Ordinance 2007-1525 [DENIED BY VOTERS]

Home Browse Search

Initiative Petition No. 2007-1 Full Text of the Proposed Initiated Ordinance Ordinance No. 1525 Series 2007 An ordinance transferring authority from the unelected Louisville Revitalization Commission to the Louisville City Council and establishing procedures for the Louisville Urban Renewal Authority. THE PEOPLE MAKE THESE FINDINGS: A. The City of Louisville is a Colorado home rule city. district for this area. In 2005, the LRC found blight in this area. B. Under state law, the City may create an urban renewal authority. It may designate either the City Council or a group of unelected persons to serve as the authority. C. The City's urban renewal authority is the Louisville Revitalization Commission, also known as "LRC." It consists of seven unelected persons. D. These unelected persons have five-year terms. There are no term limits. They ar•e not subject to elections. They cannot be voi:ed out of office by the People, even for ethical misbehavior or other serious misconduct. E. The City Council and LRC have entered into a "cooperation agreement" that purports to limit the LRC's broad authority. However, as the agreement itself acknowledges, under ~;tate law the Council has only limited ability to control the LRC's powers. A majority of the LRC is free to terminate the cooperation agreement at any time. F. The LRC has broad authority to sue, borrow money, issue bonds, and invest;, receive and spend money. The LRC, with Council approval, also can condemn private property. G. The purpose of an urban renewal authority is to prevent and remove blight. It cannot receive funding unless there is blight. H. In 2003, the City completed a 3-year study of the "Hwy 42 Revitalization Area," an area bounded by the Burlington Northern railroad tracks, Hwy 42, South Boulder Road and Pine Street. The study proposed an urban renewal I. In 2006, the LRC doubled the size of the area it was studying for blight. The new 228-acre area included the King Soopers, Safeway and Christopher Plaza shopping centers, vacant land, and commercial downtown Louisville. Of the 150 properties in this new area, the LRC found that 27-or 17% of the properties~ualified for blight designation. The LRC then proposed an urban renewal district including all 150 properties and doubling the size of the district originally proposed in the 2003 study. J. In 2006, the City Council approved the LRC's proposed expanded urban renewal district and plan. K. The LRC has identified two primary sources of funding: new sales-tax and property- tax revenues generated in the urban renewal district. In June 2006, the LRC said its expanded district could generate $77 million in such new tax revenues over 25 years. L. Under the plan, the unelected LRC will guide development in the district, including in the historic downtown area. It will use taxpayer dollars to fund its activities, such as giving financial and other benefits to developers as "incentives" to build in the district. M. In December 2006, the City Council voted 5 to 2 to approve the 25-year plan. In January 2007, the same Council majority rejected a proposed resolution calling for (1) a plan establishing the priorities for the use of taxpayer dollars diverted to the LRC, (2) an analysis of the financial impact to the City of the LRC's diversion of taxpayer dollars, and (3) a declaration stating