Body
Department of Community Development
Reference: Brighton Crossing Metropolitan District Nos. 5-8
To: Mayor Richard N. McLean and Members of City Council
Through: Holly Prather, AICP, Community Development Director
Marv Falconburg, AICP, Assistant City Manager of Development
Philip Rodriguez, City Manager
Prepared By: Mike Tylka, Associate City Planner
Date Prepared: September 11, 2017
PURPOSE
Pursuant to Article 1, Title 32, Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended, the City of Brighton has the authority to approve service plans for special districts (also known as metropolitan or simply metro districts) that are organized within the City’s boundaries and now has before it a proposal for a multiple district service plan covering sections of the Brighton Crossing development.
BACKGROUND
This item was first received by City staff on August 25th, and this is the first submission for a new Metro District using the recently adopted Model Service Plan. The plan submitted is in a multiple district format as the applicant desires to create four new districts that are planned to have distinct boundaries.
The formal applicant, the districts’ organizer, is Brookfield Residential LLC, and their team is additionally comprised of counsel, White Bear Ankele Tanaka & Waldron, financial advisor, D.A. Davidson and Co., and engineering firm, Redland Consulting Group Inc.
The districts have an organizational deadline set on September 20th determined by the State and are seeking approval prior to this date so that they can each hold elections this coming November.
CRITERIA BY WHICH COUNCIL MUST CONSIDER THE ITEM
Per the Special District Act, Article 1, Title 32 of the Colorado Revised Statues, service plans must include the following items:
• Description of services,
• Financial information,
• Preliminary engineering or architectural survey showing how the services, are to be provided,
• Map of boundaries,
• Estimated population at build-out,
• Estimated assessed valuation at build-out,
• General description of facilities to be constructed,
• Estimated costs of land acquisition, engineering, legal and administrative costs, and costs related to the organization and initial operation of the district,
• Description and form of any proposed Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs), and
• Other information set by State Statutes or required by the approving jurisdiction(s).
PUBLIC NOTICE AND INQUIRY
Notice of the public hearing was published in the August 30th Edition of the Brighton Standard Blade. As of the date of this report, City staff has not received any public comment on the matter.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
City staff has reviewed the service plan along with Sally Tasker of Butler Snow, LLP and Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Butler Snow offers specialization in metro district formation and Ehlers offers experience in metro district financial review.
The submitted service plan addresses all items required by State Statue to be included in service plans, and it aligns with the Model Service Plan adopted by City Council this year. There were minor language changes made to accommodate the multiple district structure, but these caused no substantive revisions. Specifically mill levy caps, audit, reporting, meeting location, and notification requirements are outlined according to the model service plan.
Though the service plan that has been submitted is generally acceptable, City staff would like more time to review the financial plan and work with the applicant regarding the Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA), included as part of the new model service plan. Staff has also not had adequate time to review and discuss with the applicant the needed public improvements, particularly those roadways along the boundaries of the proposed districts. It should be noted that the discussion ofpassword1 public improvements with the applicant may require an updated financial report; therefore, staff is recommending conditional approval of the service plan at this time.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
As stated above, City staff is requesting more time to work with the applicant to outline in greater detail the public improvements for which the district will issue debt and maintain independently from the City. The City and the districts must reach a clear agreement as construction and maintenance responsibilities have far reaching implications for operating budgets and staffing, and most importantly, the residents of Brighton.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending adoption of the resolution conditionally approving the service plan for the Brighton Crossing Metropolitan Districts Numbers 5-8. This will allow for the districts to meet their organizational deadline and give staff more time to work on the IGA regarding public improvements and district financials. Ideally staff will bring this item back to City Council before the districts’ November elections for a final non-conditioned approval.
The particular conditions, in summary, are that:
1.) A financial plan that is acceptable to City Council is received;
2.) An IGA is agreed to by City Council; and
3.) Any amendments or modifications to the service plan based on the financial plan or IGA are agreed to by City Council.
OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
• Approve the Resolution as drafted;
• Approve the Resolution with changes;
• Continue the item to a date certain; or
• Deny the Resolution as drafted.
ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution (Draft)
• Service Plan with Exhibits (Draft)
• Proposed District Map as provided by applicant