Targeted Economic Development District Workforce Housing Program Guidelines
This project has received recommendation for approval by both the Missoula Jurisdictional Advisory Committee (MJAC) and Missoula Development Authority (MDA) and will go to county commissioners sometime in March.
Missoula County Community and Economic Development (CED) is considering policy guidance on how housing can support the goals of Targeted Economic Development Districts.
Background and Context:
The purpose of Missoula County’s Targeted Economic Development Districts (TEDDs) is to use tax increment financing (TIF) to build public infrastructure that encourages economic development within the boundaries of those districts (e.g., industry, manufacturing, tourism, recreation, etc.).
In 2021, the Montana Legislature amended the definition of infrastructure in the context of TIF to recognize that, in addition to roads, sewer, and water, workforce housing is also critical infrastructure necessary to support economic development within the boundaries of TEDDs across the state (Montana Code Annotated § 7-15-4279 and MCA § 7-15-4283(4)).
The Montana Legislature did not define “workforce housing” in this context, instead delegating that responsibility to local jurisdictions. This policy under consideration will provide that definition for Missoula County.
Missoula County is facing a housing affordability crisis. Over the past 15 years, home prices and rents have increased dramatically, while household incomes have failed to keep up.
Employers across Missoula County rely on workers at every income level to operate, but rising housing costs make it increasingly difficult to recruit and retain employees who can afford to live near their jobs.
Policy Framework:
The policy guideline under consideration seeks to define what types of housing within the County’s TEDDs qualify as “workforce housing,” and how those projects can be supported with TIF.
Under this policy, there will be two categories for qualifying workforce housing projects:
Attainable Housing: This category will include housing projects that are not using a formal affordable housing program, but where other metrics (e.g., increased density, decreased square footage) provide market-based guardrails to limit home prices. Projects in this category will be eligible to access TIF funding to support public infrastructure serving the project but will not be eligible to receive TIF funding for vertical construction of the project.
Affordable Housing: This category will include housing projects that use established affordable housing programs (e.g., LIHTC, Community Land Trusts, HOME, PBRAs) or other similar enforcement mechanisms as approved by CED. Housing projects in this category must deliver below-market, affordable housing, as defined by the project’s affiliated affordable housing program. Housing projects in this category will be eligible to access deeper levels of TIF funding to support public infrastructure serving the project, as well as TIF support for vertical construction of the project.
Process:
In developing this policy, Missoula County CED engaged with a stakeholder group of nonprofit and for-profit housing developers and providers to create this policy. The primary goal of this engagement effort was to ensure this policy is usable by both nonprofit and for-profit projects, and that this policy will result in an increased supply of workforce housing in Missoula County.
The stakeholder group reviewed and provided input on multiple drafts, leading to the final draft currently under consideration.
The policy will be presented to the Missoula Jurisdictional Advisory Committee and the Missoula Development Authority for review and recommendations. The final policy will be presented to the county commissioners for public comment and a final decision at their public hearing meeting at 2 p.m. Thursday, March. 12.
Key Dates:
Missoula Jurisdictional Advisory Committee (MJAC): 6 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 27, in the Lands & Communities Conference Room, 127 E. Main St., Second Floor, or virtually via Microsoft Teams
Missoula Development Authority (MDA): 3:15 p.m. Wednesday, Jan. 28, 2026, in the Sophie Moiese Room in the Missoula County Courthouse, 200 W. Broadway, or virtually via Microsoft Teams
The Missoula County commissioners will take public comment and consider adoption of the policy at a public hearing meeting: 2 p.m. Thursday, March 12, in the Sophie Moiese Room in the Missoula County Courthouse, 200 W. Broadway, or virtually via Microsoft Teams.
Public Comment:
Submit public comment by Wednesday, March 11, using the comment tool below.
Who's Listening
-
Phone 406-258-3707 -
Phone 406-258-3444
Missoula needs up to several thousand more affordable income-restricted rental and owner-occupied housing units to meet our needs for a substantial percentage of our work force and retirees (many of whom also work part-time to make ends meet). The market will not provide it without substantial government assistance. The best way to get this housing is to build it on publicly owned land, because by backing out land costs the overall housing prices drop proportionately. Given the housing subdivisions already approved by the county and city for housing not affected by income eligibility, it looks like Missoula will have plenty of market-priced housing. I therefore urge the county to focus all its immediate further housing efforts to building on conveniently located public land, in partnership with the city to the extent it makes sense. The Villaggio project proves this housing will quickly fill when built. Thanks.
David Aronofsky
The terms "attainable" and "workforce" housing suggest to me that the housing is attainable by the workforce that would be living in them (therefore, local residents). I understand that there is no cap on pricing, but on size. As housing needs increase across the country and Missoula remains a destination to move to, it's fair to expect that people from outside of the local workforce, especially from densely populated cities, will be happy to work remotely from small living spaces in Missoula while making big city incomes. This means that developers and landlords can set unattainable prices for locals. Based on supply and demand, I don't believe that capping the size of the housing alone makes housing attainable for the local workforce. Alternatively, the unique community of Missoula relies heavily on non-profit employees, which often necessitates spreading donated money as thin as possible to accomplish tasks needed for our community wellness. Additionally, young adults and teens who join the workforce cannot compete with adults with established jobs from around the country. This means that as our young people grow up, they are increasingly likely to be displaced from Missoula. I realize affordable housing exists, and I also realize there is a long waitlist for it... too long for individuals and families trying to stay in their own community. For this reason, I propose that "attainable and/OR workforce housing" references housing that can be realistically attained by those making the Median income of residents in Missoula County.
TIF should not be used for work force housing.
1. TIF transfers costs to people who do not directly benefit from the expenditures. It amounts to welfare for TIF recipients. Can the same result be achieved through Tax benefits for developers, along with legal zoning? This seems to be the approach for the 1st category of Workforce Housing.
If so this should be considered and discussed publicly to highlight pros and cons of alternatives.
2. The second category of workforce housing amounts to little more than a rental option, with no incentive to improve much less maintain their property, They get all the costs of being a landlord without the opportunity to improve their financial situation. This they will be stuck.
3. What's the point of encouraging mixed income development other than social engineering toward some unknown goal. This may be the most unfounded, unsupportable policy element in the whole thing. If this is what you are getting from your housing specialist I suggest you reevaluate the position.
3.the requirement that state prevailing wage rates must be paid to all contractors working on the TIF funded portion of the project is pure social engineering. It is not practical. It's not as though skilled labor are not commanding reasonable compensation. Market forces will achieve better results without the distortion and increased regulatory impacts that will be imposed on developers.
TIF's should only be used for public benefit and not just workforce or any category of people living there, this seems like there are barriers to get into housing in general.
The benefit for workforce housing would result in speeding up a process that leaves out locals in lieu of housing targeted at specific groups of people above locals. Workforce housing is great tool to add housing stock, but if locals cannot get access to that stock then we run the risk of creating new housing for new jobs for folks who fit the mold. Everytime there is a new company pops up to hire locally, those mid to upper level jobs belong to people relocating and those living here are denied access because they do not fulfill their job qualifications and thus are ineligible for workforce housing. if there are means to keep these developments in the public good, then I can get behind this. Who really picks and chooses who gets to live in workforce housing? Keep TEDD's for workforce housing only and leave TIFs alone. Affordable or not you cannot have Fair Market Rate housing if the Market isn't fair.