DILLON, Colo. — The Dillon Town Council revisited the topic of metropolitan districts during their August 26 meeting, following prior criticism regarding their oversight. Town attorney Kathryn Winn presented an overview of how these special districts operate and the relevant regulations governing them.
Winn emphasized the mixed landscape of metropolitan districts in Colorado, noting that while some function effectively, others have faced significant challenges. She highlighted the purpose of these districts in providing essential services such as water, sewer, fire protection, and even mosquito control. By allowing developers to fund public improvements upfront through bonds, metro districts aim to facilitate local development.
Established two years ago, the Triveni Square Metro District was designed to support developer Jake Porritt’s projects in the area. However, its controversial nature has sparked discontent among residents, leading to a recall of council members who supported certain initiatives and a rejection of one of the proposed projects.
Winn addressed the concerns expressed by John Henderson, an attorney with Coloradans for Metro District Reform. He raised issues related to the amount of debt the Triveni Square district could incur and the extent of its inclusion area—a region where properties can be added without amending the service plan. According to Winn, the Triveni Square district’s board approved a total of $120 million of debt across several categories. However, she clarified that only $120 million in bonds can actually be issued in accordance with the service plan.
Following Winn’s presentation, council member Barbara Richard inquired about tracking the district’s debt issuance. Winn assured her that the town would receive notifications whenever new debt is issued, reinforcing that the district must provide annual reports.
Winn also detailed the boundaries of the Triveni Square district and its inclusion area, which initially comprised over a quarter of an acre of land, while the inclusion area covered 18.7 acres. Properties within this inclusion area can join the district without needing permission from their owners, though those wishing to join must petition the metro district’s board for approval.
In March, the town council made adjustments to the service plan, adding and removing properties from the inclusion area, including the movie theater site that was initially slated for redevelopment. The developers pivoted their focus to the newly acquired Uptown 240 property, later naming it Waterview.
Addressing additional limitations, Winn mentioned the restrictions on mill levies, the need for town approval to use eminent domain, and how the district must refrain from pursuing grants that would compete with town applications. Council member Rachel Tuyn asked for Winn’s assessment of the service plan’s effectiveness in addressing these concerns. Winn stated that while the plan was “not badly written,” it lacked specific approval language she would have preferred, noting the town’s input in the process.
Winn advised the council to consider developing a standard service plan template for future requests, ensuring that desirable language and limitations are clearly included.
This discussion reflected the evolving landscape of development and governance in Dillon, as the town navigates the complexities of metropolitan districts to balance growth with residents’ concerns.
This article was automatically created by OpenAI and may contain inaccuracies. For corrections or removal, please contact contact@publiclawlibrary.org.