Project dossier · Hood County (Granbury area), Texas

Project Red and Project Yellow In review

Two proposed data center campuses covering 677 acres on the grounds of the existing Wolf Hollow power generating complex in Hood County. District Judge Bryan Bufkin of the 355th Judicial District Court granted the county's plea to the jurisdiction and dismissed with prejudice the developers' suit arguing the projects were automatically approved because the county missed a 30-day statutory deadline; the judge found the submissions did not meet the state's definition of 'development plans.' Commissioners had twice delayed voting on the projects pending more disclosure and compliance with new county development regulations. Reporting identifies National CRE Holdings LLC as a Starwood Capital Group entity and Greenland Capital LLC as the owner of MARA Holdings, which already operates two bitcoin mining sites in the county.

Key facts

Filing LLC
National CRE Holdings LLC; Greenland Capital LLC
Size
677 ac
Location
Hood County (Granbury area), Texas
Stage today
In review

Source
read 2026-08-14

What to do next

Next step: An application is in the record. Ask the planning office for the next hearing date and request formal notice.

Build an action pack for this project →

What has happened so far (8 events)

  • 2026-02-10vote
    Hood County Commissioners Court rejected a proposed six-month moratorium on new data center and industrial permits in a 3-2 vote; County Judge Massingill and Commissioners Andrews and Wilson voted against, Commissioners Samuelson and Eagle voted in favor. · source
  • 2026-02-10coverage
    State Sen. Paul Bettencourt and State Rep. Jared Patterson sent a letter to Attorney General Ken Paxton shortly before the moratorium vote urging him to investigate counties seeking data center moratoriums, arguing counties lack constitutional authority to issue them. · source
  • 2026-02-24vote
    Hood County Commissioners Court rejected a second data center moratorium proposal in a 3-2 vote with the same split; commissioners voted instead to request a formal opinion from Attorney General Ken Paxton on whether the county has legal authority to enact such a ban. · source
  • 2026-03-10vote
    Hood County Commissioners unanimously adopted amended Section One Development Permit Regulations requiring data center developers to demonstrate committed water resources, submit complete power generation concept plans, certify compliance with the Lone Star Infrastructure Protection Act, and limit building coverage to 10% of a property (down from 50%). · source
  • 2026-03-24vote
    Hood County Commissioners unanimously voted to postpone action on the Project Red and Project Yellow concept plans pending receipt of additional information; the meeting revealed MARA Holdings' connection to both developments through a joint venture with Starwood, and residents raised concerns about environmental impacts and noise from existing MARA bitcoin mining operations. · source
  • 2026-06-02coverage
    The Texas Tribune reported that Hood County faces eight proposed data center projects spanning over 7,600 acres, including the 677-acre Project Red and Project Yellow on grounds neighboring the Wolf Hollow power plants; commissioners had twice delayed voting on those two projects pending more disclosure, prompting the developers to sue claiming automatic approval. · source
  • 2026-07-15filing
    National CRE Holdings LLC and Greenland Capital LLC filed notice of appeal of Judge Bufkin's dismissal to the Second Court of Appeals. · source
  • 2026-07-15ruling
    District Judge Bryan Bufkin of the 355th Judicial District Court granted Hood County's plea to the jurisdiction and dismissed with prejudice the lawsuit by National CRE Holdings LLC and Greenland Capital LLC, ruling their concept plan submissions did not meet the statutory definition of 'development plans' that would trigger automatic approval under the 30-day deadline. · source

Find the paper trail

Find the paper trail (0 filed · 11 places to look)

State environmental permits

Backup generators, water withdrawal and stormwater are permitted by the state, usually earlier and in more detail than anything filed locally.

County & town filings

The rezoning application, site plan, traffic and noise studies, staff report and every revision.

Utility & grid records

The electricity request is filed with the grid operator and the utility long before the town hears about it — and states the real load.

Federal databases

Works anywhere, and covers the operator's record at its other sites.

  • EPA ECHO facility searchEvery federally-reported air, water and waste permit at a facility, plus its inspection and violation history. Search by address or draw a radius around the site. This project's locality centres on 32.430, -97.830 — search that point with a 5-mile radius.
  • EPA EnvirofactsThe same underlying records, queryable by county — useful for 'what else is permitted near this site' rather than one facility.
  • EPA Facility Registry ServiceResolves the shell LLC on a permit to the facility it belongs to. Worth a look when the filing name means nothing locally.

These are places to look, not evidence that anything has been filed. Links were checked on 2026-08-21; search links are queries, not records. What to ask for.

Around here

Other tracked projects in Texas

Cite this page: GridWatch AI, “Project Red and Project Yellow”, aigridwatch.com/projects/project-red-project-yellow-hood-county-tx, retrieved 2026-10-11.

As of August 2026 (2m ago) · changes weekly — re-check before citing

A working set of identified proposals a community can track, not a census — most of the country's activity is not in here yet. Pennsylvania is the exception: its rows are synced from PA DEP's own data-center permit tracker, so the state's coverage is close to complete and carries the permit trail with it. **Each row carries its own provenance.** Rows showing a verification date link to reporting or the governing body's own record and were read on that date; rows marked *unverified* have no source on record — a lead to check, not a fact to cite. **Stage is derived, not asserted.** *Hearing scheduled*, *Awaiting decision*, *Approved* and *Withdrawn* are computed from each row's milestone dates on every rebuild, so a hearing date that has passed stops reading 'scheduled'. Hearings get moved and projects re-file under new names — treat a scheduled date as the earliest to act by, and confirm with the clerk before relying on it. Leads are mined into data/project_candidates.json and promoted here only after a human reads a primary source.

Part of the data center project tracker — open data, CC BY 4.0 (JSON · CSV).

Toolkit States Tracker Search