Jackson leaders unanimously extend deadline for Penrose development agreement at 90 Virginian Lane
September 29, 2025 | Jackson, Teton County, Wyoming
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
Jackson town council members and Teton County commissioners on Sept. 30 voted unanimously to extend the deadline for a development agreement and ground lease option with developer Penrose for a large affordable-housing project at 90 Virginian Lane until Dec. 31, 2025.
April Norton, housing director for the Jackson Teton County Housing Authority, told the joint meeting the development agreement is “really in its final form,” and staff and the developer are close to resolving remaining items including parking, easements, unit mix, affordability and the phasing plan. Norton said staff plans to return to the bodies before the end of the year with the development and financing agreements.
The extension gives staff and Penrose more time to complete outstanding items and to present a financing agreement that details the timing and split of a previously discussed $10 million local contribution. Norton said the $10 million is a contribution to the development and is not payment for rights of first rental or purchase.
Why it matters: the project is expected to produce deed-restricted housing intended for local workers and renters. Officials and nonprofit advocates noted the size and complexity of the project — including an expected 221 deed-restricted homes in materials discussed during the meeting — and said additional time is needed to ensure legal, financial and programmatic details are settled before execution.
What officials said and asked
April Norton, housing director, outlined the timing: the county bought the land in August, issued an RFP in November and selected Penrose in June 2024; a ground lease option was signed in December 2024. Norton said staff previously extended the timeline in May to September when the bodies agreed to cost-share schematic design, and asked for another extension to year-end so the team can finalize legal and technical items.
Norton and county legal counsel noted a practical constraint on interim uses of the site: the property was acquired using tax-exempt bond financing, and renting the site for short-term use (for example as an RV park) could push revenue above a threshold that would jeopardize the tax-exempt status. Norton said, “we are not in line to run that as an RV park next year,” and added that generating more rental revenue could force the bonds to be taxed.
Councilor Beeman asked which provisions will appear in the development agreement. Norton said the draft covers obligations of the housing authority/landowner and the developer, including number of units, parking ratios and a parking-management plan, HOA management, timelines and breach provisions, income mix and affordability requirements carried from the RFP.
Financing and public subsidy
Commissioners and councilors reiterated that the financing agreement — the document that will set the timing of the $10 million contribution and any other public funding — is linked to the development agreement. Norton said staff intends to bring back a financing agreement for review and that the two agreements will be presented close in time, if not at the same meeting.
Norton clarified that the town and county’s $10 million contribution is “a contribution to the development; it is not a purchase of right to first rental or right to first purchase.” A county staff member also described the land contribution (cited in discussion as about $28–29 million) and the additional $10 million as the public financial inputs under consideration.
Several elected officials asked staff to present multiple financing/options to the bodies rather than a single recommendation. Commissioner Gardner asked whether profit-sharing provisions could be included; Shannon Coxbaker, a developer representative, said profit sharing is possible in definition and will be explored further before the financing agreement is brought back.
Affordability and unit mix
During the meeting staff confirmed that the draft under discussion includes a cap on workforce units: the current draft states a maximum of 30 workforce units. There was some confusion on the record about whether the RFP required a percentage or a unit cap; staff confirmed the draft language now reflects a cap of 30 workforce units and that other affordability components remain from the RFP.
Public comment and partners
Three members of the public spoke in favor of the extension and the project’s goal of producing affordable homes. Claire Stumpf, executive director of Shelter GH, said the project would provide “safe and stable residences for hundreds of locals,” and urged the bodies to give the project time to succeed. Blanca Moya, who identified herself as a nonprofit worker with limited-English constituents, and a neighbor, Mike Yen, also spoke in support.
Formal action and next steps
Commissioner MacKerr moved to direct and authorize the Jackson Teton County Housing Authority to extend the development agreement timeline and the ground lease option agreement to Dec. 31, 2025; Commissioner Karlman seconded. The motion carried unanimously.
Staff said they plan to return to the council and commission in November with the development agreement and a financing agreement (or related meetings close in time), and officials asked for multiple financing options and clear timing for any public subsidy decisions.
— End —
April Norton, housing director for the Jackson Teton County Housing Authority, told the joint meeting the development agreement is “really in its final form,” and staff and the developer are close to resolving remaining items including parking, easements, unit mix, affordability and the phasing plan. Norton said staff plans to return to the bodies before the end of the year with the development and financing agreements.
The extension gives staff and Penrose more time to complete outstanding items and to present a financing agreement that details the timing and split of a previously discussed $10 million local contribution. Norton said the $10 million is a contribution to the development and is not payment for rights of first rental or purchase.
Why it matters: the project is expected to produce deed-restricted housing intended for local workers and renters. Officials and nonprofit advocates noted the size and complexity of the project — including an expected 221 deed-restricted homes in materials discussed during the meeting — and said additional time is needed to ensure legal, financial and programmatic details are settled before execution.
What officials said and asked
April Norton, housing director, outlined the timing: the county bought the land in August, issued an RFP in November and selected Penrose in June 2024; a ground lease option was signed in December 2024. Norton said staff previously extended the timeline in May to September when the bodies agreed to cost-share schematic design, and asked for another extension to year-end so the team can finalize legal and technical items.
Norton and county legal counsel noted a practical constraint on interim uses of the site: the property was acquired using tax-exempt bond financing, and renting the site for short-term use (for example as an RV park) could push revenue above a threshold that would jeopardize the tax-exempt status. Norton said, “we are not in line to run that as an RV park next year,” and added that generating more rental revenue could force the bonds to be taxed.
Councilor Beeman asked which provisions will appear in the development agreement. Norton said the draft covers obligations of the housing authority/landowner and the developer, including number of units, parking ratios and a parking-management plan, HOA management, timelines and breach provisions, income mix and affordability requirements carried from the RFP.
Financing and public subsidy
Commissioners and councilors reiterated that the financing agreement — the document that will set the timing of the $10 million contribution and any other public funding — is linked to the development agreement. Norton said staff intends to bring back a financing agreement for review and that the two agreements will be presented close in time, if not at the same meeting.
Norton clarified that the town and county’s $10 million contribution is “a contribution to the development; it is not a purchase of right to first rental or right to first purchase.” A county staff member also described the land contribution (cited in discussion as about $28–29 million) and the additional $10 million as the public financial inputs under consideration.
Several elected officials asked staff to present multiple financing/options to the bodies rather than a single recommendation. Commissioner Gardner asked whether profit-sharing provisions could be included; Shannon Coxbaker, a developer representative, said profit sharing is possible in definition and will be explored further before the financing agreement is brought back.
Affordability and unit mix
During the meeting staff confirmed that the draft under discussion includes a cap on workforce units: the current draft states a maximum of 30 workforce units. There was some confusion on the record about whether the RFP required a percentage or a unit cap; staff confirmed the draft language now reflects a cap of 30 workforce units and that other affordability components remain from the RFP.
Public comment and partners
Three members of the public spoke in favor of the extension and the project’s goal of producing affordable homes. Claire Stumpf, executive director of Shelter GH, said the project would provide “safe and stable residences for hundreds of locals,” and urged the bodies to give the project time to succeed. Blanca Moya, who identified herself as a nonprofit worker with limited-English constituents, and a neighbor, Mike Yen, also spoke in support.
Formal action and next steps
Commissioner MacKerr moved to direct and authorize the Jackson Teton County Housing Authority to extend the development agreement timeline and the ground lease option agreement to Dec. 31, 2025; Commissioner Karlman seconded. The motion carried unanimously.
Staff said they plan to return to the council and commission in November with the development agreement and a financing agreement (or related meetings close in time), and officials asked for multiple financing options and clear timing for any public subsidy decisions.
— End —
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meeting