Mills County approves development agreement for White Tail/White Veil Run after heated public hearing over TIF and affordability

The Mills County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday approved Resolution 25-38, a development agreement that authorizes tax-increment financing (TIF) for the White Tail/White Veil Run subdivision and pledges incremental tax revenues to pay for road and other public infrastructure.

The board opened a public hearing on the development north of Glenwood on 230th Street and received more than an hour of testimony from residents and the developer before taking a roll-call vote to approve the measure. "The name of the game now is affordability," said John Shirley, a Henderson resident, criticizing the use of urban renewal for undeveloped land and saying proposed home prices would be out of reach for many local households. Shirley urged the board to define "affordable housing" and disclose how the LMI (low- to moderate-income) set-aside from TIF proceeds will be held and spent.

Developer Mark Hughes said the project was proposed three years ago and that TIF assistance financed road construction that enabled the subdivision to move forward. Hughes said four families have already moved into the 14‑lot addition and that new residents have produced additional school revenue. "If we were told no at the time, that wouldn't have been a TIF project," Hughes said, describing the road and lot work as necessary to deliver houses after prior flood-related losses.

During the hearing, several residents and supervisors pressed staff for clearer accounting of how much the LMI set‑aside will generate annually for this project. County staff explained that roughly one‑third of incremental tax payments for the project are designated for LMI purposes over the life of the TIF but said they could not provide an exact annual dollar figure during the hearing. Supervisors committed to providing detailed, project-specific numbers after the meeting.

Supporters and opponents framed the issue differently: some residents warned that TIF and urban renewal can defer taxes and effectively shift short-term costs to long-standing local taxpayers, while proponents argued the tool pays for public infrastructure that otherwise would not be built and can return more taxable property to the tax rolls over time.

After supervisors discussed those concerns and the project's history, one supervisor moved to approve the resolution authorizing the development agreement with Jennifer and Mark Hughes. The motion was seconded and carried by roll-call vote. The board recorded the approval as Resolution 25‑38.

The board closed the public hearing at 09:17. Supervisors said they would follow up with staff to provide a clearer accounting of the LMI/TIF funds allocated to the project and how residents or community groups might apply for those LMI dollars.

What happens next: the development agreement is authorized and county staff will provide supplemental financial details on the LMI fund and TIF mechanics, per supervisors' commitments.