maintain that the lengthy state-mandated process and existing vesting rights make any moratorium in Temple "limited, if any, practical effect on projects." They also noted the city has addressed concerns like water use, noise, traffic, and land-use compatibility through existing zoning and utility agreements. The debate highlights a broader tension between state encouragement of data center development and local communities' desire for control over their impacts.