Dubai Developer Pulls the Plug on Texas Megaproject, Casting a Shadow Over EPIC City
The withdrawal of “Sustainable City USA” from Kaufman County underscores how political scrutiny and resident backlash could shape the future of large‑scale, faith‑adjacent developments like EPIC City
When Dubai‑based SEE Holding quietly stepped back from its ambitious plan to build “Sustainable City USA” in Kaufman County, the decision did more than end a single development proposal. It sent a clear signal about the political and cultural headwinds facing large, master‑planned communities in Texas—particularly those perceived, fairly or not, as religiously oriented. For projects such as EPIC City, the episode offers a cautionary tale.
SEE Holding had been planning a 2,300‑acre “green” development marketed around sustainability, advanced technology, and dense residential design. Similar projects by the firm overseas—primarily in the United Arab Emirates and Oman—include shared green spaces, artificial intelligence‑driven infrastructure, and prominent mosques as community amenities. While standard in the company’s international portfolio, those features quickly became a flashpoint in Kaufman County once residents raised concerns that the project could evolve into an Islamic‑centric enclave.
Those concerns drew comparisons to EPIC City, another proposed development that has faced scrutiny over its perceived religious character. The comparison proved politically potent. Keith Self, a Republican congressman and co‑chair of the Sharia Free America Caucus, publicly echoed residents’ fears, framing the issue not as zoning or land use, but as a question of cultural and legal compatibility. Shortly thereafter, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced a formal investigation into SEE Holding’s plans.
The political pressure escalated quickly. According to Lance Gooden, another Republican congressman representing the area, direct conversations with SEE Holding led to a decisive outcome. After advising the developers to reconsider whether the timing and location were appropriate, Gooden announced that the company had chosen not to move forward in Kaufman County and declared the matter resolved. The withdrawal was reported on March 23 and effectively ended the project before it could advance beyond the planning stage.
For EPIC City, the implications are significant. The collapse of Sustainable City USA illustrates how quickly large developments can become entangled in broader ideological debates once they are framed through the lens of religion or cultural identity. Even without concrete evidence of unlawful intent, the perception of an “Islamic‑centric” city proved sufficient to trigger state‑level investigations and ultimately derail a multibillion‑dollar proposal.
Scale also played a role. SEE Holding’s overseas Sustainable City projects typically span about 165 acres or less. The Kaufman County proposal, by contrast, covered approximately 2,300 acres—nearly fourteen times larger. That size amplified visibility, scrutiny, and political risk. For EPIC City, which has likewise been portrayed as a large, self‑contained community, the lesson is clear: the larger and more symbolically distinct a project appears, the more likely it is to attract organized opposition.
Attorney General Paxton’s comments reinforced that reality. Declaring that there would be no “sharia city” in Texas, he emphasized that any development on American soil must comply fully with U.S. and Texas law, and that his office would investigate for any unlawful actions. While the investigation’s findings were not detailed publicly, the rhetoric alone contributed to an environment in which SEE Holding opted to withdraw rather than persist.
In the end, SEE Holding’s exit leaves open questions about whether the firm will pursue other sites in Texas or elsewhere in the United States. More broadly, it leaves developments like EPIC City operating in a newly clarified landscape—one where public perception, political framing, and cultural anxieties can be as decisive as financing or design. For proponents and critics alike, the Kaufman County episode stands as a precedent that will likely shape how future projects are proposed, defended, and judged.
An excellent article, indeed. I live in Kaufman County, Texas. We initially learned about the planned development when some information circulated about a meeting with County planning commission members and the developer. That meeting happened behind closed doors, without public attendance or input. We then learned about another planned meeting with tge County, which would include the developer and their lawyers, but it was cancelled so the lawyers could do more research. We believe the meeting was cancelled due to the spread of information through local social media, concerning tge existence of the project, the earlier meeting, and the upcoming meeting. Phone calls and emails ensued, and all local officials were contacted and asked for input, without any satisfying responses. That was followed by public contact with our state officials, which began showing interest and positive results for Kaufman residents. The final notice came on March 23, and there was a noticeable breath of relaxation, and notes it thanks for officials who took action.
During all this, many comments seemed to be more directed toward a kinetic response from individuals, rather than letting the pressure from ideological confrontation take its effect. There are lessons here for other areas to learn before similar efforts are made to insert non-conforming, anti-constitutional developments in another place. We were successful in opposing an Islamic-centered development in our county, over a few weeks, by uniting as a body of concerned citizens, and asking our elected officials for information, for inclusion is any meetings or considerations and agreements, and finally for assistance to oppose. With dedicated, and helpful official contacts, we were successful in stopping an incompatible development from even getting started. We thank our great State Attorney General, Ken Paxton, our State Senator, Bob Hall, and our U.S. Representative, Lance Gooden for their cooperation interest, their help, and their action on this situation.