Opinion ID: 69265
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The City's Resolutions

Text: Artisan/American first points to the City's resolution opposing tax credits for the development, as well as the City's later opposition to Artisan/American's other proposed projects. For each project, the City's resolution stated that the proposed project in question does not meet the City's building ordinances, that one third of all the `low-income' residents in Brazoria County that utilize housing vouchers currently reside in Alvin, that in comparison with all the other cities in Brazoria County, the City currently has a higher percentage of citizens receiving housing assistance, and that a new apartment complex with similar rental assistance programs recently opened for occupancy in late 2003. Artisan/American notes that, at the time of the resolution, the City had not received plans or plats for the project and had not requested marketing studies, and the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs had not approved the project. Essentially, Artisan/American contends that the City acted hastily and without adequate information in voicing its opposition, and this speed belies the City's assertion of non-discriminatory purpose. As an initial matter, we see no reason why plans, plats, or marketing studies would be necessary to determine that the project does not meet the City's building ordinances  at least as far as the ordinance at issue here is concerned; so long as the City knew where the project would be built, it could determine that the project was within 300 feet of single family housing. Artisan/American fails to convince that rejection of a specific project based on that basic knowledge is arbitrary or unreasonable. Moreover, there is no evidence that these resolutions constituted departures from the City's normal policy and procedure; no evidence that Artisan/American's tax application was treated any differently, or addressed more quickly, than other projects submitted to the Department of Housing and Community Affairs; no evidence to suggest that a marketing study is normally prepared prior to a resolution supporting or opposing a project's tax credit application; and no evidence that the City's opposition of the tax credits affected its consideration of the project's permit. The fundamental flaw, in the evidence that Artisan/American does put forth, is that it offered it in a vacuum; [it] presented absolutely no evidence that other, `non-protected' applicants or applications were treated any differently around the time of [Artisan/American's] rejection. [10] Without more, as the district court held, the speed with which the City responded is of no moment.