Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-03-11 EDDA MINUTES• • • , ENGLEWOOD DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 333 WEST HAMPDEN AVENUE, SUITE 602 BOARD OF DIRECTORS MARCH 11, 1998 MINUTES MEMBERS PRESENT: Kientz, Collins, Oxman, Waggoner, Powell, Kaufman, Duernke MEMBERS ABSENT: Sanchez, Weinberger, Pfannenstiel Celva, Doyle STAFF PRESENT: GUESTS/VISITORS: Chuck Esterly, Richard Kahrn and Ladd Vostry, Public Works; Jim Winholtz, Atty; Art Scabelli, Neighborhood & Business Development; Gary Sears, City Manager; Torn Burns, Mayor I. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS AND VISITORS Chairman Kientz introduced Chuck Esterly, Richard Kahrn and Ladd Vostry, Public Works; Jim Winholtz, Attorney; Art Scabelli, Neighborhood & Business Development; Gary Sears, city Manager and Torn Burns, Mayor. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.rn. Chairman Kientz asked if there were any additions or corrections to the February Board meeting minutes. One correction was noted by Karen Doyle. A motion was made by Bob Powell, seconded by Kells Waggoner and passed unanimously approving the minutes as presented. III. TREASURER'S REPORT Gary Oxman asked if there were any additions or corrections to the January, 1998 Treasurer and Revenues and Expenditure reports. There being none, a motion was made by Bob Powell, seconded by Steve Collins and passed unanimously approving the reports as presented . 1 • • • IV. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT v. Chairman Kientz told the Board that he had spoken to Larry Nesbit, from Englewood High School who will be coordinating the clean up of Englewood with the help of the high school students and EDDA in the spring. The Board needs to pick a Saturday date, not past May 15th when the members would be available to supervise the students. There will be about 30 students, the cheerleaders and the link groups that will be available to help with the project. The areas that have been designated are the alleyways to the east and west of Broadway. As discussed earlier EDDA will be making a donation to the Englewood High School. Chuck Esterly told the Board to have EDDA coordinate with Public Works to have the street sweepers available just before or after the clean up. Art Scabelli told the Board that the trash bags could be obtained from the Glad Bag Corporation through the Clean, Green and Proud group and that he would be looking into the matter. Art added, that this clean up effort would coincide with the Clean, Green and Proud's National Clean Up but he was unsure of the date. Director Celva told the Board that the clean up date could be included in the EDDA's newsletter. Discussion ensued and the Board agreed that May 2nd would be the designated date with May 9th as an alternate date for the clean up . DIRECTOR'S REPORT Public Works -South Broadway Improvement Plan Director Celva introduced Chuck Esterly, Richard Kahm and Ladd Vostry from Public Works who would be making a presentation on the South Broadway Improvement plan. Chuck Esterly told the Board that the Federal Government allocates money to the state who then splits the money among the metropolitan planning organizations throughout the state. The City's MPO is DRCOG, the Denver Regional Council of Governments and every other year they authorize a three year plan under the auspices of !STEA, Intermodal Service Transportation Act. The initial program was for six years and was broken down within the City. DRCOG is required by law to do a three year plan and to secure the money for two of the three years. Every two years the City plans projects for three years and if your project falls within the first two years then it will be authorized and if the project is during the three years it will be rolled into the next project but at this time it is uncertain what the next authoriza'tion or chanQe will occur. Specific require1nents on how some of the money is split up is left up to the individual ~reas to decide on how to spread it out. ISTEA 2 • • • insisted that a certain amount of the money had to be spent on something other than highways with some of the money allocated to the huge projects, light rail or sidewalks, transportation and bicycle paths. In the beginning the Englewood program was very successful because the City applied for a variety of projects and they received a large sum of money for the projects that were not typically highway projects, the bicycle paths that go through Cushing Park and Bellview Park and the sidewalks on Bellview and Broadway. Since then the other jurisdictions have expanded their lists with a large number of projects. The criteria for scoring the projects is completely impartial. The City's previous projects was the Broadway interchange to widen the Broadway bridge going over Broadway and to widen 285 underneath the bridge allowing for more lanes and the widening of Broadway up to Yale. The City was notified that their scores were high and that both of their projects were eligible. Because the City was already receiving more than their fair share the state told the City they would need to choose only one of the projects. Since the interchange was more expensive and it would receive more federal contributions, the interchange project was chosen. Hampden/285 to the north is not a state highway, Broadway is a state highway to the south to Littleton and a state highway at Littleton Boulevard with the route to Martin Marietta before all of the new development that has occurred in the area. The City of Littleton approached the State Highway Department about abandoning that section of roadway and since that time Littleton Boulevard was abandoned as a state highway. The City contacted the State Highway Department to negotiate a plan for Broadway to become a state highway from Hampden/285 to Littleton Boulevard which will provide the City with some compensation that represents future maintenance on Broadway and then it will be removed from the state highway system. If the City opposes such an action the state would probably prevail with their ability to take it away without any gain for the City. There has been a significantly renewed interest for changes on Broadway more than the interchange. The pavement needs work and if not with the federal money for the designated arterial system then the work would need to be done with City money and raising the money would be an issue. The City approached the MPO, DRCOG about giving up their interchange project and swapping it with the project to widen Broadway. The widening of Broadway would not allow for any land taking but would be done entirely within the existing right-of-way. The fillers between the sidewalks and curbs are very wide and the sidewalks within many places are asphalt, gravel, concrete and a variety of different treatments, trees, etc. The curb line in the EDDA district would need to be moved back along most of the section and the benefit to Englewood and EDDA would be a new road 3 • • • service with the construction of brand new curbs and gutters and possibly for work to be done on some of the sidewalks. The construction would include landscaping at the existing right-of-ways but the biggest benefit would be the left turn lanes in the center area and in other places the median. The City could restore on-street parking at locations where parking doesn't exist and to allow the traffic lanes that bend over to make room for a left turn pocket because it takes up at least one and half blocks of on-street parking which would allow on-street parking for the entire length of Broadway. Streetscaping has already been done to the block in front of Kaiser Permanente with a pull out for their drop off and Kaiser has adequate parking which includes the back parking that they have constructed so that area would not be part of the cross section of the roadway but would still be resurfaced. Discussion ensued. Richard Kahm told the Board that the City is in the process of initiating an intergovernmental agreement with the state for the project which will then go before City Council before the project is official and then a consultant will be hired to handle the design which will be coordinated with EDDA and how the construction will impact the existing businesses. Under the current !STEA funding the City's construction money has been moved from 1999 to 2000. $2,000,000.00 will be available in 1999 with the total amount for a 3.7 million dollar project. Richard told the Board that from a design point the City is looking at a bigger picture. He added, that Art Scabelli has been working on the Broadway Corridor Plan for the last couple of years with EDDA involved to a certain degree. Art's department has looked at the Broadway Corridor all the way from the Yale to the south City limit line with some landscape architects that have been hired and the City is trying to design some themes in the EDDA district, the Motor way and the Gateway north of downtown. Art told the Board that one of their objectives in the steering committee meetings over the last couple of months has been to coordinate some of the elements that the City wants to see up and down the corridor with a unified theme, street l ighting, underground of the over head lines and replacement of the physical street lights including the gateway area and to coordinate their efforts with EDDA. Jim Winholtz. Attorney -Downtown Development Authorities Director Celva told the Board that Jim Winholtz, an attorney who has special knowledge on the downtown development authorities and in other special districts would be making a presentation about what powers that EDDA has and any ways and means of raising additional capital through the existing statutes. Celva and Jim met with Ron Straka last week and 4 • • • discussed tonight's agenda. Jim Winholtz told the Board that he spent most of his life in Boulder with many opportunities to do other things, but that he has never done any legal work for the City of Boulder . In 1965 Jim worked with the City manager in Boulder and has worked with various communities that are diverse and that all of his work is now related to local government or cities. His first project was in Arvada which ended with major financial problems for the City. Jim worked with the City of Littleton on the Riverfront project, with Echostar and they put that program together with Joey Rider who was the commercial developer, with Winter Park where he served as their downtown redevelopment attorney, he helped Broomfield put its program together, with the City of Edgewater, Longmont ODA and they have a nice senior housing project downtown with some retail, Wheatridge and trying to clean up the 38th and Wadsworth corridor, Estes Park where he has helped put their downtown redevelopment program together which has worked out very well and is currently the City Attorney for Federal Heights and for the City of Golden. Director Celva requested Jim to address some issues, the specific questions and then discussion of the petition and if EDDA wants to expand the district, how can that be accomplished. The statute is silent as to how you do that, but states that an existing downtown development authority can be expanded with the petition process, which involves the property owners and any adjacent area which means right next to. It does not mean you can skip an urban renewal authority and go to another part of the City with a gap in between. The land owners must petition EDDA to be included in an expanded area which EDDA then takes the petition to City Council. The statute is silent as to what that petition states, however it must have a full legal description of the owners property, as well as a boundary description or a map and must be very thorough. Aside from any political considerations and Doug Bruce's involvement with Amendment One of the Tabor which is very confusing, but it is very clear that a downtown development authority is subject to Tabor, subject to any change in any of its tax structure that requires going to an election which can only be held in November of each year. If the petitions are to be recognized to expand the area, if the mill levy is going to be extended 4.397, then a Tabor election can be avoided by having the people in the petition acknowledge that if, this is part of the process there would be an accessed valuation on the property 4.397 and it would be included in the petition. EDDA reviews the petition thoroughly to be sure it matches and EDDA needs to know, do people with multiply ownership of properties get to petition more than once or vote more than once, the answer is no. Swedish Hospital votes one time even if they own hundreds of acres. Can the EDDA funds be used to go out into the neighborhood, the 5 • • • southwest area, east or south to the adjacent land owner that wants to be in the district, to petition and then for EDDA and the staff to solicit the adjacent land owners, work with them, indicate what they will or will not get for their 4-1/2 mills. The entire process can be done by EDDA and it can be done as a legitiment expenditure. Once the process takes place it can be expanded by this petition process without an election, but City Council must do it by ordinance. The issue that could be disagreed with is that as the petition language is very clear that there would be an increase in taxes, but they are voluntarily requesting them. Director Celva asked, if one property has one vote the question, personal property, real property, looking at a geographical district does that become a simple majority voting for inclusion. Jim added, that the statute doesn't state that you vote for inclusion, but states that you petition, EDDA considers the petition, decides if they want the land owner in the district, how do you make the boundaries, how do you clean them up and what kind of negotiations do you have with the property owners for that purpose. Director Celva asked what about when you are talking about the adjacent owners and to create adjacency where there is a problem. Jim added, the real power that EDDA doesn't have, but that the Urban Renewal Authority has is the eminent domain, condemnation which makes it much more convenient to acquire properties, but is politically very difficult to accomplish. Does the bonding capacity of the City apply this, EDDA's ability to incur debt is dependent solely upon City Council's actions, they can do that with a process of enactment of an ordinance. The statute on DDA's was written before Tabor. Obviously, if you include that under the Tabor it will require an election in November. The process is that City Council submits it, the statute states you only do it by ordinance, under Tabor it must be submitted to the electorate and the people that vote on it would be the ones that would incur the debt under tax increment, the land owners, co-lessees or tenants in the statute and residents because the property owners own the land, the tenants own the personal property and it doesn't matter if the residents lease or not, each one is given one vote. Director Celva told the Board that he explained to Jim because the question how could EDDA work with the City in funding, financing offsite and onsite public improvements related to the Cinderella city project some of the questions were related to the tax increment, financing, permanent renewal authority and if the bonding capacity of EDDA added to the City's existing bonding capacity. Celva added, there is a limitation on the charter on the amount of bonds that can be outstanding. Jim added, that there is only about 10% of the assessed valuation. If you use tax increment bonds which are true junk bonds and the reason is that they are very limited obligation bonds and the limitation is related 6 • • • only to the advalorem property, advalorem personal or if you want to include sales tax, incremental revenues only and with the utilization of tax increment financing with the DDA there is no legal liability of the City, there is no general obligation of the City to pay those bonds or pay the indebtedness out of any other source other than those three. They are very difficult in this market to market and you will have bond council who will be very conservative in their opinions about how you go through the process and who is involved with the election and might require a City Council wide election but it is not necessary, it is only limited to the district. Celva added, DDA's also have the power to issue bonds other than tax increment bonds. Jim added, they do if there is a source of revenue but the funding has to be arranged. The debt has to be arranged with the City Council and can only be financed through the City Council ordinance. Celva added, does that expand the City's bonding capacity under their charter. Jim added, that it depends on the revenue source, if it's TIF then not, if it is GO obligations or some other revenue source such as revenue bonds then it does. Mayor Burns asked Jim if he was aware that there were urban renewal bonds in the area that are at fault. Jim added, that under those circumstances it would be extremely difficult to do any indebtedness or any tax increment because, some underwriter would want to see what arrangements were being made for the existing bonds before going on for a new issue. Mayor Burns asked, what about a special district, if you created one. Jim added, that special districts have liens on property, the special district has a very limited revenue source and that is an advalorem property tax or lien on the property that takes first priority, it's a mortgage, their usually solid and they are rated, do very well and you pay lower interest rates. That is one method of financing, it requires an election and usually some participation is appropriate, although not required by the City or governmental election, unless the petition exceeds 50% of the vote they can force an election. You can have a petition process, but you have Tabor, the election requiring it and it's clear to incur any debt you have to have an election in November. The Supreme Court has literally not followed Doug Bruce's position on Tabor in any decisions that have been handed down in five years. There is a very controversial part of the statute with the urban renewal authorities which require, that if you are going to use tax increment financing you have to prepare an impact analysis for the county, present it to them before you approve tax increment financing and with DDA's and urban renewal authorities tax increment financing is typically done through the redevelopment plan. It requires a very elaborate process of running it through the planning commission and then bringing it back to the governing body, the City Council with at least one and 7 • • • usually two public hearings, but you also have to give two other taxing entities an opportunity for input. If you are going to use residential properties within your tax increment area, then you will have to involve the school district and they get to come into the process in a advisory capacity. This is stated by law and the courts have stretched that out to say not only do they get to come in under an advisory capacity, but in the Winter Park case they get to sue you if they don't like what you are doing. In addition, urban renewal authorities now have to prepare an impact analysis for the county and Broomfield and Boulder county are fighting over that impact analysis and whether it was sufficient enough. A Boulder county judge has ruled that the impact analysis was insufficient, so there is a dilemma as to what the county needs to have and what it needs to know. DDA's do not have to go through an impact analysis with the county, although DDA's may utilize through the City Council tax increment financing, but this has not been included in the legislature requirements, it is clearly in urban renewal authorities. DDA's may enter into governmental agreements with any governmental entity and the law states very specifically that for urban renewal authorities and cities to do the things that DDA's choose to do such as planning, financing and leasing of property or perhaps ownership of some facilities, DDA's are subject to what City Council allows or tells you to do as far as implementing the plan for downtown, doing any other public type projects and any type of development projects. One recommendation, if EDDA has some program or some plan implementation or process in mind that you put it together and present it to the City and ask the City Council ahead of time for their approval, put together an !GA, intergovernmental agreement for those purposes and City Council by resolution or ordinance depending upon what action, authorize EDDA to do the various things that would make sense to maintaining and developing downtown. Both owners if joint owners each have a vote. DDA's are supposed to analysis the impact of metro growth on downtown. On the assessed valuation you may impose a valuation maximum of 5 mills. Discussion ensued. Director Celva stated that the rule of strict construction may not be applied, that allows some broad interpretation. Jim added, exactly typically when laws are looked at they are supposed to be applied in the manner that would most be in favor of the public or against the government. This statute states clearly that they are supposed to be interpreted liberally, give as much leeway to what we think the law says as we can. Director Celva asked what about other DDA's aware of Longmont, Grand Junction. Jim added, what they used for tax increment financing. The tax increment financing is whereby you freeze the existing tax base at a date certain, at a certain level so all the taxing entities, advalorem property tax 8 • • • only, as well as personal property tax, so all the taxing entities, the schools, fire districts, if any, recreation districts, the county will continue to receive that level of property tax assuming that there has not been reassessment and not a mill levy change. With the DDA public improvements you are going to improve the value of the property, the assessed valuation and therefore additional taxes will be realized, that additional tax or increment goes into a special fund to be used by the entity imposing the increment, EDDA to pay for public improvements, acquisition of parking and various properties for public purposes and improvement of downtown. This method may only be utilized for 25 years. The City can authorize utilization of sale tax increment, freeze the sales tax in the district at the level date of the freezing with the same principle applying. The tax realization, not the tax rate would stay the same and those monies would be earmarked and go into the special tax increment fund to be used to pay the debt you may incur to do the public improvements. It works well in Denver, Edgewater, Arvada and Estes Park. The indebtedness for the urban renewal is about 30 million dollars. Littleton just went through the process, they took about 50 cents on the dollar and used Echostar. VI. BOARD MEMBER CHOICE The meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ ,,J~~ conni,e Sanchez Secre:tary 9