City Council Study Session Agenda and Packet 2020 01 28

Home Browse Search

Kelly PC 999 18th Street, Suite 1450, Denver, CO 80202 Mayor Stolzmann and Councilmembers City of Louisville January 23, 2020 Page 10 Special district proponents sometimes propose a mill levy limit that becomes inapplicable when the district’s ratio of debt to assessed valuation drops below 50%, or a limit which applies only to the debt service mill levy. Provisions qualifying the mill levy limit should be closely evaluated in terms of the City’s policy goals, particularly since the policy behind a mill levy limit may need to be balanced against the policy of avoiding special district defaults. Taxpayer protection provisions might also include prohibitions or limitations on non-property tax fees and charges that can be imposed by the special district. Service Plan Amendments / Material Modifications. At any time that a district is taking actions, like issuing bonds, which actions are outside the limits of a service plan, a “material modification” is deemed to have occurred. In some instances, a material modification will require a service plan amendment. In others, it may be cured, or at least addressed, by the 45- day notice. Service plan amendments need to go through the same process of notice and hearing as the original service plan. It is recommended that any provisions of a service plan that are of particular concern to the City Council provide that any deviation from such provisions would be a material modification that require either consent of the City Council or an amendment of the service plan, as deemed appropriate by the City Council. Recommendations. The following are some recommendations that might be considered in a service plan review process, in order to maintain control, flexibility, and protection. As noted above, implementing these recommendations is often a matter of negotiation with district proponents. The following is intended to generally introduce these recommendations to you, as some or all of them may be matters for more specific discussion in the context of a particular proposal. • Ensure that the district is established primarily for infrastructure financing, and limit the provision of ongoing services by the district to those expressly permitted by the City either in the service plan or an intergovernmental agreement between the City and the metro district, particularly if these services could duplicate those that the City can provide. • Require the district to construct all facilities and public improvements to the standards of the City and other entities having jurisdiction, and to dedicate them, at no cost, to the City or other appropriate entities upon completion. • Include provisions in the service plan to ensure that the City can require the dissolution of the district at such time as is in the City’s best interests. The plan should include provisions requiring the district to cooperate in its own dissolution, subject to applicable law. The absence of outstanding district debt, while not an absolute requirement for dissolution, is certainly a simplifying factor. However, districts can be dissolved for all 13