Johnson County commissioners agree that the Goodland Development, which will sit mostly in Grand Prairie but also partially in Johnson and Ellis counties, hold promise for huge benefits. They agree also, however, that it entails numerous challenges.
Representatives from Grand Prairie and the development company discussed the project during the workshop portion of Monday’s meeting of the Johnson County Commissioners Court. Court members made no decisions on a proposed Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone, or TIRZ, request or a proposed partnership with Grand Prairie.
“For one thing [Commissioner Larry Woolley] was out of town and unable to attend Monday’s meeting,” County Judge Chris Boedeker said. “This is too big of a decision to make without the input of the entire court.”
Court members expressed other concerns as well.
Goodland representative Daniel Twigge described the development as a city within a city and likely the biggest development prospect in the history of Johnson County.
The 5,000 acre masterplan will be near the planned connection of U.S. 360 and Farm-to-Market Road 287.
Project work on the mixed-use development, which recently began in Ellis County, will take decades to complete. The development, which involves more than $5 billion in investment, will provide housing for 40,000 residents, Twigge said.
Included also will be a town center, parks and other amenities as well as additional business, retail and government service facilities, Twigge said.
Grand Prairie Deputy City Manager Megan Mahan spoke of the project’s importance to her city.
“We know growth is coming to our area,” Mahan said. “Several years ago we began discussions on how we can just let growth happen in a way we can’t control or we can take ownership to manage and control that growth.
“This is not a typical development project. It’s something that comes around once in a generation. We want to make sure it’s a lasting project and want to do it responsibly.”
While much of the development will sit within current Grand Prairie city limits other portions, such as the city center, will be within Johnson County. The plan, Mahan said, is for Grand Prairie to eventually annex the entire development, which would make the city responsible for water, sewer, public service, and other services. The annexations would also bring a part of Grand Prairie into Johnson County.
Completion of the project requires participation from Grand Prairie and Johnson County, Twigge said, in order to finance the infrastructure necessary via a TIRZ agreement.
Under a TIRZ agreement, participating governmental entities determine the base value of affected properties as per property tax collections before development.
“As development or redevelopment occurs, the appraised value of the property in the zone should increase,” according to the Texas Comptroller’s website. “The difference between the increased appraised value of property in the zone and the base value is the captured appraised value.”
That percentage of captured increased value goes back into the reinvestment zone to fund infrastructure and other allowable needs.
Johnson County, Cleburne and other county cities have long participated in Tax Increment Financing, or TIF, programs, which are synonymous with TIRZ but have never done so in projects involving residential housing.
The proposed TIRZ agreement calls for the county to participate at a rate of 70% over 30 years.
Commissioners on Monday voiced concerns over who would handle responsibility for supplying water to the development not to mention governmental services such as police and fire protection, water, sewer, roads and so on.
“I think it needs to be clear that every bit of the Johnson County portion of this development will be within Grand Prairie’s city limits,” Commissioner Kenny Howell said.
Boedeker also expressed concerns.
“It’s unusual for developers to ask for TIRZ participation on residential development,” Boedeker said. “That’s an issue we’ve not worked through before. While there are commercial and industrial aspects to this project, the lion’s share is residential.”
Howell agreed.
“We’ve done commercial and industrial,” Howell said. “We’ve never done any kind of abatement or TIF or whatever on residential. That’s because reinvestment in infrastructure and all is more for things that are going to help the county grow, bring jobs and employ people, increase mobility and safety and things like that, not for residential.”
Howell also called the proposed 70% participation rate too high.
“I’d love to have it,” Howell said. “It seems like a great deal and a huge project. But at the same time, we have to be very protective of our resources and our taxpayer’s dollars in the county.”
Twigge said the project would come with no maintenance responsibility on the county’s part in relation to roads, utilities and other costs but would also bring the benefit of billions in new tax values and revenues.
“There’s benefit in growth, increased values and economic development,” Boedeker said. “Also governmental services closer and more readily available for residents in that part of the county. But we don’t want our existing residents to have to pay the price for new development.”
Boedeker, and others, added that under the proposed agreement, Johnson County would still collect millions in property tax revenues.
Boedeker said he remains hopeful that concerns over the development can be worked out paving the way for the project to move forward and succeed.