Wyoming housing deals under scrutiny as Teton residents and developer clash over tax status of Flat Creek project
Loading...
Summary
A Teton County resident alleged last week that a publicly‑leased affordable housing project (Flat Creek) uses a tiny public ownership stake to claim property tax exemption while private investors reap value; the project's developer and county officials said the structure is consistent with Low Income Housing Tax Credit rules and statutory exemptions.
Public testimony before the Revenue Committee on a Teton County affordable housing project turned into a detailed dispute over ownership, tax exemptions and who benefits.
Rebecca Bextel, a Jackson resident, told the committee she used public records to examine Flat Creek Apartments — a 48‑unit project built on one acre the town leased under a 99‑year agreement — and concluded the arrangement resulted in a near‑complete tax exemption for a privately managed development that benefited outside investors.
"They do not pay a penny in property tax," Bextel said, describing documents showing the Teton County Housing Authority held a 0.0001% stake, local partners held tiny fractional interests, and investor limited partners held the overwhelming majority. She estimated the project removes roughly $110,000 a year from local property tax rolls in that example and criticized developer fees and grant flows into the project.
Christian Pritchett, principal of Blue Line Development, disputed the characterization and said the structure conforms to the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) model used nationwide. He said project economics require outside investor limited partners to claim tax credits; those investors do not run the property and do not claim long‑term operational control, and he said the housing authority retains a right of first refusal at the end of the compliance period, which creates long‑term local control mechanisms.
Teton County Assessor Melissa Shinkle and WCDA's Scott Hoverson also testified. Shinkle said she had relied on statute (Title 15, Chapter 10) and agency opinions in treating the project as a qualifying housing project under municipal/county authority, noting that housing projects owned pursuant to that chapter are exempt from taxation. Hoverson (Wyoming Community Development Authority) described compliance and underwriting limitations that govern LIHTC projects and said WCDA reviews tenant files and enforces income restrictions as part of federal program compliance.
Committee members asked whether the result — private operation of a large, subsidized project on municipal land with little immediate local tax revenue — was the intended outcome of current statute. Assessors and local officials urged the committee to consider statutory clarity on ownership thresholds and whether the municipal/county housing project exemption should apply to projects where private investors own the majority interest. LSO staff and multiple members signaled the need for further study rather than immediate legislative revision.
The committee did not advance statutory changes but encouraged additional data collection and suggested an oversight request to WCDA and follow‑up on county practices and distribution of costs for services connected with these projects.
