← Back to context

Comment by mhurron

3 days ago

> the government later changed the rules

Did they, or was it found that they had ignored them and are now being forced to follow the law? Those state and local governments were so supportive that the processes for approvals and reviews was all done in secret and without necessary inputs. You know, the things the laws in those areas said you had to do.

In this particular project, it looks like Oracle and Blue Owl Capital singed the contract before state regulators reviewed and provided necessary approvals.

https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/new-mexico-regula...

And not seeking necessary regulatory approval doesn't really seem like things 'beyond their control.'

10 comments

mhurron

Reply
tiffanyh  3 days ago

Maybe some are not as familiar with this, but I'll use Texas as an example.

In 2025, Texas state government announces a $40B infrastructure investment specifically calling out building data centers for AI as a key part of that package.

https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-google-annou...

Then, just this week, Texas government reverse their position and halts permits for all data centers:

https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-directs-tceq...

I'm not trying to defend Oracle, but I can understand their perspective on this.

If the state government is only now blocking what their contract commits them to deliver, it's unreasonable.

  • wat10000  3 days ago

    If I contract with a construction company to build a house, and they can’t get permits because the local government turned anti-housing, would that be force majeure and allow the construction company to get out of the contract without big penalties? (Actual question here, not rhetorical.)