City and county leaders discussed a proposal from the Texas Housing Foundation to build a roughly 152‑unit multifamily project on Friendship Lane and South Eagle Street, with financing based on low‑income housing tax credits and an operating agreement that would remove the property from ad valorem taxation while providing a payment‑in‑lieu option.

The proposal: Representatives said the project would offer 100 percent affordable units at different affordability levels — typically 70, 60 and 50 percent of area median income (AMI) — and that rents would be lower than market rates. A one‑bedroom at 50 percent AMI was cited in presentation materials at about $948 per month; comparable market units were described as higher, in the $1,400–$1,800 range.

Concerns and questions: County and city officials asked whether the project would actually serve the local workforce (teachers, first responders, janitorial and other staff) or if many units would be taken by retirees and nonworking households. Commissioners and council members asked for an economic benefit analysis, a breakdown of unit counts by AMI tier, details on ownership and operating entity (housing finance corporation structure) and whether proceeds or fees would be reinvested locally.

Why it matters: The city and county would be waiving ad valorem tax revenue for the parcel while seeking public‑purpose benefits (workforce housing). Officials emphasized they would need to justify abatements to constituents and wanted firm data showing the proposal would expand housing opportunities for people the taxing entities employ or for essential workers who currently commute long distances.

Discussion vs. decision: Officials signaled they were not ready to endorse a tax abatement or operating agreement. They asked the applicant for an economic‑impact summary, an AMI/ unit breakdown, and written assurances about local prioritization and any payment‑in‑lieu terms. No formal approval was sought or granted during the workshop.

Ending: City and county staff agreed to request additional analysis from the developer and to consider whether a locally controlled housing finance corporation structure or contractual return of benefits to the jurisdiction would be appropriate if the project advances.