Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fort Worth council debates shifting bond funds to affordable housing; staff asked to study capacity
Summary
Council members urged adding or re-designating bond money for affordable housing and broader homeownership uses while others pushed to keep focus on streets and mobility; council asked staff to examine bond capacity, public-art allocations and open-space priorities before a possible Feb. 10 bond call.
Several Fort Worth council members urged shifting or adding bond funding toward affordable housing during a bond work session, while other members argued the council should prioritize streets and mobility projects tied to core city responsibilities.
Councilman Beck said he wanted "additional dollars put into affordable housing" and asked that any increase not be limited strictly to single-family homeownership, arguing for flexibility to allow multifamily or other ownership models. Multiple council members — including Nettles, Beck, Peoples, Hall, Martinez and Craighead — supported exploring a modest increase to the housing allocation and asked staff to identify where funds might come from.
Opposing voices, including Councillor Larnsdorf, urged caution. Larnsdorf said the $5,000,000 proposed for affordable single-family housing is a "good test" and argued increasing capacity should instead go to streets and mobility or public safety because those needs are tied more directly to city operations.
Council members also asked staff to check bond capacity and whether another $5,000,000 could be added "without touching other projects" and without increasing the tax rate. Jay Chapa and staff said they would investigate whether modest additional capacity could be achieved while meeting tax-rate constraints.
The session also included questions about the city's public-art allocation. Staff and council discussed that ordinance-driven allocations currently take 1% from the streets and mobility proposition and 2% from other propositions, a combined total staff estimated at about $10,000,000; councilors asked for a memo explaining the ordinance and how changes could be made before the legal deadline.
Mayor and staff closed the discussion by summarizing follow-ups: verify bond capacity and tax-rate impact, clarify public-art legal requirements, provide a prioritized list of open-space acquisition targets mentioned as possible reallocation sources, and return with refined language on what housing funds would qualify for and who would be eligible. No formal reallocation or vote occurred at the work session.
