Fort Worth Housing and Finance Corporation Meeting – June 23, 2026
Fort Worth Housing and Finance Corporation Meeting – June 23, 2026
The Fort Worth Housing and Finance Corporation (HFC) met on June 23, 2026, to approve previous meeting minutes, receive a briefing on the $10 million affordable housing bond program, and adopt a resolution to accept funding from Chapter 380 economic development agreements. The meeting generated robust discussion about program priorities, geographic equity, and housing types.
Consent Calendar
- Approval of Minutes – The minutes from the April 28 meeting were approved unanimously with no opposition.
- Written Reports – No questions were raised regarding the written reports presented by Matthew Mondero.
Discussion Items
-
Briefing on the Affordable Housing Bond Program – Anderson Stout presented the draft framework for the $10 million bond program, which voters approved in an earlier election. The proposed allocation includes:
- $4 million for home ownership opportunities (vacant lot preparation, infrastructure costs)
- $4 million for multifamily rental development (gap financing, site preparation)
- $2 million flexible set‑aside for projects as they arise
- Target areas: neighborhood improvement areas, opportunity zones, urban villages, transit‑oriented districts, and neighborhood empowerment zones
- Evaluation criteria: project readiness, financial feasibility, neighborhood compatibility, equity, and leverage of private investment
- Timeline: outreach and evaluation through mid‑2027; first funding availability in 2027; construction focused in FY28; completion and compliance by FY29
- Metrics: affordable units generated, units per dollar, land required, and new capital infrastructure value
-
Councilmember Beck (Chair) raised several concerns:
- Stated that single‑family focus contradicts best practices in city planning and Fort Worth’s own infill development code; questioned why the ownership allocation is limited to single‑family homes instead of more dense types like duplexes or townhomes.
- Noted that cheap infill property for single‑family homes is unlikely in higher‑income districts (e.g., District 9) but available in districts with greenfield land, conflicting with the mayor’s goal to preserve open space.
- Asked why the program does not simply direct funds to the existing community land trust (CLT), which preserves affordability in perpetuity, whereas Habitat for Humanity allows equity building.
- Highlighted the new federal “Building More in America” bill (recently passed in the Senate) that offers competitive grants for housing supply increases, and urged staff to align the bond program to leverage those federal dollars.
-
Staff Response (Anderson Stout and Casey):
- Public input during the bond campaign favored single‑family, but the program is flexible and can include duplexes, townhomes, and cottages; condominiums are difficult to finance in Texas.
- The $4 million for ownership was partly driven by federal funding already focused on multifamily; bond funds address the lack of affordable single‑family ownership identified in the housing strategy.
- Community land trusts and other partners will be considered; a competitive process will be used to evaluate all proposals.
- Staff acknowledged the small size ($10 million) and agreed to incorporate council feedback into detailed policy development.
-
Councilmember (District 6 Representative):
- Expressed concern that affordable housing projects tend to concentrate in certain districts (especially District 6) due to lower land costs and ease of development.
- Stated unequivocally, “I don’t want to continue to be proliferated in district six with affordable housing projects,” and urged a balanced distribution that does not rely solely on “easiest” locations.
- Staff responded that equitable distribution is desired but may not be possible across all 10 council districts given the limited $10 million; feedback will shape scoring criteria.
-
Councilmember Michael:
- Supported a thorough review of all available partners (Habitat, CLT, etc.) before finalizing the process.
- Stated that competitive processes will allow new and existing developers to bring forward innovative ideas.
-
Councilmember Nettles:
- Endorsed the idea of a workshop with outside partners (e.g., Housing Channel, nonprofits) and a small council committee to refine the program quickly, aiming for success to support future bonds.
- Emphasized that affordable housing should be citywide, not limited to certain zip codes, and noted that developers will propose projects across the city.
- Cautioned against holding funds for a specific type (e.g., single‑family vs. multifamily) if good projects emerge; staff confirmed flexibility to reallocate between categories.
Key Outcomes
- Resolution Approved – The HFC unanimously adopted a resolution to accept funding from the city’s Chapter 380 economic development agreements. This allows a 5% rebate on property tax increases from certain developments to be directed to the HFC for affordable housing. The resolution had previously been approved by the City Council in December 2025 but required formal HFC action.
- Future Agenda Item – A future meeting will include additional information on the affordable housing bond program, incorporating feedback from councilmembers and planned workshops with community partners. Staff will also analyze the new federal housing bill for synergy opportunities.
- No other business; meeting adjourned.
Meeting Transcript
Today's meeting of the Fort Worth Housing Housing and Finance Corporation. First item of business is the approval of meeting minutes from April 28th. All those in favor? Any opposed? Seeing none, motion passes. We have written reports. Matthew Mondero is here if we have any questions. Are there any questions on the written reports? Alright, seeing none. Next, we have a briefing on the affordable housing bond program. And Anderson Stout is here to give us that. Good afternoon. I want to provide an update on the affordable housing bond program. So far to date, we've developed a proposed allocation timeline. We've identified allocations for all priorities, which we'll show as we go through the presentation. We've engaged with all the municipalities seeking guidance and best practices to just try and figure out what's working or what's not for regional partners. So as we in as we build and develop our policy, we can incorporate best practices. The proposed target areas will be neighborhood improvement areas, opportunity zones, urban villages and transit oriented districts, neighborhood empowerment zones, and revitalization areas, and then this map actually just shows in the blue where all of these areas are concentrated across the city. Again, not limited to just these areas, but these are the areas we want to focus on as we target affordable housing across the city. In terms of allocations, we are considering 4 million in home ownership opportunities that will be used for which is a vacant large site preparation and pre-development cost infrastructure costs. Same distribution for multifamily rental development, which is a vacant lot side preparation and infrastructure costs. Um that will go to gap financing vacant lots of funding infrastructure that could either be for the multifamily developments or single family developments. We'll consider projects as they come in and allocate them based on those funding. For multifamily rental, non-profit and for-profit developers, we want to leverage our private and other sector investments and um to work in collaboration with affordable housing. Fort Worth Housing Finance Corporation. This will be what we will use to actually score our developments or deals that come through. We want to make sure that they are ready. So project readiness, financial feasibility that they are strong, and the developments make sense that they are considering the neighborhood neighborhood compatibility that whatever is developed aligns with whatever development style or architectural style in the communities. Equity in terms of the units that will be bro produced, and leverage the ratio of bond funds in the private sector investment. So we haven't um figured out the percentage allocation for those as we develop the policy. We'll make those determinations, but these are the high-level criteria we'll be looking at as we evaluate deals. Um this is our timeline, it's an aggressive timeline, but uh we would like to get all of the funding spend within um the next four years so we can show um we have development deals and that the program is successful um by the time the next fund um comes around so um to mid 2026 through the twenty twenty seven we wanna we'll be working in one console doing a lot of evaluation um developing um doing outreach and we wanna release our first funding availability in twenty twenty seven we want to focus on land acquisition and investments um that will include ready for construction political construction in FY28 we want to be focused on construction so we want to make sure we have projects in the works that we're working to get those funds in twenty nine we want to focus on debris and competition um developing or what that as was minimum major expenditure affordable compliance and loan repayments. These are some of the things we will be considering as metrics um to track the work um as it goes along um the amount of affordable units generated um both on the single family side and multifamily side um number of units per one dollar so leveraging all funds um it creates a land required and the value of new capital infrastructure that we were able um to put um into the system and this is a question I have thank you for putting this together I appreciate this um first I wanna say um how remarkable it is that we're all sitting here talking about the first ever housing bond that the city of Fort Worth has put forward so I want to thank the voters for um for speaking on that but I have some issues with um what's proposed here mainly when we know better we do better in every academic uh in the planning space in the in the uh in the government space that I have ever read and I've read up on some of it right I have a master's in city and regional planning so I I'm I'm not flying blind here talks about how bad policies that promote single family developments are for communities. In fact our own development says our our own um code talks about infill development and how we as a city of Fort Worth promote infill development. Where are we gonna find cheap property because this is affordable so where are we going to locate cheap infill property to build these new homes? My guess is is that we're not right I have a lot of infill property in district nine and district nine does not see a lot of new construction homes. District three does district six does district eight and seven where they have lots of green land. That does not jibe with the mayor's effort to uh to preserve open space right this is going against I feel like what our city policies are and we know better. Now I think it is important that we have an option in this bond for ownership too often when we talk about affordable housing we talk about rental properties but there's a reason why we talk about rental properties and that's because you get more bang for your buck. You can put 300 units on a piece of property that would take you ten times the amount of space to put single family homes so why are we specifically stating that this ownership opportunity has to be for single family homes when there are so many other types of more appropriate and better use of our tax dollars types of of of housing that offer the ability for people to buy in that are not single family homes. I'd like to know how we got to that decision and how we change it. Yeah, I'll jump in. If you can go back to the the slide that shows the four million for the home ownership. So you may recall when we started the public outreach for this odd proposition, it was restricted to single family. And so that's what a lot of the community heard initially, and then council asked us to broaden it so that all housing types were available. We had heard a preference for single family throughout that public input. And so we thought it was important to expand that a bit to include duplexes, townhomes, cottages, not just strictly your traditional detached single family. We have a lot of vacant lots within loop 820, where we've got a lot of neighborhoods that we could double their density just by filling in with single family or duplexes or town homes. So that's that's part of the thought is that where we've got single family zoning or B2 family zoning or other zoning where we have vacant lots that we think it's appropriate to infill on those lots. I agree with you that from the density standpoint, we want to densify our multifamily areas and mixed-use areas as much as we can.
openpublica.com