Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners accept Enterprise Products agreement terms for FRA 15 and authorize next steps
Summary
Chambers County commissioners accepted terms for Enterprise Products’ FRA 15 fractionation facility: a $3.65 million up-front payment (including $2 million PILOT), $1 million for infrastructure and $648,000 community impact contribution; fixed payments of $242,000 are planned for years 2–10. The court voted to move the agreement forward for memorialization.
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Chambers County Commissioner’s Court voted to accept the negotiated terms of an economic development agreement with Enterprise Products for a proposed 150,000-barrel-per-day fractionation facility (FRA 15).
BJ, presenting for county staff, told the court the company agreed to make an initial payment of $3.65 million: $2 million as a payment‑in‑lieu‑of‑taxes (PILOT) for year one, $1 million toward infrastructure development and $648,000 for the community impact program contribution. BJ said subsequent years two through ten would provide fixed annual payments of $242,000.
The agreement was presented for consideration so the court could approve terms and memorialize them in a formal contract at the next meeting. Commissioners asked whether the recurring $242,000 would be placed in the county’s CIP; staff said the payment is a direct payment per county policy and that initial infrastructure dollars will be available in year one. A motion to accept the agreement terms was moved and seconded and the court carried the motion.
Why it matters: The upfront payment provides immediate funds the county intends to use for infrastructure and community impacts tied to the project. The PILOT and subsequent annual payments represent a mix of near‑term capital and long‑term revenue considerations for taxpayers.
The county will return with a finalized, memorialized agreement for execution and the court did not vote on the final contract language at this meeting.

