Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sheldon ISD approves tax‑incentive JETI agreement for proposed Eli Lilly project
Summary
Sheldon Independent School District’s board approved a three‑party Jobs, Energy, Technology and Innovation (JETI) agreement with Eli Lilly that the district and counsel described as projecting about $5.9 billion in capital investment, a peak taxable value of $4.4 billion and roughly 604 new jobs; the board authorized the president to sign the agreement.
Sheldon Independent School District’s board voted to approve a three‑party agreement with the governor’s office and Eli Lilly under the Jobs, Energy, Technology and Innovation (JETI) Act, authorizing the board president to execute the agreement.
The district’s counsel, Eddie Hernandez Perez of Leon Alcala, told trustees the company projects "a total capital investment of $5,900,000,000 with a peak taxable value" of about $4.4 billion and "they're projecting a total of 604 new jobs there." Perez said the project would be located inside an existing reinvestment zone and outlined the JETI tax treatment: construction years are not taxable for maintenance and operations (M&O) purposes, incentive years will be taxed at 50% of M&O value during the 10‑year incentive period, and the project remains fully taxable for interest and sinking (I&S) bond purposes.
Why it matters: If built as projected, the facility would represent one of the largest single private investments reported to the board, with material implications for Sheldon ISD’s long‑term tax base and debt service collections. Perez said construction would begin in the 2026–27 school year with peak project values occurring in later construction years and incentive years beginning in the 2031–32 school year, subject to the timing and approvals required by statute.
The presentation explained the multi‑step statutory process: applications are filed with the district, then the comptroller and the governor’s office review the application and circulate a draft agreement before final board action. Perez said the district had held a public hearing in August and that the application paperwork had been submitted to the comptroller earlier in July.
Trustees asked several technical questions about tax years, the year‑lag between tax and financial reporting, and when the district would begin to recognize M&O revenue from the project. Perez reiterated the statutory treatment and the year‑lag, and the board recorded a unanimous vote authorizing the president to execute the agreement.
What’s next: The agreement authorizes district execution now; subsequent events will depend on the company’s construction and the state approvals already in process.
