Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Industrial Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Developer seeks reinvestment zone and tax abatements for proposed 90 West Industrial project

Brookshire City Council · April 2, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Geoma Properties presented a proposed 200,000 sq. ft. industrial warehouse off US‑90 and asked the city to initiate a reinvestment zone so the city and county can consider tax abatements to attract credit tenants; developer estimated $17–20 million in added value and $96,000–$113,000 in annual tax revenue at current rates.

Jack Galva of Geoma Properties presented plans for a 200,000‑square‑foot industrial building dubbed “90 West Industrial” on the south side of US‑90 and asked council to begin the process to designate the site as a reinvestment zone so the city (and, likely, the county) can consider tax abatements to attract credit tenants. Galva said the developer’s market approach assumes tax incentives will make the speculative building more competitive for large tenants.[1]

Galva described the proposed site layout and said the project would be similar to an earlier nearby development, and he estimated the completed, leased project would add about $17 million to $20 million in taxable value to the city’s rolls and generate roughly $96,000–$113,000 in annual tax revenue based on the 2026 tax rate. He told council the county has indicated it typically follows city action on abatements and that the county’s initial approach to speculative industrial abatements has been two years for speculative improvements with the possibility of extension once a tenant is in place.[2]

Council members asked procedural questions about permitting status and county coordination; staff confirmed the property owner has submitted permits and plat materials and that additional county approvals would likely follow any city action to move forward with a reinvestment zone. No formal abatement was approved at the meeting—council heard the presentation and the matter was moved into the city’s project list for follow‑up.