A Strategic Framework for Community-Led Engagement

White Paper | January 2026 | John E Hargrove PE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Jasper County and the unincorporated community of Buna face an emerging reality that county leadership must address with intention and transparency: artificial intelligence, data center development, and distributed technology infrastructure are moving into rural Texas. Site selectors and technology operators are actively targeting rural communities that possess what they need—land, power infrastructure, water access, and fiber connectivity.

This shift represents both opportunity and risk. The opportunity lies in potential economic activity, tax base stabilization, and infrastructure investment. The risk lies in commitments made before local stakeholders understand the full cost to emergency services, utilities, water resources, and community character—costs that, once incurred, become permanent local obligations.

Jasper County is not anti-technology. However, the county cannot afford reactive engagement. This white paper outlines why Jasper County must establish clear standards, engage transparently, and maintain negotiating leverage before deals are finalized—not after commitments narrow local options.

The core recommendation is simple: prepare now, negotiate deliberately, and insist that corporate interest in rural infrastructure translates into tangible community benefit and shared accountability, not extracted value and externalized costs.

1. CONTEXT: THE TECHNOLOGY SHIFT REACHING RURAL EAST TEXAS

Over the past eighteen months, a structural shift has accelerated across rural Texas. Operators of artificial intelligence infrastructure, data processing facilities, and computing centers are moving away from traditional urban centers and established tech corridors. They are targeting rural communities for a specific reason: land, electricity, water, and fiber backbone proximity are converging in places that urban expansion has bypassed.

This is not speculative. Site selectors are active, land brokers are quiet, and preliminary meetings are beginning in rural county offices and chambers of commerce across East Texas. The pattern is consistent: early interest moves quietly through brokers and consultants; preliminary commitments are made with nondisclosure agreements; public announcement follows after incentives and infrastructure commitments are locked in.

The technology driving this shift is real and consequential. AI training and inference require enormous computing power, which demands proportional electricity. Data centers consume significant volumes of water for cooling. Processing facilities need low-latency fiber connectivity and reliable power continuity. These are not small-footprint operations.

Critically, these are not traditional job-creation facilities. A modern data center serving regional or national operations may employ 20–50 permanent staff (many of whom may be remote or not in the USA)—far fewer than traditional manufacturing or industrial operations of comparable footprint. Construction employment is temporary. Supply chains are national, not local. The economic model is capital-intensive and labor-light, which means facility operators extract significant value from rural infrastructure while generating limited local employment without intentional structuring.

Why rural communities are targeted is equally important to understand. Rural Texas has land available at prices that would be prohibitive near cities. Transmission lines and substations have excess capacity that urban regions have already saturated. Water availability in some regions provides cooling resources that growing metros cannot access. Fiber backbones, installed for telecommunications purposes, now offer connectivity layers that rural areas did not anticipate would anchor industrial development.

For Jasper County specifically, County Line Rail Industrial Park represents precisely what site selectors are looking for: rail access, power infrastructure, fiber proximity, and land availability in a region with water resources. These assets are genuine advantages, not liabilities. The question is not whether Jasper County should pursue such interest, but how to engage when it arrives—and it will arrive.

2. JASPER COUNTY AND BUNA: LOCAL CONDITIONS THAT MATTER

Understanding technology-driven development requires grounding in local reality. Jasper County governance, Buna’s unincorporated status, existing infrastructure, and community values shape what is feasible, what carries risk, and what must be defended.

Unincorporated Governance Structure

Buna is not a municipality. It has no city council, no city manager, and no municipal zoning authority. Governance responsibility lies with Jasper County Commissioners Court, which operates under state-delegated county authority. This means development standards are set at the county level, enforcement relies on county infrastructure and regulatory capacity, and costs flow to county budgets and special districts—not to a municipal government that can levy municipal tax bases.

This matters acutely for technology-facility negotiation. A city can grant tax abatements, impose local development standards, negotiate community benefit agreements, and enforce local zoning. A county operates with narrower tools: county road authority, property tax incentives (limited by state law), utility coordination through special districts, and negotiated agreements. Where incorporated municipalities have a municipal identity to leverage, unincorporated areas depend on county-level coordination and special-district alignment.

Workforce, Commuting, and Demographic Realities

Jasper County’s workforce patterns are well-documented. The average commute is 30.4 minutes—14% higher than the Texas average. Nearly 40% of the county’s working-age population travels outside the county for employment. Many commute over an hour. ZIP code 77612 (Buna area) supports 96 local businesses and approximately $40 million in payroll, but over 4,400 job openings are listed locally—indicating that many positions require out-of-area commuting or remain unfilled due to skills mismatch.

This pattern means that a data center arriving to Buna would not solve local employment gaps unless training and recruitment pipelines are deliberately built. The facility would provide construction jobs temporarily, then permanent positions for specialists who may commute in rather than hire locally. Secondary economic benefit—services, trades, logistics—would be real but modest. Buna’s demographic structure—aging population, limited youth retention—compounds the workforce reality: these are not communities with surplus labor capacity.

Emergency Services and Public Safety Capacity

Jasper County Emergency Services District #1 (JCESD#1) covers 270 square miles, including the entire Buna ISD boundaries, serving 7,000+ residents with an annual budget of $1.76 million (2024). The district operates through a contract with the Buna Volunteer Fire Department. Coverage is provided by volunteers supported by minimal paid staff, long response times (frequently exceeding 13 minutes for EMS), and limited surge capacity.

Any development that increases emergency call volume, industrial incident risk, or service demand would stress a system already operating with thin margins. The district is actively planning infrastructure additions—substations in Gist and Cairo Springs, additional daytime staffing—but these improvements are designed for existing population growth, not industrial-scale development. A 20-MW data center represents a potential incident source that JCESD#1 is not currently equipped to manage without significant new resources. Those costs would fall to the district unless a facility operator contractually commits to funding.

Infrastructure Capacity: Water, Power, and Broadband

Water and wastewater service in South Jasper County is fragmented among multiple utility entities, water control and improvement districts, and private systems. No single authority provides comprehensive water planning or capacity assessment. This fragmentation was adequate for rural residential demand but creates coordination challenges for large-scale industrial users. A 10-MW data center with evaporative cooling demand could consume 3–5 million gallons daily, representing 10–15% of some local utility district supplies.

Electrical power infrastructure is more developed. JCESD#1 service area benefits from proximity to substantial transmission lines. However, ‘proximity to transmission’ does not equal ‘available power.’ Understanding whether actual grid capacity exists, who pays for local distribution upgrades, what timeline applies, and whether reliability risks shift onto residential users requires specialized utility engineering analysis.

Broadband is a mixed reality. Fiber backbones exist in proximity to County Line Rail, making connectivity to external networks feasible. However, this does not mean household broadband coverage is adequate. Data center operators do not improve consumer broadband access; they consume bandwidth for their own operations. Any public benefit from household broadband must be negotiated as a separate community benefit term, not assumed.

Community Values: Rural Identity and Stewardship

Buna’s identity is rooted in continuity: land stewardship, community autonomy, and cultural continuity through generations. The comprehensive community planning process (‘Keeping Buna Rural,’ April 2025) explicitly prioritizes preservation of rural identity alongside economic opportunity. This is not anti-development sentiment; it is a statement that growth should reinforce rather than replace local character.

This value framework is significant for technology engagement. A large industrial facility that transforms landscape, traffic patterns, noise, and service demand—without corresponding community control, decision-making participation, or reinforcement of local identity—represents a violation of this principle, regardless of economic metric. Facility operators focused on operations may not perceive this as important. Buna residents will.

3. LESSONS FROM BROADBAND: WHAT WENT WRONG AND WHY IT MATTERS NOW

Broadband deployment in rural Texas over the past fifteen years offers a stark lesson in the cost of passive engagement and misaligned intent. Federal and state broadband policy was designed to expand access and close the rural-urban digital divide. Intent was sound. Implementation, however, revealed consistent problems: funding was insufficient for comprehensive deployment; deployment was uneven; speed and reliability fell short of promises; digital literacy gaps meant access did not translate to usage; and community stakeholders were often consulted after technical decisions were made, not before.

For Jasper County specifically, broadband availability expanded, but coverage gaps and reliability issues remain. More importantly, broadband deployment became primarily a utility and technology matter, not a community priority-setting exercise. Decisions about where fiber was laid, what speeds were available, and what consumer costs applied were made in state offices and technology company boardrooms—not in county courthouses or community forums.

Technology-driven development repeating this pattern would be far more costly. A data center facility is not a public utility; it is a private enterprise. If Jasper County allows such a facility to be sited, permitted, and incentivized with the same passive, reactive engagement that characterized broadband deployment, the county will inherit permanent service obligations—EMS coverage, water supply, power reliability, traffic management—without corresponding decision-making authority or enforceable community benefit terms. The lesson is clear: early engagement, transparent process, and community benefit clarity must precede infrastructure commitments, not follow them.

4. RISKS OF PASSIVE ENGAGEMENT

The consequences of reactive, uninformed engagement are substantial and long-term.

Infrastructure Strain and Cost Shifting

Large industrial facilities demand reliable infrastructure—power, water, road access, emergency response—at scales that rural systems may not be designed to accommodate. A 10-MW facility draws electricity equivalent to supplying 8,000–10,000 homes. A facility consuming 3 million gallons of water daily represents major draw on local utility districts. When infrastructure proves inadequate, the cost of remediation falls to local entities. New power substations, water pipeline extensions, EMS staffing and equipment, and road improvements become county-funded mandates that shift rates to residential users.

Loss of Negotiating Leverage

Developer interest follows a clear sequence: early exploratory meetings, quiet land acquisition, preliminary site surveys; then formal announcements and partnership proposals; finally public celebration and infrastructure negotiations. By the time public engagement occurs, core terms are already determined. Communities that engage late have lost bargaining power. Once land is optioned, the developer has committed capital and can afford to wait. Local leverage is highest in the exploratory phase, when decisions are still fluid.

Long-Term Obligations Without Sustainable Revenue

Tax incentives are attractive at announcement but problematic at execution. A 10-year property tax abatement reduces county and special-district revenue for the duration, then terminates. If the facility’s operation does not generate sufficient non-abated tax revenue to cover service costs, the county assumes permanent service obligations for temporary revenue streams. Water commitments are even more binding. Once water supply is allocated to a facility, that allocation is difficult to recover.

Mismatch Between Development Type and Workforce Reality

Buna’s demographic and employment realities mean that facility operators will import specialized workforce rather than hire locally. Secondary economic benefit is real—construction trades, logistics, local services—but limited. Residents hoping for large-scale local job creation will be disappointed. That disappointment, combined with visible infrastructure strain and changed community character, creates political backlash without corresponding economic justification.

Erosion of Rural Identity and Community Trust

Facilities that transform landscape, increase traffic, introduce security/access restrictions, and change community character erode the rural identity that Buna has chosen to preserve. Once landscape changes, reversing those changes is prohibitively expensive or impossible. More subtly, if a facility arrives through nontransparent process, community members feel that decisions were made by outside parties before locals were consulted. That loss of trust affects all subsequent community engagement.

5. STRATEGIC PRINCIPLES FOR ENGAGEMENT

Jasper County should adopt clear principles before any technology-development proposal is formally presented. These principles establish non-negotiable bounds for engagement and define what ‘community benefit’ means in local context.

Pre-Development Readiness Over Reactive Deal-Making

Before saying ‘yes’ to any facility, Jasper County must complete baseline technical and governance work: water-capacity analysis; power-grid feasibility; EMS/emergency-response impact assessment; county-road maintenance cost modeling; and fiscal-impact analysis. This work is expensive and requires outside expertise, but it is essential. Communities that negotiate without this foundation are negotiating blind.

Transparency Before Nondisclosure Agreements

Public conversations must occur before confidentiality agreements are signed. Once NDA restrictions apply, community input is curtailed. Jasper County should insist that preliminary site assessments, economic impact claims, and infrastructure requirements be disclosed publicly before exclusivity agreements are finalized.

Community Benefit Clarity Before Incentives

Tax abatements, infrastructure investment, and utility priority cannot be unilateral decisions. They must be explicitly tied to community benefit terms that are enforceable and measurable. Community benefits might include: funded EMS staffing and equipment upgrades; water-supply infrastructure improvements benefiting residential users; road improvements; workforce training partnerships; or household broadband access improvements.

Infrastructure Realism Before Recruitment

Jasper County must be clear: facility location is contingent on demonstrated infrastructure capacity and agreement on upgrade responsibility and cost allocation. Specific utility agreements, with named parties and funding sources, must precede site approval. This shifts the burden properly: the facility operator absorbs infrastructure costs as part of project viability.

Local Voice Embedded in Decision Processes

Buna has no municipal structure through which residents can formally engage. Jasper County must provide alternative engagement mechanisms: a standing county task force including elected officials, BISD representation, ESD commissioners, chamber of commerce, and appointed resident representatives; regular public briefings; written summaries of all preliminary discussions; and explicit decision points where community input is solicited before county commitments are made.

6. WHAT ‘GOOD ENGAGEMENT’ LOOKS LIKE FOR JASPER COUNTY

Translating principles into practice requires specific steps and clear decision gates.

Early Engagement Protocol

When preliminary developer interest is communicated, Jasper County should activate a multi-stakeholder task force immediately. Members should include the County Judge and designated Commissioners; representatives from JCESD#1, Buna ISD, the Buna Chamber of Commerce, and nearby utility districts; and 2–3 appointed community representatives.

The task force’s first action is to commission a preliminary technical assessment: Does adequate water supply exist without displacing residential service? What grid infrastructure exists, and what upgrades are required? What EMS/fire demand is projected? What road impacts are anticipated? This work typically costs $15,000–$30,000 and requires 6–8 weeks. It must be completed before formal negotiations begin.

Questions County Leaders Should Ask Early

The task force should follow a mandatory checklist before any preliminary agreement is signed:

• Site and Land Use: Is the proposed footprint compatible with county development standards and neighboring properties? What setbacks, buffers, or restrictions apply? Who enforces them?
• Water and Wastewater: What is the projected water demand? Do utility entities have confirmed capacity? What is the cost for required infrastructure upgrades? Who bears those costs?
• Power and Energy: What is the peak-load demand? Does the local transmission system have adequate capacity, or are upgrades required? Who designs and funds upgrades?
• Emergency Services: What incident types could occur? What training and staffing are required? Will EMS response time meet facility operational needs? What funding does the operator commit to?
• Transportation and Roads: What truck traffic is projected? Which roads carry this traffic? What maintenance costs are projected?
• Community Benefits: What permanent jobs are realistic? What training will the operator commit to? Will household broadband improvements be provided?
• Tax and Fiscal Impact: What tax revenue is projected? What abatements are proposed? How do abatements affect net fiscal benefit?
• Environmental and Land Use: What environmental permits are required? What baseline conditions apply? What monitoring or reporting is required?
• Governance and Accountability: How are disputes resolved? What periodic reporting occurs? What happens if the operator fails to meet terms?

Coordination Across County and Regional Partners

Engagement cannot be siloed to the county judge’s office. JCESD#1, Buna ISD, utility districts, and chambers of commerce must coordinate to avoid making conflicting commitments. A shared information policy—where preliminary assessments and developer claims are distributed to all relevant entities simultaneously—prevents selective information and competitive bidding within the county.

State and Philanthropic Partners

Texas Economic Development & Tourism, regional councils of government, and foundations like TLL Temple Foundation have roles here. The Governor’s office can provide technical expertise or clarify state policy; COGs can facilitate regional coordination; and foundations can fund technical assessments. None of these entities should drive local decisions, but all can provide capacity support that strengthens local negotiating position.

What Jasper County Should Not Commit To Prematurely

Conversely, clear ‘no’ items should be established:

• No preliminary infrastructure commitments before technical feasibility is confirmed.
• No tax abatements without explicit, enforceable community benefit terms tied to those abatements.
• No nondisclosure agreements covering infrastructure demand, environmental impacts, or community benefit terms.
• No fast-track permitting or approval processes that bypass standard environmental review or public process.
• No binding commitments based on speculative developer claims without independent verification.

7. ROLE OF CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE AND REGIONAL LEADERS

Chambers and economic developers have a critical role in this engagement, but that role is supportive, not directive.

Chambers as Information Brokers and Educators

Chambers can clarify for business communities what technology facility development means, what it does not mean, and what realistic expectations are. This prevents false expectations that lead to later backlash. Chambers can also facilitate constructive business-community engagement: developer briefings for local leaders, supply-chain opportunities during construction, mentoring of small contractors interested in facility contracts.

Chambers as Civic Conveners

Chambers can convene multiple stakeholder groups without wielding governmental authority. Chambers can host forums where technical assessments are presented, where questions are asked, and where competing interests are explicitly surfaced and discussed.

Economic Developers as Technical Support

Regional economic developers can provide technical expertise that county staff do not possess: how to evaluate fiscal impact models, how to structure community benefit agreements, what precedents exist in other rural counties. Their role is to strengthen local capacity, not to encourage or discourage development.

State Leaders and Policy Alignment

State representatives and senators have a role in ensuring that state policy supports rural agency rather than overriding it. State policy should protect local agency, not assume development is always beneficial.

8. NEAR-TERM, MID-TERM, AND LONG-TERM ACTIONS

Actionable steps, realistically scaled to rural capacity, should guide Jasper County’s posture.

Near-Term Action (0–12 Months): Establish Pre-Development Standards

Jasper County Commissioners Court should formally adopt a ‘Technology-Facility Pre-Development Standards and Engagement Protocol.’ This is a written policy that establishes how the county will engage if exploratory interest arises. It should include the mandatory checklist, the task-force structure, the timeline for technical assessment, and the decision gates before any infrastructure commitment. This document should be public, shared with chambers and regional partners, and distributed proactively to state representatives.

Cost: $3,000–$5,000 | Timeline: February–April 2026

Mid-Term Opportunity (1–3 Years): Build Regional Information-Sharing Compact

Jasper County should initiate a multi-county consortium among Southeast Texas counties to share pre-development information, technical assessments, and negotiated-agreement templates. This prevents ‘competing in silence’ and ensures that no single county is outmatched in negotiations. The consortium can jointly commission technical studies that individual counties could not afford separately.

Cost: $2,000–$3,000 per county annually | Timeline: Scoping by June 2026; launch by January 2027

Long-Term Posture (3–10 Years): Develop Enforceable Community Benefit Framework

Once Jasper County has engaged with one or more potential facility developers, the county should formalize a ‘Community Benefit and Infrastructure Impact Framework’—a template agreement that future projects must meet. This framework specifies: utility cost allocation; EMS/fire funding commitments; workforce-training partnerships; environmental monitoring; decommissioning obligations; and compliance reporting requirements.

Cost: $8,000–$12,000 | Timeline: Scope by late 2026 or 2027; finalize by 2028

CONCLUSION: A CALL FOR INTENTIONAL LEADERSHIP

Jasper County is not anti-technology. The county has significant infrastructure assets—power, water, rail, fiber proximity, and land. These are real advantages. County leaders should take strategic pride in what Jasper County offers and in the potential for aligned, mutually beneficial development.

However, Jasper County must engage intentionally, not reactively. The difference between opportunistic development and fit-first development lies in leadership. Communities that prepare early, ask hard questions, demand transparency, and insist on community benefit terms negotiate from strength. Communities that welcome interest uncritically defer to developer expertise and negotiate from weakness.

Jasper County’s leadership position is clear: the county wants growth, but on terms that preserve rural identity, do not impose unfunded service obligations, and ensure that local voice is central to decisions about local futures. That posture is protective without being obstructive. It is pro-economic-development without being pro-development-at-any-cost. It is realistic about what technology operators need and what rural communities must defend.

The work begins now. Adoption of pre-development standards, coordination with regional partners, technical assessment capacity, and transparent public process are not obstacles to development; they are prerequisites for responsible development. Communities that complete this work will attract projects aligned with community values and will negotiate terms that distribute benefits locally and costs equitably.

Communities that do not do this work will find themselves explaining to residents why emergency response times have lengthened, why water systems are stressed, why roads are deteriorating, and why facility operators extracted value while leaving burdens behind. That explanation is harder than the preparation. Intentional leadership is not a burden—it is the foundation of sustainable, community-led economic development.

—

Prepared by: John Hargrove PE, Buna Regional Economic Development LLC

In collaboration with: Jasper County governance partners, regional economic development stakeholders

Date: January 2026