A bill for an ordinance approving three metropolitan district Service Plans: Broadway Park Metropolitan District No. 2, Broadway Park Metropolitan District No. 3 and Broadway Park Metropolitan District No. 4. Approves three metropolitan district service plans: Broadway Park Metropolitan District No. 2, Broadway Park Metropolitan District No. 3, and Broadway Park Metropolitan District No. 4 located west of Broadway and Center Avenue in Council District 7. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 12-19-17.
Approval of the service plans establishes the following There is sufficient and existing projected need for the Organizing for the Organization of Service in the area. The existing service in the area is adequate for present and projected needs. The district is capable of economically providing a sufficient service to the area within the proposed boundaries. The land and proposed development to be included does and will have the financial ability to discharge the proposed indebtedness on a reasonable basis. And the facility and service standards will be compatible with the facility and service standards of the city. City staff does recommend approval of the service plan. The applicant, their representatives and city staff are here tonight to answer any questions that you might have. Thank you very much. We have the same three speakers for this one as the last one. So we'll go through again Paul Williams. Good evening. Paula Williams. I'm with the law firm of McGinty Becker. Our office represents the applicant in the formation of the three metropolitan districts. I'm here to answer any questions, if you have any otherwise. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you very much. Dan Cohen. Hello. Dan Cohen, president of the Metro Districts and representing the underlying land ownerships. Thank you. Here to answer any questions. And last up, Chairman Sekou. Chairman say coup. Black Star Action Movement. Self-defense. Representing poor working. Poor senior citizens. Okay. So let's try one more time. My question was never answered. The diversity of the Metropolitan Board. Who's on it and does it represent a diverse neighborhood from which they're operating? And under what circumstances are poor people going to be included in making sure they're in the back room, in the seat, making decisions along with this thing? We need to be in it. Demand in the spot. So there are voices are clearly heard during the process of policy and vision of what you're doing and how that's going to impact us. Being able to advocate for housing that we can afford and services that are within that area because poor people are not just in a specific area in this town. We're all over this town all over and strategically dispersed. So that is very difficult for us to become organized. And yet on the other side, the flip side, because we're everywhere. We know everything that's going on. So it's just a question that's coming together and organizing that and needing a vehicle in an operational, structural way to do that, to be of service and not adversarial. So as we go about this process. I'm looking for the diversity. I don't see it. Now. Maybe you got it and it's not here, but I don't see it. And as long as I've been down to city council, this thing, this has always been in the metropolitan districts. We're not in the policymaking positions. By design. By design. So it's very easy to look the other way when we're talking about including subcontractors and minority, who's going to be there to enforce it, who's going to be the voice. So we've got to get real authentic about this and transparent about this and just actually say what we're willing to do and start talking about it and do it or stop talking about it because you're more consistent because you're not doing it. And that's authentic and that's transparent, and that's not much to ask. At all. Because that's why we're here to service everyone, every citizen in this city. It's not an easy task to do because old habits. And cultural traits and characters are not easily transformed overnight. Especially when you're pursuing the evolutionary process. Well, we're a revolutionary organization. And yes, Paul, there's an urgency. Yeah. And not just in one level of government, but in all levels of government because we have lots of work to do and very little time to do it. And so there has to be a futuristic vision for the city council in terms of how we're going to transfer all of this work over to the incoming city council people that are coming, because this project is going to go beyond a lot of people's time here. And so as you had to reconstitute a new team to carry this forward, we have to make sure that that teamwork has the same chemistry, that the existing body who's going to be left with finishing this thing off in addition to transfer of power in a organized way that we don't have. Because all of this is getting ready to be replaced and changed fundamentally, starting with the mayor's office, in addition to the six seats that are open now. So he got to start thinking about that. Especially you, because you're going to be stuck with this thing to the end and it's going to be completed during your term. So because you're going to do it again, I know it. You got to. You can't quit, Pat. Now, not now, now, not zero. You got to do this one more time or so we can complete this thing to the end. So we have total success, see? And that'll be your stamp and your legacy, why you was here. And I can look in your face in determination and see that you ready for it. So to not labor any further with this, those are the concerns. Looking forward to working with each and every one of you in this matter and very excited about. Given a push toward this thing in a way that. Works for all of us. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers. Are there any questions from members of council? Councilman Espinosa. One quick question for you, Paula. There's the, you know, the huge art piece that is there at the Denver Design Center and it's called a district. Was there public dollars that went into the design center previously? So the Denver Design Center is. That's not part of Broadway market. Well. It was not. It is not. There's three existing metropolitan districts on the north side of the property that are the BNP metropolitan districts. Number one, two and three. Those districts. In connection with the city of Denver, put together a major regional drainage project. And so those districts did receive some moneys from the city and county of Denver in order to effectuate that drainage property. The Denver design districts are actually not part of those right now. So so they're sort of carved out of them right now. Maybe. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. There's the the Denver Design District is is just a moniker, a name. It's there's there's not technically a governing authority. It's it's a name that was created when the general development plan was brought forward. So there's there's a set of metropolitan districts on the northern end of that general development plan that have been in service for ten years now. And the new districts are being formed. They're going to cover that that are up for resolution right now, are going to cover the southern half of that general development plan. Okay. Um. All right. Thank you. Yep. Thank you. Councilman. Councilwoman Ortega. Dan, will you remind us? It's my recollection that it was in 2011 that city council had to approve an extension of the tiff to cover the cost of that storm drainage that came from West Wash Park through the Design Center property. And I think it goes under 25 and over to the river. It's my understanding that's all done. But do you remember what that amount was? The the total project cost was about $21 million. The city contributed about $16 million and the Bbmp metro districts covered the rest. Okay. And do you remember how far that extended the tiff out to. Yeah. Basically the bonds were were being close to paid off at the time. And so essentially, rather than extinguishing the tiff with the bonds being paid off, it was extended another six and a half years basically to the end of its 25 year life term. And that can't do the math in my head. Right? I believe it expired towards the end of 2017. Yeah. The end of. 2027, 2017, October 26. So the tiff has expired. All right. So that all that debt than has been paid off. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Ortega. And and Dan, if you at the microphone quickly, since our friend, Chairman, you did ask the first time and I apologize if I forgot to reiterate the question, could you just buzz through for us or you can kick to Andrew? However, I take it with these metropolitan districts, how are the boards formed? You guys are the only landowner in all of these districts, is that correct? And just buzz through the one minute version of the of the boards first. Correct. The basically the the the metro district will be taxing the underlying property that is within its boundaries and we are the only landowner within those boundaries for now. So in order to control the amount of tax that is going to be levied on that property, state statute actually requires in order to to essentially be eligible to be on a board, you have to either be a resident within the district or a landowner within the district, as well as a resident of Colorado. Right now, I'm actually the only person that is eligible as a landowner within the the district and a resident of Colorado. But eventually, there will probably be other landowners within the district or residents within the district that would have the ability to join the board as well. Great. Thank you very much. All right. Seeing no other comments, Madam Secretary, roll call. Blackie Espinosa actually did have comments. But anyway, we that was still questioning. I thought, oh, are we still in questions? I thought we'd move to comments. I'm sorry. It's getting late. I haven't even closed the thing. I'm sorry, Madam Secretary. I have to close the hearing first. So seeing no other questions. Public hearing for counsel Bill 1449 is closed. Comments by members of Council Councilman Espinosa. Did you have a comment? Yeah, I just wanted to to the chairman his comments. I didn't want it. I am not going to use this as an excuse, but I didn't want to go on and recognize that. That, you know, development in this area. We have a whole host of other ordinances and policies and programs in place to sort of try to make inroads on affordable housing and homeless needs and things like that. And and the reason why they're all sort of structurally in place and we're doing quote unquote, the best we can is as these new developments come online, they're going to pay linkage fee and they're subject to a whole bunch of other expenses that hopefully feed into those other things that the city is trying to do to sort of address other social concerns and other needs of our citizens. As we all know over the last ten years, it's clear that, you know, the things that we're doing today still are painfully inadequate. That's not lost on me. And it's also one of these things that if I were in, you know, more of a bargaining position at the mayor's end or something like that, we might be asking more of these of these developers, because what's not lost on me is I have a I have a street in my district called River Drive. There's approximately 30 residences on that on that street. It's been that street. Most of them have been there, some of them dating back into the early 18 I mean, late 1800s. The street and what's underneath it largely has not been changed. The infrastructure that serves those houses yet, they're paying right now $180,000 a year in taxes. They're not using $180,000 a year in taxes. So if we said, hey, that's $5.6 million that you're going to amass over the next 25 years, what would you like to do with that? And then we'll just self tax you guys and pay for it. I'm sure they'd be all sorts of ideas on and that's what we're doing. What we're doing metro districts right is we're, we're taking money that would otherwise go into the general fund and. Oh, no, okay, wrong kind of district. Metropolitan districts. Come to us. You have to come to the mike for an additional fee. This is on top of the tax. Yeah. So just to be clear, Andrew Johnston with the Department of Finance, when we create these special taxing districts, it's actually a tax in addition to the DPS mill levies in the city mill levies. So this would be a brand new tax in a specific general, a specific area. So that's even better. I love that. That helps me. Right, which is then the city still is getting its portion, DPS is still getting its portion, city still getting this portion to to to share the workload that stable neighborhoods like I was talking about are already contributing to on an annual basis that's not forgone. So what they're using they're doing is putting an additional burden on themselves to pay for that infrastructure. So that goes to that other point. The previous point, which is we're still doing what the best we can with what we've got. We're still collecting it in this regard, just like everybody else in my block included. And trust me, I would love to, to, to, you know, we don't get our, you know, the $100,000 would more than pay for the paving of that road every year. But we just we can't do that. We're not doing that. And that's where we're all in this in the collective good. The that's the good news. So I'm I'm glad once again to be reminded of the difference between this versus other buckets. That way I don't get to rail on developers for for for taking they're only taking what they're adding on to their on to their vertical and or actually everybody that participates. And and so this is this is back to my previous comments. This is the right mechanism to do this sort of development. I still wish there was more more sort of clearer vision about what we're doing. But with this sort of latitude, the developers and the horizontal and vertical developers will have a lot more say and we'll probably be more comprehensive and cohesive and what they do provide. So that's me rambling. They did it again. But I just wanted to, you know, you heard and this council very, very much very is is is in tune with and has a place in their hearts to try and and lift all boats. And, and we're very limited and in the portion of the budget that is still available after we pay everybody in the city. But we're trying things. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa, and thanks for catching that. I had skipped completely over the comment section. I think you also make a great point. We have an area here that has big box stores and a sea of parking and a lot of public infrastructure that's being built on a private landowner choosing to tax themselves above and beyond what feeds the general fund and schools to help build that public infrastructure so that this can redevelop into transit oriented development. So I will say again. Thank you. I'm excited to support this. I hope my colleagues will, too. And now, Madam Secretary, Roll Call. Black Eye, Espinosa Gilmore, Herndon. I Cashman can eat Lopez. I knew Ortega. I Susman. Hi, Mr. President. Hi, Madam Secretary. Please close the voting. Announce the results.