RICHMOND, Texas — Fort Bend County Commissioners Court voted Monday to create Reinvestment Zone 34, clearing a key step toward a proposed Tesla solar cell factory in the county.
The zone covers roughly 3,057 acres in Precinct 2 near the intersection of FM 762 and FM 1994. All four commissioners voted in favor. Interim County Judge Daniel Wong abstained, citing longstanding business ties between his company and Tesla, and the meeting grew tense at points, marked by gavel pounding as the court worked through the agenda.
Creating the zone does not by itself commit the county to any tax abatement, said Carlos Guzman, the county’s director of economic opportunity and development. Guzman said the designation is an administrative step that allows the county to consider incentives for specific projects in the future, and that any project would come back before Commissioners Court, with a public comment period, before incentives are granted.
About the project
Tesla has not committed to building in Fort Bend County. The company filed an application in early August with the Texas Comptroller’s Office seeking a 10-year property tax limitation under the state’s Jobs, Energy, Technology and Innovation Act, routed through Lamar Consolidated ISD, for a facility referred to internally as “Project Crystal Sun.” The filing describes a $10.1 billion investment, about $1.5 billion in real property and $8.6 billion in equipment, with construction running from 2026 through 2028 and commercial production targeted for the first quarter of 2029.
The plant would manufacture photovoltaic solar cells and modules, handling the process from raw silicon through finished modules at a single site rather than assembling imported cells, as most U.S. solar plants currently do. Tesla’s filing projects 9,712 permanent full-time jobs once the plant is operating, plus roughly 1,150 construction jobs at peak. The company has told the state the project would generate an estimated $107 billion in Texas GDP and $6.4 billion in state and local tax revenue over 38 years.
Tesla’s application indicates the company is also weighing an out-of-state site for the project, and has told regulators that Texas risks losing the investment if it doesn’t approve the tax incentive.
Public Testimony
Two speakers addressed the court in support of creating the zone.
Jim Rice, president of Rice & Gardner Consultants and chair of the Fort Bend County Toll Road Authority, told commissioners that reinvestment zones help the county compete for major job-creating investment and let new tax value generated by development help fund infrastructure such as drainage, roads, utilities and site access.
“Growth helps pay for growth,” Rice said.
Rice, who is also the immediate past chair of the Fort Bend Regional Partnership, urged commissioners to make responsible use of the tool to support continued growth in the county.
Jeronimo Cortina, author of the Fort Bend Regional Partnership’s Fort Bend 2050 report, also spoke in favor, telling commissioners that a reinvestment zone designation is “not a blank check” and that projects would still require approval and would need to contribute to the public good. Cortina said the tool can help convert underdeveloped property into jobs and improved quality of life, and urged the court to use it responsibly to help the county compete against other counties and states for investment.
Commissioners McCoy and Prestage return, McCoy with a pointed message
Monday’s meeting also became a flashpoint in an ongoing dispute over Wong’s authority as interim county judge. Commissioners Dexter McCoy and Grady Prestage, who have been boycotting Commissioners Court meetings amid a separate legal dispute over whether Wong holds legitimate authority, both appeared Monday. In a statement released through his office, McCoy said he returned specifically because Wong had agreed to abstain from the reinvestment zone vote.
“If Mr. Wong can step aside to protect the integrity of a vote involving a company with which he has business interests, why won’t he step aside to protect the integrity of the people’s business?” McCoy said in the statement, which was also read at the meeting.
McCoy tied the reinvestment zone item to a broader list of grievances, saying Wong has eliminated the court’s agenda briefing process, which allowed county departments to vet proposals before they reached Commissioners Court. McCoy said that change has let “consequential items appear at the eleventh hour without adequate departmental review or public scrutiny.”
McCoy pointed specifically to personnel actions he attributed to Wong, including what he called the firing of a tenured staff member and her replacement “with an unqualified member of a commissioner’s court office staff.” He also criticized a Friday agenda posting, ahead of Thursday’s regular Commissioners Court meeting, that he said would strip funding, staff and authority from the Fort Bend County Attorney’s Office.
McCoy called the move “political retribution” against County Attorney Bridgette Smith-Lawson, an independently elected official whom he noted was named the Texas District and County Attorneys Association’s 2026 Civil Practitioner of the Year.
“We should not use the machinery of county government to punish an elected official for doing her job,” McCoy said.
McCoy also criticized a renewed push to eliminate associate judge positions, saying the court had already debated and rejected linking that question to the creation of two new district courts after hearing from judges, attorneys and the Fort Bend County Bar Association last year.
“Don’t undo a previously vetted decision at the eleventh hour,” McCoy said. “That is exactly why transparency and process matter.”
McCoy said he would still evaluate the reinvestment zone “on its merits” and vote based on the county’s best interest, but argued Monday’s meeting proved commissioners “can govern” and county business “can move forward” while courts separately resolve the dispute over Wong’s authority.
“Today we know Mr. Wong will step aside to protect his business interests,” McCoy said. “The question is will he step aside to protect your interests? So far the answer has been a resounding no. The people’s interest must come first.”
Wong briefly responded during the meeting, saying he was “kindly just running this meeting” and welcoming McCoy and Prestage back. McCoy replied that the commissioners had returned because “the appropriate actions have been taken to protect the people’s interest.”
Wong’s office pushes back
Bobby Eberle, Wong’s director of communications, disputed McCoy’s characterization after the meeting, saying McCoy’s concerns could have been raised earlier had he attended prior meetings.
Eberle argued that McCoy and Prestage’s participation Monday, including Prestage addressing Wong as “Judge Wong” while making a motion, undercut their position that Wong’s meetings are illegitimate.
“The judge did participate in the meeting; he ran the meeting,” Eberle said. “He simply recused himself from a vote, but he was acting as the county judge.”
Eberle said the personnel matter McCoy referenced was on a prior public agenda that McCoy could have attended, and said Wong’s recusal Monday was disclosed “from the get-go” in the interest of transparency. Asked about the nature of Wong’s business ties to Tesla, Eberle said Wong’s company has worked with Tesla and Elon Musk on past engineering projects.
“It’s of the utmost importance for him to be transparent,” Eberle said. “He’s doing everything by the book, everyone knows it, and I think it sets a good tone for how commissioners court should operate.”
Before the vote, Wong said he had filed a Local Government Officer Conflict Disclosure Statement, known as Form CIS, with the Fort Bend County Records Administrator under Chapter 176 of the Texas Local Government Code, disclosing his company’s relationship with Tesla. He asked that the record reflect the disclosure and the filing.
