Metro District Discussion

City Council is considering new regulations for Metro Districts in City of Lakewood.

Files

Metropolitan Districts Background Memorandum June 11 ( 0.5 MB )

Comments & Feedback

Comments
 
This case is closed, online commenting is no longer available.

I believe the idea is so that the residents can remove the metro district if they have it on a ballot.

12/10/2020 7:40 pm
JD Lobue
2 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

THERE IS NO PROVISION IN TITLE 32 FOR MULTI OR SUB DISTRICTS AND NO AUTHORITY FOR THE "MASTER/SERVANT" CONFIRGURATION

12/10/2020 7:33 pm
JOHN HENDERSON
2 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

Thank you for this forum. It is extremely helpful, and I especially appreciate counsel presenting these recommendations to the larger body. Hope you all have a happy holiday season.

12/10/2020 7:30 pm
JD Lobue
2 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

Independent audit with substantial penalties for fraud

12/10/2020 7:29 pm
Deborah Romero
3 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

I think it is important to ensure that the financial books be able to be opened up in order for the developer to justify their expenses. Without doing that, they can try to manipulate any oversite.

12/10/2020 7:25 pm
JD Lobue
3 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

"But for having the district, we wouldn't be able to make tons of money?"

12/10/2020 7:19 pm
JD Lobue
3 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

I am not comfortable with Lakewood staff being involved with oversight. I don't think the City Council has enough time to thoroughly review the 30+ districts that currently exist, much less adding more districts that would be large such as in Rooney Valley.

The citizens will not be protected, and they are your constituents - not the developers. So please do not add more special districts.

12/10/2020 7:18 pm
Deborah Romero
3 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

UNDER TABOR NO DEBUT MAY BE APPROVED WITHOUT A VOTE OF ALL THE RESIDENTS. THE DEVELOPER ELIMINATES THIS RIGHT TO VOTE IN THE FIRST BALLOT - ELIMINATING THIS RIGHT TO VOTE MUST BE PROHIBITED

NEW DEBT SHOULD BE ANY DEBT THAT IS ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT.

LOOK AT THE BALLOTS - THE DEBT AUTHORIZED BY THE DEVELOPER WHEN YOU APPROVED THE DISTRICT IN 2006 WAS $4.9 BILLION

- JOHN HENDERSON

12/10/2020 7:01 pm
JOHN HENDERSON
3 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

The initial agreements establish an up to amount of debt and may be not be considered new. Up to 4,000,000,000 is common language in the original agreements.

12/10/2020 7:00 pm
JD Lobue
2 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

Why is "new debt" even needed if the project has been built out? I thought the point of metro districts was to get the project built....

12/10/2020 7:00 pm
Deborah Romero
3 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

Yes for the appointment process to follow the election process posting. Great point. Mr. Hutchinson

12/10/2020 6:49 pm
JD Lobue
3 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

Transitioning the board from the developer is a great thing to have happen. The part that is concerning is that the developer created board sets $$ amounts binding future residents that were not represented in the agreement. Changing the agreements will create developer lawsuits costing the newly created resident board money to remove the unenforceable agreement. Isn't that concerning?

12/10/2020 6:41 pm
JD Lobue
3 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

The notice to prospective buyers MUST BE at initial point of contact in the sales process - closing is way too late. Closing is too late to back out of the deal. Buyers would lose their deposit.

I like the ratio of mils. Solterra's mils are 74% higher than the neighborhood to the east.

12/10/2020 6:35 pm
Deborah Romero
3 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

Special districts, in theory, do serve a purpose. The City was supposed to have been monitoring the ones they had authorized, yet the Council didn’t seem to know anything about it until John Henderson brought the abuses to their attention. Now metro district abuse statewide has been publicized. Over the years it has been proven to me through word and deed that Lakewood staff take the side of developers over citizens. That is why they cannot be counted on as watchdogs. (Solterra is the poster child for why special districts need firm oversight.) I would prefer there be NO MORE SPECIAL DISTRICTS if they will not be properly monitored and held accountable by staff and elected officials. It is very time and resource intensive to analyze the actions of special districts, and the City of Lakewood does not have those resources under these trying times and budget concerns.

I really don’t understand why this industry gets special treatment, when other industries have to procure their own financing for expansion. From what I’ve seen in Rooney Valley, the costs of development have been paid many times over by the residents of those special districts. That is an inefficient use of money and only serves to enrich a few. If a builder gets a loan or raises capital elsewhere, they repay the loan after the homes are sold and then the business is concluded. The residents are not endlessly taxed for the same expenses.

To the elected officials who will be voting on this, put yourselves in the shoes of the citizens and think of family members and friends buying a house. Would you want them to be paying more than necessary for years and years? The elected officials’ obligation is to the (1) existing residents first, (2) future citizens, and lastly (3) developers.

12/10/2020 11:57 am
Deborah Romero
4 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

Dear Committee Members,

Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the committee’s discussions over the past several months. The process has been thoughtful and thorough and I am confident the committee’s recommendations to Council will wisely guide the future use of metro districts within Lakewood. I trust your discussion will move toward mandating well-considered improvements in how districts are created and managed.

Metro districts have been an important vehicle to support improvements within the city for many decades and, with rare exception, have been well-managed and have served their residents well. It would be unfortunate if the use of metro districts were to be diminished to the point that developers were unable to use them as they were originally intended by state legislature. Their wise use benefits not only new communities, but, also, those areas that require redevelopment.

My company supports the committee’s goal to ensure that future metro districts serve the needs of future residents and the city at large. We support any reasonable changes that work to that end and would be pleased to assist the committee in any way we could.

Sincerely,

Rod Mickelberry
Cardel Homes

12/10/2020 11:41 am
Rod Mickelberry
4 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

METRO DISTRICTS RESULT IF LOWER PROPERTY TAX COLLECTION.

When purchasing a home in a metro district most wise buyers realize the extra cost of being in a metro district. Therefore the offers will be less resulting in the assessed value being less. This will cause future property tax collect to be reduced by being in the metro district.

12/09/2020 8:43 pm
Charles Oleson
4 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

I am a Lakewood resident and support the formation and use of metropolitan districts. They are critical to the development of many communities across Colorado and within Lakewood. Please continue to support the formation and use of metropolitan districts.

12/09/2020 5:10 pm
Michael Pietschmann
4 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

I oppose the establishment's proposals.

12/06/2020 2:32 pm
Lynne Kinney
4 / 5 Committee Members have viewed this comment

Your Question has been submitted.