The general assembly has adopted legislation for the formation of special districts to eliminate overlapping of services provided by local government and to avoid double taxation resulting from duplication of services and facilities. The city council is creating procedures to avoid having indebtedness of special districts affect the credit rating of the city and preserve the financial integrity of the city and its citizens. The city council declares its desire to prevent the shifting of development risk to nondevelopers and to attempt to minimize excessive tax burdens upon city residents in special districts, as well as not allow the costs of any special district to be shifted to citizens who are not within the geographic boundaries of a special district or receiving benefit from it. The city council has determined to establish policy guidelines relating to the creation of separate districts within the city's boundaries for the purpose of financing the construction of certain public improvements. The guidelines contained in this article are general in nature, may be considered by the council among such other information as the council deems appropriate and shall vest no right in any individual or entity relating to the creation of a Special Improvement District, General Improvement District or Metropolitan District subsequent to the effective date of the ordinance from which this article derives. The adoption of this chapter is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the city and is provided for under the home rule powers granted by the Constitution of the state.

(Code 1975, § 60A-1; Ord. No. 1677, 6-22-87; Ord. No. 2623, § 1, 7-14-00)

The types of districts covered by this article are defined as follows, and include only those districts created subsequent to the effective date of the ordinance from which this article derives:

General Improvement District (GID) means a district organized under C.R.S. § 31-25-601 et seq. as a separate political subdivision of the state.

Special Improvement District (SID) means a district specifically authorized by Chapter XII of the Charter and, pursuant to Section 12.1 of the Charter, the procedure implementing such authority has been set forth in a procedural ordinance, codified as Article II of Chapter 62 of this Code.

Thornton Development Authority means an urban renewal district created pursuant to C.R.S. § 31-25-101 et seq.; also known as TDA.

Title 32 Special District, also referred to as a "Metropolitan District" or "Metro District," means a quasi-municipal corporation and political subdivision proposed, organized, or acting pursuant to C.R.S. § 32-1-101 et seq., and in accordance with Article III of this chapter.

(Code 1975, § 60A-2; Ord. No. 1677, 6-22-87; Ord. No. 2519, § 1, 8-24-98; Ord. No. 2623, § 2, 7-14-00; Ord. No. 3003, § 1, 7-24-07)

Cross reference— Definitions generally, § 1-2.

This article sets forth:

(1)

The circumstances when the city may choose to consider using districts as a financing tool, rather than using:

a.

Pay-as-you-go cash funding through the capital projects fund;

b.

Incurrence of debt or revenue obligations by the city through the issuance of general obligation bonds, utilities revenue bonds or sales tax revenue bonds;

c.

Tax increment financing through the TDA; or

d.

Long-term lease financings, the creation of a nonprofit building authority or any other available financing mechanism.

(2)

The threshold criteria pursuant to which the city may review each proposal for the creation of a district and evaluate the benefits which will accrue to the city or the affected properties:

a.

Within the project area of the TDA as established on September 13, 1982, in the Thornton Community Improvement Plan, as amended from time to time (the project area of the TDA);

b.

Within the city's boundaries, but outside the boundaries of the project area of the TDA; or

c.

Within the city's extended planning area, as designated in the city's adopted Comprehensive Plan.

(3)

The unique characteristics of each type of district and the situations where each may offer the most appropriate and efficient financing vehicle, absent other considerations which the council may determine to take into account.

(Code 1975, § 60A-3; Ord. No. 1677, 6-22-87)

(a)

Policy goals. The city's goal is to be prepared to use the most appropriate financing alternative for the construction of public improvements designed to serve redevelopment projects, new commercial and industrial developments and residential developments within the city's boundaries or service areas. In addition, establishment of these policy guidelines will facilitate compliance with the city's Comprehensive Plan, the utilities master plan, transportation and mobility master plan, drainage master plans, the Thornton Community Improvement Plan, and the capital improvements plan, as well as the coordination of developments which are planned within the city's extended planning area and additional growth areas. Through the creation of an SID, GID or Metro District, potentially, the city could achieve two goals:

(1)

Constructing certain public improvements with noncity funds and localizing the financing burden therefor.

(2)

In some circumstances, assisting the private sector, as well, by cooperating in projects beneficial to both public and private entities.

(b)

Policy objectives. As set forth in this subsection, the city may consider the creation of an SID, GID or Metro District when, in the sole discretion of the council, the formation of a district is in the city's best interest and in the best interest of the area to be served. Circumstances which may indicate that a district may be an appropriate financing alternative within the city's boundaries or within the extended service area include:

(1)

Where the public improvements to be constructed provide a general benefit to all or a portion of city residents and have previously been established as a portion of a system-wide municipal project, as set forth in the city's Comprehensive Plan, transportation and mobility master plan, drainage master plans, utilities master plan, capital improvements plan, the Thornton Community Improvement Plan or any other public facility document that the city may adopt, but where construction financing has not been budgeted in a given current year in the city's capital projects fund. Such projects could include interchanges to interstate highways or highways operated by a public highway authority, and major open space or natural features as identified in the parks and open space master plan.

(2)

Where the public improvements will serve commercial or industrial redevelopment projects or new developments which will enlarge materially the city's tax base.

(3)

Where the public improvements will serve commercial, industrial or residential development which will enhance the entire community, with a special emphasis on the quality of the proposed development or redevelopment project.

(4)

Where the financing burden would be imposed primarily on those properties specially benefited.

(5)

With respect to public improvements which, pursuant to the city's then-current development policies and applicable ordinances, are the obligation of the adjacent, surrounding or nearby properties, where the public improvements are disproportionately large and financially burdensome in comparison to the benefit received by the affected properties.

(6)

Where the council makes a determination, in its sole discretion, that creation of a district is necessary or desirable, for reasons of economies of scale, construction timing, coordination with other public improvements or the preservation of the health, safety and general welfare of the city's citizens.

(c)

Objectives for public improvements within project area of TDA.

(1)

The city may review proposals for district creation in the circumstances set forth in subsection (b) of this section, among other circumstances, and in accordance with the review considerations established in subsection (d) of this section, among other considerations; provided, however, that, as an overriding policy consideration, the city may choose to consider most favorably districts proposed in connection with development or redevelopment projects located within the boundaries of the project area of the TDA. If the proponents for the proposed district can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the city council that the public improvements to be financed through such district will further encourage and enhance development or redevelopment within the boundaries of the project area of the TDA, the city may choose to consider more extensive assistance through the financing mechanism afforded by the proposed district or by any other means available and deemed appropriate by the council. By way of example, but not determinative as a matter of policy, the city may include but not be limited to the types of public improvements to be financed within the boundaries of the project area of the TDA as follows:

a.

Collector streets, in addition to arterial streets.

b.

Detention or retention facilities, in addition to distribution water mains and sewer collection and outfall lines.

c.

Landscape improvements within the public right-of-way and open spaces, storm sewers or traffic signalization improvements, in addition to major off-site improvements.

(2)

It will remain entirely within the council's discretion to determine the types of public improvements which are warranted for districts created within or without the boundaries of the project area of the TDA.

(d)

Review considerations. In conjunction with Article II of Chapter 62 relating to SIDs, Article III of this chapter relating to Metro Districts and any future procedural ordinance which the city council may adopt relating to GIDs, those districts which include the following provisions as part of their organizational proceedings or, with respect to SIDs, appropriate assurances contained in collateral documents may be more favorably considered:

(1)

A report from the city manager that the proponents for the proposed district have submitted all necessary information as required by the city's respective procedural document, and that the city staff has made a recommendation on the formation of the proposed district.

(2)

A provision that all improvements constructed by the district will be subject to inspection by the city in such form and fashion as necessary to ensure compliance with the city's approval of applicable plans and permits.

(3)

Exclusive of SIDs and unless otherwise provided for and specifically approved by the city or state or public highway authority, a provision that all facilities constructed by the district would be conveyed to the city or other entity, free and clear of any lien, claim, encumbrance or demand, subject to the city's normal warranty procedures.

(4)

Exclusive of SIDs, a prohibition against the provision of any ongoing services and operations or maintenance of facilities, unless the council specifically approves the district's proposal to provide continuing services.

(5)

An assurance that adequate written notice and disclosure will be provided to the initial and subsequent purchasers and users of the properties within the district regarding the existence, operations and additional taxes, charges or assessments which will be imposed in connection with the district.

(6)

To the extent possible, provisions designed to minimize the financial impact upon the purchasers and users of the properties within the district, and minimize the risk of bond defaults.

(7)

Exclusive of SIDs, a provision that the district, once created, is subject to the city's subdivision, Development Code, Building Code, and other land use requirements.

(Code 1975, § 60A-4; Ord. No. 1677, 6-22-87; Ord. No. 2623, § 3, 7-14-00; Ord. No. 3648, § 11, 4-11-23; Ord. No. 3745, § 47, 8-26-25)

The following may be considered in determining the appropriateness of the use of each type of district under this article:

(1)

SIDs may be most favorably considered in situations where the goal is initial construction of the public improvements, i.e., upon completion, the improvements will become part of the city-wide system to be operated and maintained by the city. Other factors conducive to the approval of SIDs may include:

a.

Requests for the creation of an SID from a substantial number of property owners willing to pay assessments for the benefit conferred.

b.

Properties in an undeveloped area or in a developing or redeveloping mode.

c.

Properties with fragmented ownerships along the public right-of-way.

d.

Public improvements which will provide a benefit to the property commensurate with the cost thereof.

e.

Properties which will not be subdivided into multiple parcels.

f.

Properties with a foreclosure sale value sufficient to support the assessment liens imposed.

g.

Public improvements which require cooperative financing between the city and private individuals or entities, where the city's contribution has been budgeted in the capital project funds.

h.

Public improvements located within the project area of the TDA, because SIDs are unaffected by the frozen assessed valuation level imposed by the TDA.

(2)

GIDs may be most favorably considered in situations where the city requires a financing mechanism for the continued operation and maintenance of improvements, separate and apart from the city's general fund or utilities operations funds.

a.

Other factors conducive to the approval of GIDs include:

1.

An area where the city considers it necessary to maintain complete control; the city council sits ex officio as the GID's board of directors.

2.

A situation where the GID's broad condemnation powers would be beneficial.

3.

Properties in an area which may be overlapped in the future by a larger Title 32 special district.

b.

Under limited circumstances, the council may determine to permit the creation of a GID which would use general obligation debt as a financing mechanism with a property tax levy as security therefor. Within the boundaries of the project area of the TDA, such debt financing must be specifically authorized by an intergovernmental agreement among the GID, the city and the TDA.

(3)

The city may choose to consider such Metro Districts in the following situations:

a.

Where the proponents can demonstrate that there is a necessity for the independent control exercised by the Metro District's board of directors; by way of example, but not determinative of policy, where the viability of the Metro District's financing plan is dependent upon the directors' authority and ability to impose rates, fees and charges, as necessary, to meet payments on its revenue or general obligations issued to finance the public improvements;

b.

Where the proponents can demonstrate that the district's independent authority to control the construction of improvements will inure to the benefit of the city; or

c.

An area where the creation of a larger Metro District is not anticipated to be used as a financing vehicle for major areawide public improvements.

(Code 1975, § 60A-5; Ord. No. 1677, 6-22-87; Ord. No. 2519, § 2, 8-24-98; Ord. No. 2623, § 4, 7-14-00)

Separate procedural documents have been approved and may be approved implementing the procedure deemed necessary to effect the creation of districts in accordance with the policy guidelines set forth in this article for each type of district.

(Code 1975, § 60A-6; Ord. No. 1677, 6-22-87)

The purpose of this article is to establish the procedures for the formation of a special district pursuant to C.R.S. § 32-1-101, most often referred to as a "Metropolitan District" or "Metro District."

(Code 1975, § 60B-2; Ord. No. 1678, 6-22-87; Ord. No. 3003, § 2, 7-24-07)

The city council declares that the creation of Metropolitan Districts will facilitate the provision of governmental services by providing a noncity alternative for financing certain public improvements. The city council further declares that the purposes of this article are to facilitate the initial construction and financing of such public improvements. The city council recognizes that the formation of Metropolitan Districts requires procedures for the orderly processing of proposals for the formation of these districts and policies and limitations that will allow city council the full discretion in determining the needs of the community in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens.

(Code 1975, § 60B-1; Ord. No. 1678, 6-22-87; Ord. No. 2519, § 3, 8-24-98; Ord. No. 2623, § 5, 7-14-00; Ord. No. 3003, § 3, 7-24-07)

(a)

Pursuant to the power vested in the city by its home rule Charter, no Metro District shall be created without the approval of the council, as evidenced by a council resolution, after a public hearing thereon. The purpose of this article is to prescribe the procedure governing the creation of Metro Districts within the city's boundaries.

(Code 1975, § 60B-3; Ord. No. 1678, 6-22-87; Ord. No. 2623, § 6, 7-14-00; Ord. No. 3003, § 4, 7-24-07)

(a)

This article establishes the requirements for the presentation of a proposal for the creation of a Metro District to the council and the standards of review which the council may choose to consider, among other criteria, in making a determination as to the approval, conditional approval or disapproval of the creation of a Metro District.

(Code 1975, § 60B-4; Ord. No. 1678, 6-22-87; Ord. No. 2519, § 4, 8-24-98; Ord. No. 2623, § 6, 7-14-00)

(a)

Form of application. Any request for approval of a Metro District within the city's boundaries shall be in the form of a formal application as follows:

(1)

A document designated as a "service plan" utilizing the model service plan approved by the city manager which shall contain:

a.

All of the information required by C.R.S. § 32-1-202(2), as well as the requirements set forth in this subsection which are additional to those required by C.R.S. § 32-1-202(2).

b.

A statement that the proposed Metro District shall not provide any ongoing governmental services, without the specific approval of the council, as evidenced by a council resolution, after a public hearing on the matter has been held, either at the time of adoption of the service plan or subsequent thereto.

c.

The map of the proposed Metro District's boundaries shall have attached thereto a legal description of all properties included therein.

d.

An itemization of any costs which are expected to be assumed by the city for construction of public improvements.

e.

Proof of ownership for all properties within the proposed Metro District.

f.

A copy of any and all of the proposed enabling, controlling, contractual and/or operations documents that would affect or be executed by the proposed Metro District, including the intergovernmental agreement between or among the Metro District, the city, TDA, or any other government, authority or district.

g.

Statements regarding community engagement that ensure that residents have adequate opportunity to participate in Metro District meetings and remain apprised of the Metro District's operations and functions through a public website.

h.

An assurance that the city would be provided with written notice of the date of hearing on the petition that the proponents would intend to tender to the district court.

i.

Provisions that the Metro District shall have none of the following powers granted to the Metro District by state statute employed without the prior approval of the council, as evidenced by resolution after a public hearing thereon:

1.

The inclusion of properties within or the exclusion of properties from the boundaries of the Metro District;

2.

The consolidation with any other special district pursuant to C.R.S. § 32-1-101 et seq.

3.

The use of eminent domain powers for any real property.

4.

The imposition or collection of operation and maintenance fees subsequent to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy unless a majority of the Metro District board is comprised of residents who have voted in favor of imposing and collecting such fees. For purposes of this subsection, the term "resident" shall mean any person who currently lives within the Metro District's boundaries, or owns or rents a developed residential lot that contains a dwelling unit other than a model home within the Metro District's boundaries.

j.

A statement that the district shall not be authorized to impose, receive, collect or pledge to any indebtedness of the district a public improvement fee (PIF) unless otherwise approved by the city.

k.

Provisions that the Metro District shall take all action necessary to dissolve, pursuant to C.R.S. § 32-1-701 et seq., upon an independent determination of the council that the purposes for which the Metro District was created have been accomplished, whereupon council shall adopt a resolution, after a public hearing thereon, stating that the proposed Metro District shall be dissolved; provided, however, that minimum and maximum time limits upon the council's determination may be set forth in the service plan.

l.

Statements that the proposed Metro District will be subject to all of the city's subdivision, Development Code, building code, and other land use requirements.

m.

If multiple Metro Districts are proposed to serve different areas of one development, a statement of how the multiple district structure will operate and an assurance that no single district will retain control of all financial decisions for all the districts.

1.

Under limited and justified circumstances, the city may, in its sole discretion, permit a single district within a multiple district structure to have some reasonable controls for the sole purpose of ensuring the completion of a very large and complex development. The service plan shall include statements justifying the need for such a district and what reasonable controls the district requires.

n.

Under certain circumstances for large, multiphase developments with long anticipated timeframes for build-out, the city may require, in its sole discretion, statements that specify and limit improvements financed by different areas and/or phases of the development in order to ensure an equitable distribution of public improvement costs.

o.

Provisions that the proposed Metro District will file with the city annually, within six months of the close of the fiscal year, an annual report setting forth the information outlined in C.R.S. § 32-1-207(3)(c), a certificate of compliance with the Code, an annual financial statements audited in accordance with GAAS, unless otherwise exempted from audits by C.R.S. § 29-1-604. Also, copies of any filings made pursuant to SEC rule 15 c 2-12 shall be filed with the city.

(2)

If the development served by the proposed Metro District does not have an Approved Preliminary Plan at the time of city council's consideration of the service plan, the service plan shall not include authorization for the Metro District to issue debt; impose a debt mill levy, operating mill levy, or fees; or enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the city. Once a Preliminary Plan for the development served by the Metro District is approved pursuant to Section 18-43 of the City Code, the Metro District may submit a request to the city for a service plan amendment to obtain authorizations for total debt issuance, maximum debt mill levy, maximum operating mill levy, and fees. The service plan amendment shall be submitted and considered by council in accordance with Section 66-65 of the City Code. The intergovernmental agreement shall include the information identified in Section 66-60(a)(3) of the City Code.

(3)

A written intergovernmental agreement with the city in the form of the model intergovernmental agreement approved by the city manager, to be approved subsequent to the city council's adoption of a resolution approving the service plan and the city's approval of a Preliminary Plan for the development within the proposed Metro District boundaries, which shall specify:

a.

None of the following powers granted to a Metro District by state statute shall be employed unless otherwise provided in the intergovernmental agreement:

1.

The inclusion of properties within or the exclusion of properties from the boundaries of the Metro District.

2.

The refunding of any of the Metro District's outstanding bonds which would extend the maturity of the outstanding bonds, or increase the total debt service.

3.

Any increase in the maximum debt mill levy or maximum operating mill levy above the cap.

4.

The consolidation of the Metro District with any other Metro District or Title 32 District.

5.

The acquisition, ownership, management, adjudication or development of water rights or resources.

6.

The use of eminent domain powers for any real property.

7.

Application for Greater Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund grants or other state or federal grants.

8.

Provision of services to properties outside the boundary of the city.

9.

Bond documents may not provide acceleration of debt against the issuer as a remedy.

10.

The authority to plan for, design, acquire, construct, install, relocate, redevelop, finance, operate or maintain fire protection facilities or services.

11.

The operation and maintenance of any part or all of the public improvements.

b.

In addition the intergovernmental agreement shall contain the following provisions:

1.

Requirements for dissolution of the district upon the accomplishment of the purposes and undertakings for which the Metro District was formed. If the Metro District was only created for construction of public improvements, it shall dissolve when all outstanding debt is paid. If the Metro District was created for providing services or maintenance functions, the Metro District may continue so long as those services are provided.

2.

Acknowledgement by the Metro District that the city shall not be limited in implementing council or voter approved growth limitations, even though such actions may reduce or delay development within the Metro District and the realization of Metro District revenue.

3.

All activities by the Metro District will be subject to all of the city's subdivision, Development Code, building code, and other land use requirements.

4.

No telecommunication facilities owned, operated or otherwise allowed by the Metro District shall affect the ability of the city to expand its telecommunication facilities or impair existing telecommunication facilities.

5.

If there is a reimbursement agreement approved for public improvements installed by the district, all reimbursed funds shall only be used by the district to repay debt service.

6.

All limitations contained in the service plan, including, but not limited to, those pertaining to the maximum debt mill levy, maximum debt mill levy imposition term, and maximum operating mill levy:

i.

Shall not be subject to set-aside for any reason or by any court of competent jurisdiction, absent a service plan amendment; and

ii.

Are, together with all other requirements of Colorado law, including in the "political or governmental powers" reserved to the state under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code (11 U.S.C.) Section 903, and are also included in the "regulatory or electoral approval necessary under applicable nonbankruptcy law" as required for confirmation of a Chapter 9 Bankruptcy Plan under Bankruptcy Code Section 943(b)(6). Any debt that exceeds the maximum debt mill levy and the maximum debt mill levy imposition term, shall be deemed a material modification of this service plan pursuant to C.R.S. § 32-1-207, and shall not be an authorized issuance of debt unless and until such material modification has been approved by the city as part of a service plan amendment. The city shall be entitled to all remedies available at law to enjoin such actions of the district.

7.

Notices of disclosure shall be provided as follows:

i.

The Metro District will use reasonable efforts and due diligence to cause each developer and home builder to provide a notice of disclosure to the buyer at the time of entering into the purchase contract and obtain the home buyer's signed acknowledgment of the notice of disclosure. The notice of disclosure shall describe the general purpose of the Metro District and financial impact on each residential property, and shall specifically provide the information required by C.R.S. § 38-35.7-110, as amended from time to time.

ii.

The Metro District shall record the notice of disclosure for each property within the district with Adams County at the time the plat is recorded, or record the notice of disclosure for each property prior to any building permits for the subdivision being issued if the subdivision plat has already been filed. The Metro District shall provide the city with a copy of the recorded notice of disclosure. The notice of disclosure shall include all information required by C.R.S. § 38-35.7-110, as amended from time to time.

iii.

The Metro District will provide the disclosure notice to the developer or home builders for prominent display at all sales offices, and inspect the sales offices within the district boundaries on a quarterly basis to assure the information provided is accurate and prominently displayed.

8.

The district is not authorized to plan for, design, acquire, construct, install, relocate, redevelop, finance, operate or maintain television relay and translation facilities and services.

9.

Public improvements will be designed and constructed in accordance with the standards, specifications, and approval of the city and any other governmental entities having proper jurisdiction.

10.

Prior to the issuance of any privately placed debt, the district shall obtain the certification of an external financial advisor.

11.

The district shall not exercise its city sales and use tax exemption.

(4)

Copies of the service plan and intergovernmental agreement, including supporting information as required in subsections (a)(1) through (a)(3) of this Section 66-60, together with a nonrefundable application fee, as established by resolution of the city council, shall be forwarded to the city development department at 9500 Civic Center Drive, Thornton, Colorado 80229. The applicant shall pay all reasonable fees and expenses incurred by the city if the city chooses to retain outside financial, legal, accounting, feasibility or other expertise to assist in the review of the application or service plan.

(5)

If a proposed Metro District submits application documents that deviate from the form or content of the model service plan and model intergovernmental agreement, the documents will be reviewed by the city's financial and legal consultants at the applicant's expense.

(b)

Considerations of review.

(1)

At the public hearing the city council shall disapprove the service plan unless evidence satisfactory to the city council of each of the following is presented:

a.

There is sufficient existing and projected need for organized services in the area to be serviced by the proposed Metro District.

b.

The existing service in the area to be served by the proposed Metro District is inadequate for present and projected needs.

c.

The proposed Metro District is capable of providing economical and sufficient facilities and services to the area within its proposed boundaries.

d.

The area to be included in the proposed Metro District has or will have the financial ability to discharge the proposed bond financing on a reasonable basis.

(2)

If disapproval is not required, it is entirely within the discretion of the city council to approve, conditionally approve or disapprove the creation of a Metro District within the city's boundaries. Any such decision by the council will be a legislative, not a quasi-judicial act, and no person shall have any right, by virtue of this article or otherwise, to create a Metro District within the city's boundaries. If the council chooses to consider whether or not the creation of a Metro District is in the best interest of the area proposed to be served thereby, the council may choose to apply the following criteria, in addition to such other information or other criteria as it deems appropriate and pertinent in making a decision:

a.

Whether the facility and service standards of the proposed Metro District are compatible with the facility and service standards of the city.

b.

Whether the creation of the proposed Metro District will be in the best interests of the area proposed to be served.

(3)

Exclusions. The city council may exclude territory from a proposed Metro District prior to approval of the service plan submitted by the proposed Metro District. The petitioners shall have the burden of proving that the exclusion of such property is not in the best interest of the Metro District. Any person owning property in the geographic area of the proposed Metro District who requests his or her property to be excluded from the Metro District shall submit a written request for exclusion to the city council at or prior to the hearing in order to be considered. However, the city council shall not be limited in its action with respect to exclusion of territory based only upon such request.

(Code 1975, § 60B-5; Ord. No. 1678, 6-22-87; Ord. No. 2465, § 2, 8-11-97; Ord. No. 2519, §§ 5, 6, 8-24-98; Ord. No. 2623, § 7, 7-14-00; Ord. No. 2656, § 33, 2-12-01; Ord. No. 2663, § 39, 4-23-01; Ord. No. 2863, § 1, 11-23-04; Ord. No. 2890, § 1, 6-28-05; Ord. No. 3003, § 5, 7-24-07; Ord. No. 3325, § 1, 1-27-15; Ord. No. 3603, § 1, 10-12-21; Ord. No. 3745, § 48, 8-26-25)

The city development department will comment on the creation of Metro Districts proposed in the county but within the city's growth area generally in accordance with the criteria established in this article. Unless otherwise agreed to by the city, the annexation of property within the growth area must be recorded with the county prior to the city taking action on a Metro District.

(Code 1975, § 60B-6; Ord. No. 1678, 6-22-87; Ord. No. 2863, § 2, 11-23-04; Ord. No. 3003, § 6, 7-24-07)

(a)

Except as otherwise indicated in this section, the notice for public hearings shall be pursuant to C.R.S. § 32-1-204.

(b)

The applicant of the service plan shall be responsible for mailing written notice, including all information required by C.R.S. § 32-1-204, of the public hearing on the proposed Metro District by first class mail to the following:

(1)

All property owners within the proposed Metro District as listed on the records of the county assessor.

(2)

The governing body of any existing municipality or special district which has levied an ad valorem tax within the next preceding tax year and which has boundaries within a radius of three miles of the proposed special district boundaries.

(Code 1975, § 60B-7; Ord. No. 1678, 6-22-87; Ord. No. 2519, § 7, 8-24-98; Ord. No. 2623, § 8, 7-14-00; Ord. No. 2863, § 3, 11-23-04; Ord. No. 3003, § 7, 7-24-07)

Editor's note— Ord. No. 3003, § 8, adopted July 24, 2007, repealed § 66-63, which pertained to hearing and derived from Code 1975, § 60B-8; Ord. No. 1678, adopted June 22, 1987.

Editor's note— Ord. No. 3003, § 8, adopted July 24, 2007, repealed § 66-64, which pertained to determination; continuing jurisdiction and derived from Code 1975, § 60B-9; Ord. No. 1678, adopted June 22, 1987.

(a)

Upon final approval by the district court for the organization of the Metro District, the improvements, construction schedule, financial arrangements and date of dissolution of the Metro District shall conform to the approved service plan.

(b)

Material modifications shall be as follows:

(1)

After the organization of a Metro District and pursuant to the provisions of this article, material modifications of the service plan, as originally approved, may be made by the board of directors of the Metro District only by petition to and approval by council in substantially the same manner as is provided for the approval of an original service plan in Section 66-60; but the processing fee for such modification procedure shall be as established by resolution of the council. Such approval of modifications shall be required with regard to changes of a basic or essential nature, whether or not they are deemed to be immaterial by the Metro District's board of directors, and shall include but not be limited to:

a.

Any change in or addition to the public improvements to be constructed or a significant change in the timing of their construction.

b.

The types of services, if any, provided by the Metro District.

c.

A decrease in the financial ability of the district to discharge the existing or proposed indebtedness.

d.

Any debt issued that results in the Metro District exceeding the total debt issuance limitation.

e.

Any increase to the maximum debt mill levy, the maximum debt mill levy imposition term, and/or the maximum operating mill levy that does not meet the criteria approved in the Metro District's approved service plan.

f.

Any changes to fees that do not meet the criteria approved in the Metro District's approved service plan.

g.

Changes in the boundaries of the Metro District.

h.

Any proposal to extend the dissolution date of the Metro District.

i.

Any changes required to authorize the Metro District to issue debt or impose a debt mill levy, operating mill levy, or fees subsequent to approval of a Preliminary Plan for the development served by the Metro District.

(2)

A petition for service plan amendment shall be submitted for any material modification. The petition shall include:

a.

Any changes to the service plan since it was approved by the city council including assumptions or projects furnished in conjunction with the original petition;

b.

A detailed explanation of the action taken or alternatives considered, if any, by the Metro District to avoid the action, event or condition that resulted in the material modification to the service plan.

c.

The impact of the material modification on the Metro District's ability to develop the capital facilities and infrastructure necessary to meet its capital development plan;

d.

The effect of the material modification on the Metro District's ability to retire as scheduled its outstanding financial obligations and its ability to issue and market additional indebtedness to finance additional capital expenditures; and

e.

Alternatives or options that would be available to the Metro District if the requested amendment was not approved by the city. The amendment shall be processed and reviewed in the same manner as prescribed by this chapter for initial service plan review. This section shall not impair the right of the city to bring an action in the district court to enjoin the activities of any Metro District.

(3)

A resolution of approval shall not be required for changes of a technical nature necessary only for the execution of the original service plan. The city shall determine if a change is technical in nature.

(c)

Any departure from the service plan as originally approved, except for technical changes as referred to in subsection (b)(2) of this section or, if such has been modified, from the service plan as modified, may be enjoined by the city by appropriate court action. The city council may pursue any or all of the following remedies in addition to court action:

(1)

Withhold issuance of any permit, authorization, acceptance or other administrative approval necessary for the Metro District's development of public facilities or construction;

(2)

Exercise any remedy under the terms of any intergovernmental agreement under which the Metro District is in default;

(3)

Exercise any applicable remedy pursuant to Title 32 of the state statutes.

(Code 1975, § 60B-10; Ord. No. 1678, 6-22-87; Ord. No. 2366, § 1, 1-23-95; Ord. No. 2519, §§ 8, 9, 8-24-98; Ord. No. 2623, § 9, 7-14-00; Ord. No. 2863, § 4, 11-23-04; Ord. No. 3003, § 9, 7-24-07; Ord. No. 3603, § 1, 10-12-21; Ord. No. 3745, § 49, 8-26-25)

The city council has determined to create guidelines for establishing infrastructure reimbursement fees for major storm water improvements, water transmission and distribution facilities, wastewater collection facilities, and regional thoroughfares or arterial streets constructed at the city's expense to economically and efficiently achieve the orderly development of the city.

(Ord. No. 2622, § 1, 7-24-00; Ord. No. 2786, § 1, 7-28-03)

For purposes of this article, the following definitions shall apply:

Connection means any physical connection to a city water or wastewater utility facility subject to an infrastructure reimbursement fee.

Connector means a person or entity seeking to connect to any part of the city water or wastewater utility system, which is subject to a water infrastructure reimbursement fee or wastewater infrastructure reimbursement fee, after completion of a water transmission/distribution or wastewater collection facility by the city.

Major storm water improvement means improvements to channels, culverts, pipes and detention ponds intended to convey and control the 100-year storm runoff. Recommended improvements identified in the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District Outfall System Planning Studies (Master Plans) are considered to be major storm water improvements.

Regional thoroughfares or arterial streets means a regional thoroughfare is a street that meets or exceeds arterial street standards and provides for traffic flow across jurisdictional boundaries. An arterial street is a street whose ultimate configuration is designated in the transportation and mobility master plan as an arterial or is so designated by the city manager or designee. Improvements include street pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalks, signage, traffic control devices, stormwater and other appurtenances, right-of-way costs, and acceleration and deceleration lanes.

Total capacity means the total capacity of the wastewater collection facilities or water transmission or distribution facilities constructed pursuant to this section which will be available to connectors as determined by the public works director or designee.

Wastewater collection facilities mean these facilities include interceptors, sewage lift stations, force mains, and gravity sewer collection lines and related appurtenances.

Water distribution and transmission facilities means these facilities include water transmission and distribution lines, pump stations, or other associated facilities and appurtenances.

(Ord. No. 2622, § 1, 7-24-00; Ord. No. 2656, § 33, 2-12-01; Ord. No. 2786, § 2, 7-28-03; Ord. No. 3272, § 2, 10-8-13; Ord. No. 3648, § 12, 4-11-23)

The city may create an infrastructure reimbursement fee when the city constructs wastewater collection facilities or water transmission or distribution facilities, major storm water improvements or regional thoroughfares or arterial streets in order to be reimbursed for the cost of such public improvement.

(Ord. No. 2622, § 1, 7-24-00; Ord. No. 2786, § 3, 7-28-03)

(a)

Notice. The infrastructure department shall publish a notice of a proposed infrastructure reimbursement fee facility and specific geographic area within which the fee will apply pursuant to Section 2-1. The notice shall provide a description of the improvements the city intends to install, an estimate of the infrastructure reimbursement fee based upon the cost estimates for the facility, and the date and time that city council will consider establishing the infrastructure reimbursement fee. A notice shall also be mailed to property owners of record located within the specific geographic area. The notice shall also state that a public hearing will not be held unless requested by a property owner. Any property that benefits from the public improvement that annexes to the city after the improvement is constructed, may be charged its proportionate share through an annexation agreement.

(b)

Council consideration. The city council shall consider creation of an infrastructure reimbursement fee area as a regular business item unless a property owner within the specific geographic area requests a public hearing. If the city council determines to create the fee area, it shall adopt a resolution describing the general boundaries of the area that may be provided service by the facilities and the estimated costs for the infrastructure improvement.

(c)

Costs included in the infrastructure reimbursement fee. The actual costs of materials, labor, equipment, acquisition of rights-of-way and easements, including condemnation costs, engineering services, environmental assessment, and other costs directly related to the design and construction of the improvements shall be included in the infrastructure reimbursement fee.

(1)

Water distribution/transmission facilities. The city shall include in the calculation of the infrastructure reimbursement fee for water transmission or distribution facilities the actual costs for environmental assessment, engineering services, construction management, acquisition of rights-of-way, construction, easements, and condemnation costs. Section 74-100 of the City Code shall not apply regardless of line or facility sizing. The public works director shall identify a specific geographic area within which the reimbursement fee shall apply. The water distribution/transmission infrastructure reim-bursement fee shall be converted to a single-family equivalent fee for the meter sizes identified in the City of Thornton water and wastewater fees and charges ordinance.

(2)

Wastewater collection facilities. The city shall include in the calculation of the infrastructure reimbursement fee for wastewater collection facilities the actual costs for environmental assessment, engineering services, construction management, acquisition of rights-of-way, construction, rights-of-way, easements, and condemnation costs. Section 74-100 of the City Code shall not apply regardless of line or facility sizing. The public works director shall identify a specific geographic area within which the reimbursement fee shall apply. Specific properties within the geographic area that have been developed to their ultimate land use may be excluded from the geographic area and not be subject to the infrastructure reimbursement fee at the recommendation of the deputy city manager for infrastructure. The wastewater collection infrastructure reimbursement fee shall be converted to a single-family equivalent fee for the meter sizes identified in the City of Thornton water and wastewater fees and charges ordinance.

(3)

Regional thoroughfare or arterial streets. The city shall include in its calculation of the infrastructure reimbursement fee for regional thoroughfare or arterial street the actual costs for: Environmental assessment, engineering services, traffic study, construction management, acquisition and/or condemnation of rights-of-way, construction, and storm water. A traffic impact/cost allocation study shall be completed before or after construction of the infrastructure to identify the specific geographic area within which the infrastructure reimbursement fee shall apply and recommend an allocation formula or methodology. Such methodology may consider allocating the fee based upon an area or acreage basis; trip generation; allocating one-half of the cost of constructing the street improvement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, acceleration and deceleration lanes, and storm water to the property adjacent to the improvement; or any other alternate method.

(4)

Major storm water improvements. The city shall include in the calculation of the infrastructure reimbursement fee to major storm water improvements the actual costs for environmental assessment, engineering services, hydrologic and hydraulic studies, construction management, acquisition and/or condemnation of rights-of-way and easements, and construction.

(d)

Filing the infrastructure reimbursement fee. Upon completion of the construction of the infrastructure, the infrastructure department shall determine the initial fee based on actual costs and prepare a report for city council setting forth the actual infrastructure reimbursement fee for the initial year. The infrastructure reimbursement fee for water transmission/distribution or wastewater collection shall be included in the city of Thornton Water and Wastewater Fees and Charges Ordinance. The regional thoroughfare, arterial streets, or major storm water improvements infrastructure reimbursement fee shall be included in the resolution setting forth the annual fees and charges for the city. A map of the infrastructure reimbursement fee area, a general description of the infrastructure constructed, and a copy of the annual infrastructure reimbursement fee shall be filed with the finance director and the city development department. The infrastructure reimbursement fee shall be reviewed annually and may be adjusted for inflation based on the construction cost index provided in the "Engineering News Record".

(e)

Payment of fee. The infrastructure reimbursement fee for water transmission/distribution facilities and wastewater collection shall be paid at the same time as the water and wastewater development fees required by the City of Thornton water and wastewater fees and charges ordinance is paid. The regional thoroughfare or arterial street infrastructure reimbursement fee shall be paid no later than when the first building permit is issued in accordance with a subdivision plat subject to the fee. The infrastructure reimbursement fee for major storm water improvements shall be paid no later than when the first building permit is issued in accordance with a subdivision plat subject to the fee.

(f)

No service without payment of infrastructure reimbursement fee. No property shall be permitted to connect to a wastewater interceptor/collection or water transmission or distribution facility constructed pursuant to this section or receive a certificate of occupancy until any obligation for infrastructure reimbursement fees have been paid. No building permit shall be issued until the regional thoroughfare or arterial infrastructure reimbursement fee has been paid.

(g)

No reservation of capacity. The city shall not reserve capacity in any water transmission or distribution facilities or wastewater collection facilities for any connector unless a connector has paid the applicable fee. Prepayment of infrastructure reimbursement fees is not permitted. Available capacity shall be allocated based on a "first come, first served" basis.

(Ord. No. 2622, § 1, 7-24-00; Ord. No. 2656, § 33, 2-12-01; Ord. No. 2663, § 40, 4-23-01; Ord. No. 2786, § 4, 7-28-03; Ord. No. 3272, § 3, 10-8-13; Ord. No. 3392, § 20, 8-9-16; Ord. No. 3476, §§ 20, 7-10-18)