July 19, 2023 Study Session
Transcript
Describer:
Study Session Agenda
7404 Yorkshire Drive Castle Pines CO 80108
I. Call study session to order.
II. Urban Renewal Authority Discussion – Kim Setter, District Attorney
III. Adjourn.
Board President Jason Blankaert:
Good evening, Castle Pines, and welcome to the Castle Pines North Metropolitan District study session. Today is Wednesday, July 19th, 2023. It's approximately 530, and I am going to call this study session in order. So the first, and almost the only thing on our agenda tonight is, Kim is going to discuss with us the Urban Renewal Authority.
So thank you. Kim, I know, we just got your packets. So.
Legal Counsel Kim Seter, Esq.:
Great. Let me just jump into it.
Jason:
Let's do it.
Kim:
I started to draft a memo where we actually had several minerals, and I was going to pull those out, and I started reading them. I thought, no. So what I did is I went back to the packet of information that was given to us by Castle Pines, and I think it'll be much more effective to just walk through that.
And I'll describe to you the process in the whole, you know, how this thing works. And then when we get to the end, there's a draft intergovernmental agreement and we can talk about what we can and can't do with that, with that. Then at the very end of this packet is the letter from the fire district.
And the questions we had, there were questions about who would serve on the URA board, because you have the opportunity to submit one person, and that person would represent all of the districts that tax within the URA. So if anyone's interested, we should determine, who that is and we can promote them. Doesn't have to be done tonight or even Monday night.
But, attached to the very end of the packet is a little short memo, I think it says on it best practices or something like that, that describes what that position would involve and what you should know if you want to take that that position on the URA board. And no guarantee you would get it because there's only one.
District Manager Nathan Travis:
I'm going to step away really quick and scan this into a PDF so I can send, director Krell an email with it really fast. I will be right back, but go ahead and continue.
Kim:
Thank you for doing that and I apologize. I we should have emailed it out, but that did not happen.
Board Member Director Jana Krell:
No worries.
Kim:
All right. So on top you have the letter that you received from the city.
So to talk generally about the URA these are economic development measures. And the theory behind it is that you have certain properties that can't seem to develop. So the easiest way to think of them is something like a, what we call a Brownes field property. It's been polluted. Maybe it's has gas bills and spills from a dry cleaner.
No developer wants to come in and develop that property because it's very expensive. You have to remove all the dirt and you got to bring in new dirt. And, it just goes on and on. So you have these properties, and the way a URA works is it allows a city or a county to form an authority who then has to declare that property blighted.
So that's an it's a an unfortunate term because it brings to mind cockroaches and all kinds of things. But over the years, blight has come to mean almost anything. And you'll see in here what it means, it's actually pretty straightforward, has nothing to do with with death and destruction and health. But it's become very broad and open.
Then what happens is the URA takes advantage of the other taxing entities in that area to bring in what's called the tax increment, which is theoretically the amount of money that you would get if the URA saved the property, got a developer to come in and start developing. Obviously your tax base would go up. So in theory they get to use that tax differential in order to encourage the development or fix the blight to allow things to go ahead and, develop in the future.
Jason:
Who collects the tiff?
Kim:
The URA.
Jason:
I mean, all the special testing taxing districts inside the URA. Yes. All collect a portion of the tiff.
Kim:
Correct. So in this case, the URA is smaller than the disc than our district. So the tax increment within the URA that you would have otherwise gotten would go to the URA. So you can imagine the assessors hate this because they have to figure that all out, but it's part of their job.
And there's been quite a bit of litigation, especially in Adams County, over how to calculate that. So we kind of keep an eye on that, especially for library districts, and make sure it isn't being done some odd way because the statutes don't really describe how to do it. So we just look for some logic. So those funds are then used to replace things, to build new things, or to encourage developers to do the same.
And you'll see how that works as we walk through that. So if you look at, I hopefully you can see the highlighting that I put on this page right in the middle of the first page, where it says section 3125, 107 describes a portion of the statute in which they are required to meet with you and tell you what they are thinking about doing, and then it requires them to talk to the to you as a taxing entity and negotiate with you about the tax increment.
Prior to 2016, they just got the entire increment. There's been so many URAs that in that since 2016, the law changed and they have to negotiate with you. So that's the stage we're at now is for us to determine, are we willing to give up the entire increment or do something else or put conditions on it?
Board Member Director Leah Enquist:
I have a question. Who would negotiate on behalf of the metro district?
Kim:
Most probably me. Okay. you can appoint whoever you want to do that, but that would probably be me. And there really isn't a lot of negotiating to do. Just like the other intergovernmental agreements that we've done, it would be the same process. I'll talk to them, bring it back to you with red lines, back to them, back and forth until we get it done.
And we've got probably until mid September or so to do it. So there's just lots of time. And again there's one issue, the increment. So turning to page, I put page numbers down the right hand corner. And let's jump over to page six. I told you a few minutes ago about the blight findings. So the the URA board in the city have made findings of blight with regard to this urban renewal plan area.
The urban renewal plan area is shown on page eight. So if you flip over the next page, it's on the back there. And it is of course, the, the, the, shopping area over there where the Safeway is. that that does seem to be in need of some propping up. So that's the area we're talking about. So they have found blight there.
And we'll see a little bit deeper in here what they found to be blight. And if you turn to page seven at the top, the urban renewal area boundaries are what is shown on that map. So what we are really talking about is our infrastructure and our revenue that comes from that area. Only. Then section 1.4 on that same page says properties in the area are zoned business district.
The reason I highlighted that is because we're talking about that tax increment, which if we were talking about a residential area, would be very small because we assessed when you when you decide how much you're going to assess in taxes, the accountants take numbers that come from the assessor for valuation of property. And you see this at your house, you get every year, you get a notice of valuation and you can protest that and say, my house isn't worth anywhere near that.
Or you can leave it as it is. The assessor then takes that number and multiplies it by about less than 7% now. So you actually pay taxes on about 6.5% of the value of your house? Not 100%. But this is a commercial area. So the value of these properties is reduced to 29%. So it's a much larger tax base.
I don't that later on you'll see in here that there is a 300 unit potential residential component. So that would affect the amount you would be giving up. And who knows if any of that will happen. This is all kind of aspirational. But we'll talk about that in just a minute. But the zoning there is commercial.
So it's at 29%, tax matter. If you turn to page nine future land use designations. Again, I highlighted that because if you look at the second paragraph, it says objectives connect town centers as vibrant community gathering spaces that support a range of distinct businesses, restaurants, events space, entertainment venues, mixed use developments, civic amenities, enhanced walkability, quality of design, and supportive mix of housing.
So it's mostly commercial. The reason it's important. Another reason it's important that there is some residential. There is if the property is was redeveloped entirely as residential, you would have a lot more sewer service to provide. Not as much of its commercial, maybe even less than what's there now. We don't know. But it's part of what you have to think about in giving up this increment, because you're going to have costs associated with it.
Turning to page ten, just above the definitions, it says during the months of April through early July, representatives of the city and authority and the taxing entities met and negotiated agreements governing the sharing of incremental property tax revenue in compliance with the act. So that's where we are right now. We're getting ready to negotiate that tax increment. Moving down,
there is a definition toward the bottom of the page base amount to what we're talking about in the base amount is the amount of taxes that you would continue to get from the plan area. And from that you can determine the increment that URA would get. So the base amount, I'm not going to read that to you because it'll blow your mind.
But basically what it means is the amount you get now from your tax levy you will get for the next 25 years, regardless of what happens. So it'll fluctuate with the value of the current property if it goes down. But if it goes up, the URA will get that that marginal increase. That's all that definition means. You can read it, but you won't see where it says that.
But that is what it says.
Jason:
So even if our costs go up, correct, we're not going it would we have to go back to the voters then and ask for, for extra mills to cover this, or how would...
Kim:
You could, but you'd be giving that money to the URA. So under this system, you're locking in your revenues from that property for 25 years.
So but the theory, remember, is the properties blighted. It's not going to get fixed in theory. So something has to happen in order to increase the values. So you're saying, well, you know, we can we can live with that because in 25 years our taxes from that property are going to go up. And you'll see that in some numbers here pretty soon.
Does that make sense?
Travis:
for so for us, us specifically on that. Do we have the ability to make up that difference. So because we're going to hold the seven mill in theory with all the parks and open space IGA, we're holding the seven mills, but doing a voluntary reduction to roughly three and a half. If we did have some sort of revenue shortfall that we needed to make up for with additional property taxes, could we just reduce our mill, voluntarily reduce it to four instead of three and a half?
Kim:
Yeah. Okay. So you can you can move your mill levy around. But your your tax base is not going to change. Just a. Yeah. So if you want to increase your taxes to make X dollars, you're going to have to increase them a lot more than you would have prior to the URA to get to that number.
Page 13 the plan intentions item three. So it says properties in public spaces within the area will be eligible for one or more urban renewal activities and undertaking implemented by the authority. This includes facilitating the completion of improvements for which public money may be expended. The intentions being to to support the plan. Then you have this purpose section as a subsection of planning intentions.
If you look at the paragraph on the bottom of the page, the purpose is to remove the blighting conditions adversely impacting the properties and businesses in the area described in the survey. It is the Authority's intention to finance, install, construct, reconstruct and collaborate with others, meaning developers probably to complete capital improvements to infrastructure and utilities in an effort to further economic growth locally and regionally.
So that's basically what we've talked about in a nutshell. Each of those, the authority has the ability to to go in there and rebuild roads, even rebuild the buildings and then turn around and sell them. But typically what they do is support developers. If you think about how their revenues are going to come in, they'll come from all the different taxing entities just like us.
But your taxes are not growing very quickly because nothing's happening over there. So they don't have a lot of money at the beginning. But one thing they can do is turn around and issue bonds based upon the fact that they'll have revenue from you and the fire district and everybody else over the next 25 years. You don't become responsible for those bonds.
If they fail to pay them off at the end, they're smart enough that there will be a termination without any more payment. So it's at the beginning. They have limited ability to do much other than to say to a developer, will, we'll do something for you down the road. If you do this for us, we'll do this for you.
The URAs have worked really well in a lot of places, and I bet probably 40% of them just fade away. And nothing ever happens. If you've been out to right where I-70 turns near Golden and one road goes to Golden and up to Blackhawk, there's that turn and there's massive development there. And what used to be the property, that's all URA.
And it just hit great developer, great piece of property. I shouldn't say it hit. It's been 24 years, but it's hit now. But there is that's a URA and they're they're kind of all over the place. Turning to page 14 under approach again talks about the different ways that the that the URA can promote this growth in the area and the elimination of blight.
Then under implementation 3.3, the authority board will be the plans principal administrator. In this capacity, they will identify capital investments, roadways, open spaces, greenways in the plan area necessary to support investment in properties and infrastructure and prioritize the same to ensure they provide a public benefit to the community. So from that statement that statement is talking about them going ahead and doing some improvements themselves, and then using that to lure someone else to make a private investment in the property.
When we get to the IGA, we'll talk about some conditions that we can consider putting into the IGA, like you will replace something if we have something that needs to be replaced or, if you, take out the massive parking lot and build roads, you will put in water and sewer lines in these roads, and those are all things we can negotiate with them.
And the lower part of page 14, there's the discussion of blight conditions. If you look at the bottom of page 15, if you're interested in this, items B through looks like so K-5 are the conditions that they found over there. Again, it doesn't fit with the word blight exactly. But the bottom line is they are things that a company looked at and said, you know, these are all problems that are preventing this property from developing.
Right now, just driving through there. You know, part of it is the fact that so many things are empty. No one's interested in coming in because everything's empty. And then you have the I think it was a Safeway store. So you have a big box, which they're having trouble now because of the internet and all other things.
So nobody really wants a big box. So you're very limited in who would buy that property and use it, you know, to something like, turn it into a mall or something. But it's not nice for that either. So it's kind of it's, stymied at the moment. And if you turn to page 17. Authorized authority, undertakings and activities.
So 6.1, prepare and modify plans for the area that would be like, taking over the the city planning process and can even reach down into planning individual lots, individual construction, parks, roads, sidewalks, all kinds of things in order to kick start something, to make something happen. 6.2 complete public improvements and facilities. Again, we have a lot of public improvements and that would be part of our our bailiwick.
The URA doesn't have the authority to go in and just put things in and then turn them over to the water and sand district. They will have to go through the same process as any developer in if they choose to do this themselves. If they choose to support a developer in getting it done, the developer will have to come to the district and get those plans approved.
And, and, you know, they will make sure that they're supervised and there's a bond and we get a warranty and everything else before they come back to us.
Tera:
So in the instance that it's a developer for what we what we do, the developer pays its way. So if the URA is doing those improvements, does the URA then also pay its way for our infrastructure?
Kim:
Yeah, that's why I mentioned putting that condition into the IGA. It's not totally clear that they have to in my experience, they do. They come in because they want to get rid of this stuff at the end of the process and give it to us so they'll follow our process. But there is common law that says, like if, if we if you as a board decide to build something in the city, you don't have to go through the same process that ordinary developers do that I've tried to litigate that, and I always lose, but the law is very clear that that's the case.
But the courts find a way around it, so we don't want to risk that. And I think part of the IGA will talk about putting something in there saying, you URA will follow the same process as everybody else. If you're putting in water and sanitation facilities.
So that's complete public improvements and facilities at the bottom of page 17. Then if you flip to page 18, there again is a listing. Let's see examples of improvements that they can put in those are the kinds of things that we discussed I mentioned a little earlier. They can do almost anything parks, roads, sidewalks, even buildings, of course, water and sanitation facilities are necessary everywhere.
So whatever happens, there's somebody is going to be doing something with with water and sewer. So you will be involved in that. Next page 6.3 acquire and dispose of property. I just mentioned this because they do have the power to condemn property. They cannot condemn our property. A water and sanitation district is called, has what's it called? What’s it called, can't remember the phrase now, it's a great phrase.
It's like superior, eminent domain. The reason is the health aspect. So the city can't condemn the district's property. Nobody can condemn the district property. So where you have water and sewer lines or treatment plants, nobody can touch it, even the federal government. So yeah, you're you're really powerful in that respect. And you can condemn anybody's property. So 6.4 enter into agreements.
This is the section is describing how the URA can enter into agreements with other governments, including you. The IGA being that we're going to talk about being one of those, enter into agreements with developers, really with anybody to again try to kickstart the activity over there. And if they can't get it kickstarted, they can develop it or it can just development and then try to sell it or, you know, whatever has to be done to to keep it alive and functioning.
I've never thought about this before, but if, If the URA developed it, it's probably tax exempt. But most of your revenue would come from user fees anyway. And again, I don't think I've seen, I've seen a URA do development, but then it's turned over to someone else. So I don't recall ever seeing a tax exempt property in a URA that stayed there for long.
Tera:
So regarding user fees, can we set different user fees for different areas? Like if we needed to recover residential fees within this area, can we charge them differently than we charge everyone else? Do we have any control over that?
Kim:
Very good question. User fees have to be tied to the cost of providing the service. So, that's why you have the rate study done so that you have a that link is established.
If for some reason there is a greater cost to providing the service, in that area, you could do that. It's hard to imagine that the cost would be that you could justify the cost as being greater unless, you know, there's a this is not going to happen. But if if the whole area was in a pit and you needed lift stations and all kinds of things to make it function, you could do them.
But it's hard to see where that would be the case over there.
Nathan:
Yeah. From a especially if that with that line requiring them to follow our normal processes. So all of that is directly tied to SFEs, which is a single family equivalent. So if they do any like use changes or like take the Safeway lot that can convert it to all residential, their tap fees for water and wastewater, they would still have to pay.
And then that all of that is already directly tied to like the size of the development. So the bigger taps get substantially larger fees when you move past the residential side. The other thing that we also look at, anytime we do any kind of development side change is like just system capacity. And so there's definitely areas over there.
The that whole Safeway lot, basically if they wanted to do anything there would require them looping a water line across across, Castle Pines Parkway. There's a lift station over there. Depending on the area then what they do, they may need to get paid to have a the lift station upsized. And so all of that gets captured in like our normal process anyway, just on the front end with the developer to make sure we don't put ourselves in a situation where we have a bunch of new development comes in.
And now our lift station is undersized. And so now we have to build a new lift station. That's all. Those are all things. It would be taken care of up front. They'd have to do those upgrades anyway.
Tera:
Right! Which is in the normal situation and the developer pays for all that, which is why my earlier question is, would then the URA pay for all of that?
Because it so that there's no harm to us. I mean normally the developer we tell them what they need, they need another lift station. They need more taps. They need upsize of their pipe. We tell them and and it's that's how they get it done. So yeah.
Kim:
Yeah, yeah. So that will be if a developer does it it absolutely happens.
If the URA does it will I think it absolutely happens. But we will have a provision or I will suggest you have a provision in the, in the, in the intergovernmental agreement requiring that processing. So page 20 item 6.7 again talks about their ability to issue debt, to issue bonds to be paid back by your tax increment.
But again, you don't have any connection to those bonds. They're their bonds. They're counting on the revenues, the increment from your taxes to pay them back where I should say, the bond holders are counting on the revenue. But it's no, it's not a concern of yours, except to know that that could speed up, the development. It could happen more quickly than they can accumulate funds.
Board Member Director James Mulvey:
And those bonds aren't guaranteed by, you know, any taxpayer dollars or anything. It's just, OK.
Kim:
No, they would be a bond purchaser, would be relying on these tax increments. And in doing so, they're also relying on the same growth that the URA is trying to promote. So more likely than not, the bonds would be the URA it can only exist for 25 years.
The bonds may be 15 years and then subject to being re you know, refunded with another bond issue. The idea behind that would be. But at the end of this 15 years you haven't paid back much. We're going to add that all on top. And we're going to increase the interest rate because you're a huge risk. Even though that risk is being eliminated gradually over time.
So it's it's kind of a it's a risk analysis for the finance people \
James:
Okay. But if they default and don't pay that
Kim:
Mo effect on us and no effect on the property owners. Yeah. So, anytime a government entity issues bonds, they can be secured by that by taxes and fees. But there is no effect on the property owners, the fee payers and the taxpayers to there's no lean on your tax dollars.
There's no lean on your house. It's solely the the good faith of the government to take what it gets from you and pay it on the bonds.
Section 6.8 at the bottom of page 20, create tax increment areas. So within the defined area that was shown in that map, they could create different tax increment areas from which to, to to take that increment to develop any other property within that that URA they haven't done that here. It's all everything's coming from the same area and will go back into the same area.
Tera:
So just to clarify, my understanding within the map that I saw are the kind of new to be developed commercial area. There's the the Safeway, which is clearly aged and, you know, but if they wanted to take the tax increment from, say, the the corner of Lagae and, Castle Pines Parkway, where the where that commercial is yet to be developed new develop, they could take money from there to pay for the older area.
Is that what you're saying?
Kim:
Is that within that the,
Tera:
It appears to be.
Kim:
The boundary. Then. Then yes.
Tera:
I know its kind of small but.
Jason:
It is. It is included. You're talking about this area. So yes it is.
Tera:
Yeah. So they just want to make sure that if the, if that. Is that what you're saying?
Kim:
Yeah. They could actually would that, that red border is the area within which they're going to take the tax increment.
And that will all go into one fund. And it may be that somebody says, you know what, if we just have a 7-Eleven in that corner, everything would boom. And they promote that with all the money. Gotcha. Unlikely that could happen.
Tera:
Right? I wanted to clarify.
Kim:
It may even be that all of that money goes to do nothing but tear down all the buildings and pull up all the pavement, because for a developer, that's a lot of money getting rid of all that stuff in order to create something new.
But that's what the URA board does, is to try to figure out, you know, what needs to be done before kick start everything.
James:
Is that it? Is that a an example of something you've seen?
Kim:
The, demolition? Yeah. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Fact that's very common. you I'm sure you all remember the gates rubber plant. I-25 and Broadway.
Big rusty everything. That's what happened there. The URA came in for the sole purpose of tearing everything down. And they tore it down and developer snapped it up, and now it's like 12 story apartment buildings all the way down, right up to the sidewalk. So that's that's actually very common. And when you hear the the phrase Brownsfield properties, those are properties that have been polluted.
So and there's a lot of them, you know, within a city. And the purpose of the URA is just to clean up that pollution, which could mean replacing all the soil that could, you know, lots of different ways to do it. But, somebody has to do it before anybody else is willing to take the risk of not being able to make a profit on it.
So that makes sense. Yep. Thank you.
Page 21 sharing the tax increment. And that's the process we're going through now. So the authority may enter into accords with public bodies within the urban renewal area for the purpose of authorizing and sharing the tax increment. That's what the IGA is about. At the very bottom of page 21, more discussion of the incremental revenues. So again, the incremental revenues are the revenues that in theory would be created by the you are doing its thing.
So you're getting revenue now from this day forward after we do the IGA, the assumption is that any increase in value other than inflation is due to the URA. And they get that share for 25 years. If we leave it at 25 years. Another point that can be negotiated. Page 22. Right in the middle, I highlighted, unless and until the total valuation for assessment of taxable property in the tax increment area exceeds the base valuation, all taxes levied upon taxable property in the area shall be paid into the funds of the respective public bodies.
So if we enter into an IGA today, the valuation of that property cannot change until an even numbered year when the assessor reassesses everything. And if that valuation, let's say it's what year is this 23? 24, if there's no increase in value, you continue to get all of your tax revenue. It's just that increment that goes. And if there's no increment, there's nothing for them to take.
Bottom of page 22. Castle Pines West commercial district tax increment area. Again, it's the entire area within that red box. They could change that if they decide to change that. We have to go through this whole process again. So we'll hear about it and we'll know about it. We'll be able to comment on it. Page 23.
James:
Well, hang I said can they they can they reduce the area or choose not to.
Okay. And with that require a, you know, redo of this process. If the okay.
Kim:
Yeah. And when we again when we talk about the IGA, one of the things I'll mention is we don't want to do, we don't want to give up our increment and then find out that other districts said, well, we're not giving up our increment because then all you've done is give away your increment and reduced, the odds that this whole thing is going to work out.
So it's another provision we would add to the IGA to say, you know, we'll give up all or a portion of our increment provided that. And then we we can list those exceptions. Page 23 of that. That's what I just read. That's the intergovernmental talking about the intergovernmental agreement that they have to enter into with us. And you can see at the bottom of the page they're listing the intergovernmental agreements, but there aren't any there yet.
That's where we're going to make sure that there are others there before we give up our, our increment. Page 28. This is actually just, I think, a copy of the Castle Pines Comprehensive Plan. So the way they've set this up, the URA operates independently, but it has to comply with the city's comprehensive plan. So I didn't read the plan, but whatever the city has promulgated to control development in the city now, the URA has to comply with that same plan.
Moving on to page 39. This is where it gets interesting that the top you see, it's Castle Pines, North Metropolitan District impact report. This is required by law. If you look at the first paragraph, this report outlines the anticipated impact of the proposed URA on the Castle Pines North Metropolitan District. So that first paragraph CRS 3125.107 talks about the approval of the plan.
And then if you turn to page 40 right in the middle, contained in that box is the proposed development plan. So at the moment and this could easily change through the market or through them changing the plan, the idea would be to have 86,000ft² of grocery retail, 200,000ft² of retail service. I'm not sure what that means. Probably small restaurants and things like that.
200,000ft² of office and employment, 150 hotel and lodging rooms. So, So that has an effect on you. it's a lot of toilets and sinks and showers and probably swimming pools and hot tubs. And then residential 300 units. So as Nathan pointed out, that would be 300 single family equivalents. And then we have an equivalency, I'm sure, for hotel rooms.
And Nathan can figure out for you what that would mean if this happened tomorrow, what it would mean to the system.
Nathan:
So is that anticipated to be what exists within those boundaries, or is that what they're anticipating to add to what's already there?
Kim:
It's it is what they anticipate to exist within those boundaries. Okay.
Jason:
So what for them to change this would to the process.
Do they need to go through.
Kim:
They would have to to redo the URA, a plan which requires coming back to you. So you don't have a lot of say in it, but you do have the opportunity to come. And and in particular, if something's going to affect you, then that affects what you are willing to give up. So we would have to renegotiate that, that IGA.
So you think of it as everybody's kind of betting that if we give them this money, they'll make everything work and it'll improve. And our, service costs are going to increase because we're going to have be serving more. But our revenues for service fees are also going to increase. So we're kind of we're not out of anything yet.
And at the end of 25 years, our revenues just shoot through the roof because all of a sudden you take back the increment. That's the philosophy. Everybody's betting that something's going to happen and it might not, but it might. And the theory is it won't unless they can fix this blight. You know, if if I'm trying to think of an instance where.
Let's say one of you knew or worked for a company that is ready to put real money down there to build, you know, something massive if that's the situation, we just say forget it, because you already know the development is about to happen. But I doubt that's the case. At the moment, nobody knows when or if. And there's all these impediments.
The blights, are the impediment to future development. So the idea is that URA will remove the impediments and then we'll see what happens. So.
Summary impacts of on North on Castle Prince of North, the bottom of the page. So the purpose for the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that 100% of the district property tax increment over the 25 year period will be allocated to project costs. So this analysis assumes they're going to take the increment. They're going to use it to develop the property, and the property is going to increase in value.
And there will be a tax increment that will grow. And of course, you can just run down the list of things in those assumptions. But again the big assumption is if they don't do this, nothing's going to change. So, page 41, property tax revenue. Currently, the district's share of the property tax base in the area is approximately $338,000.
During the 25 year statutory period, the district's share of the property tax revenue base will total approximately $9.5 million, or $380,000 annually. So over the 25 years you would collect 9.5 million unless the property goes down in value, which could also happen after the 25 year analysis period is completed, the district's share of the property tax revenues will increase to approximately $937 on an annual basis, so you can see that they're estimating almost tripling the tax base in 25 years.
If everything goes as planned. These figures reflect the impact on, or inflation. Conservatively estimate approximately 1% to 2% on an annual basis. I drew a little, little graph at the bottom of the page there that I think is right. I'm not a mathematician, but I think this is correct. So you can see on the, on the, vertical axis, the 338,000 that you get annually, that line going up very slowly based on inflation.
And that's about it. And then in 2040, that should be 2047, I think, your tax revenue, that line is your tax revenue goes straight up to $937,000. And then the tax increment that you give up is that yellow shaded area. So over the 25 years it's estimated you would give up almost $11 million in tax revenue. Again, to promote this all happening.
.... It's a lot of money, but it's 25 years and and none of it might happen. So, page looks like I missed the page number on that. On the next page. The chart is entitled Castle Pines North Metro District Impact Analysis summary. And if you can read the highlighted portion between 2027 and 2024, your property tax revenues on the existing base accumulate to 9,490,000.
Your property tax increment, the portion you don't get, goes from 157,000 to 10,000,990. And note that that's based on 15.9, .79 mills. So I believe that is our is taking kind of our temporary mill levy reduction at the moment. And assuming that we don't change that. So one of the things we need to do is, talk with the city about our agreement with them.
And the mill levy, you know, them getting their mill levy and that we're going to pay them out of our mill levy until that time and figure out how that's all going to work. So page 42, you've got the beginning of another chart, and that one just shows year by year, carries over through page. 44. And the highlighted portion at the bottom shows you, first of all, the total net new property tax revenue.
So, that's assuming this growth takes place and how much new tax revenue there will be each year. And then total property tax revenues from existing development. That shows you the increase in that. The most interesting thing for you probably is that bottom box where you have the district's share of property tax base. So your base is shown there doesn't change. Total district share of
Property tax revenue again, doesn't change because that's what's going to happen over the 25 years. And then page 45 starts the IGA. So this is their proposed intergovernmental agreement for you to share the tax increment. And as I said, this is subject to negotiation. If we can't agree, there is provisions in the statute for a, an arbitration.
And what we would need to do is to show the arbitrator why, we're not willing to give up our increment. So in order to do that, it's things like the additional costs that the Urban Renewal Authority is going to create for us by, creating additional fixtures that are going to, you know, there's going to be more water usage, there's going to be more this and that, and we are going to have to, increase the plant size or whatever it happens to be.
Again, though, in our situation, we cover most of that, via service user charges and the developer, whether it's the URA or a private company, would cover the the infrastructure cost. So, it's a little more difficult to prove that we, we can't give up our increment for some reason, but it's not impossible. So if you look at the IGA, the operative paragraph is right at the bottom.
Page two. District mill levy allocation. The district agrees that CPURA may retain all incremental property tax revenues generated generated in the plan area solely as a result of the levy of the district's mill levy upon taxable property within the plan area. So in this section, we are able to, add conditions. And we've talked about a couple of potential ones, one being that other taxing entities also agree or a certain percentage or however we want to state that. Another we have to consider whether to agree on something less and why we would, we would want something less.
And we need to confer with the city about our parks IGA. The rest of the IGA is pretty much legalese that it doesn't mean a lot. So we are getting ready to have these discussions with the URA about what you're willing or not willing to do, and that will all be put together in this agreement. And I think, I don't know if you would be ready to comment on Monday,
for Monday's meeting. If not, we still have time for the next board meeting. But, eventually we'll have some recommendations for you on what we think you need to do. And but in the end, it will be up to you. And then the remainder of the packet is just that, it's called practice tips. And that's what somebody would do if you go on to the URA board.
And if, if you, if you as a board decide one of you wants to be on that board and wants to be promoted for that position, we could do that Monday night and, I'm sure the fire district is already promoting somebody fire districts like this. And if you read through this plan, you'll see that they've already been participating in it because a lot of the development sections talk about fire suppression and reducing fire, fire, fire, fire, fire, fire, fire.
So yeah.
James:
I guess the concerns I had, who were the same ones we shared at the last meeting when this first came up and we had the people presenting. I'm still a little bit concerned about the fact that the audits, you know, we're still waiting for the one year audit. We're still. And that sounds like it's tying, you know, it's going to be ready for us.
But last year's audit is a kind of in a similar situation. I think we're still behind on that. Right. Yeah. And we're in the middle of the IGA. And we're going to be providing those mills to the city at some point, obviously has to go to a vote, and that has to happen. I understand all that, but there's a lot of things in flux.
And the concern I have is now that we're coming up against this and there doesn't appear to be once we agree to whatever that percentage is or we leave it as is. There appears to be no means or way to, you know, evaluate where we currently are because we haven't had our audits. We don't know truly what stuff costs.
And then we're going to be pushed into a situation where we could, you know, provide this money for this, you know, you know, development area and, and there maybe is a issue later on that we don't discover because we didn't have the the correct numbers in hand at the time when we started having these agreement talks.
Is there any way to kind of, essentially provide a safety valve for this situation during negotiations or what have you?
Kim:
Yeah. we'll have to think through how to do that, but I think probably through the conditions if you if we want in place conditions, you know, we could I, I think I've got to read the statute, but I'm pretty sure we can say we'll provide our increment starting five years from now through the 25 years.
The issue for them will be if everybody starts putting conditions on their payment, then the URA can't go out to the bond market and say, hey, we've got these revenues that we're going to be collecting because everything's contingent. So it can really if we're all betting that the URA can fix the blight and kick start everything, every condition we put on it makes it less likely.
James:
I think, you know, five years is probably excessive, but I think if we have a good date for when we have the audits coming back and we can understand what that timetable is, which is why I was pushing for it last time. I was kind of kind of making a big deal of it because I sort of foresee these, you know, these events kind of coalescing in a certain time period and, and very concerned that we're making decisions based on missing or imperfect information.
So, you know, even if it was a year or something like that, or it might only be six months or something, but I think it's worth having that discussion.
Kim:
I will make note of that.
Board Member Director Jana Krell:
yeah. I had a question about and maybe this has been said, but I didn't hear it. How come we couldn't be a part of this, but also South Metro? Why is it an either or situation.
Kim:
In terms of who sits on the board? the statute only provides for one representative. Prior to 2016, there were no representatives at all.
And then the law changed in 2016 to allow the the taxing entities one representative. So that's the only reason the law only provides for one.
Jana:
So one taxing entity. And so said South Metro is not a different taxing entity from the metro district?
Kim:
Yes, it's another taxing entity. So so this, you URA area is within the South Metro, just like it is within Castle Pines North.
So one. Oh yeah. And there's only I don't know how many other districts there are. There's probably 6 or 7 or and but among the 6 or 7 will only get one representative. So if you look at, if you look at that, form at the end of the packet that is entitled Practice Tip, it talks about how the, the person who does that should really, you know, communicate with all the other districts and talk about what's going on and, and actually represent them.
Jana:
So Kim, if we did, want to to put ourselves as part of this, there's no guarantee that the URA would even select us if South Metro was interested. We were interested. And then three other correct of the same. Yep. Okay. So then at that point, how how is it determined? Who would be on the board from those tax entities?
Kim:
I believe the city determines that.
Jana:
okay. thank you.
Kim:
And there are other representatives of like, I think there's a citizen representative. There's, you know, but the board is,
What am I trying to say? It's made up of different entities, but but the taxing entities, oddly enough, the ones who really support the money only have one.
Tera:
And the board is made up of the city council. Yeah. Then there's one from the county. I can look in the thing for the county commissioners. I was one or the county that's representing all the just the, other districts, but some of them are like Cherry Creek Basin, I think. Library. I, I can look them up, but yeah, I mean, it's not a, not a lot of different entities.
It's basically made up of city council with these other designated things. And then I think the special district appointment is actually something by the mayor with approval by council. But I can look back in the documentation.
Kim:
That that sounds right, makes sense with the whole process, because essentially the URA is a city tool, an economic development tool.
They've been very controversial. but again, you know, in my experience, they've been very successful. So in doing what they say they're going to do, it works.
Leah:
The question that I have, I'm assuming you can offer us your recommendation. Sure. I'd be curious to hear what your recommendation.
Kim:
I don't want to do that yet, but.
Okay. my leaning generally is, it's worth doing for everyone involved. Now, whether it's worth you giving up the entire increment depends a lot on what kind of developments can happen, because you're going to have increased costs. On the other hand, in this district, your increased costs are going to be covered by your user fees. So there's all these trade offs.
But certainly when we get around to negotiating the IGA, I'll give you a recommendation. And why. but those are the kinds of things that I would look at. And again, to this is a little different. The last one I did was or worked with was in, Commerce City, where you could just look at it and say, nothing's going to happen here for a long time.
This is a little different. This is Castle Pines.
Leah:
Well, and you had mentioned that like, 40% of URAs is typically fade away. I just was curious, like, why?
Kim:
They just never get off the ground, you know, they start into this process and people lose interest, and, they just go away. Some of them get started and then within a short time, for whatever reason, Everybody I guess the bottom line is they lose interest.
But the ones that carry forward, you know, Fort Collins has had some great ones redeveloping the downtown or near downtown area. Some of them in Fort Collins. I don't know why they redeveloped them in the first place. And properties looked pretty good, but now they're great. They're being used in small towns, big cities. There's a bunch in Denver.
You know, as I say, it's a it's a good tool. It can make things happen. I suspect this one would. Again, it's Castle Pines. I think with the kick, it could take off. Probably would. And again, the question is, how much are you willing to bet on it? Always remembering, though, that that your increment is money, that if nothing happens, you're never going to see that money anyway.
If it does happen, then you will see the money and you're participating in making it all happen.
Tera:
So as a long term resident here in Castle Pines, the that is the entrance to our city and it is there's just always so much feedback to people coming into our community. We live here, and this is a tool, very common tool everywhere that you travel within the Front Range, you're probably looking at a product project that was done with the URA.
We we have to do something about that. I mean, that's that's the first impression people have when they come to our community. And the long term lease that Safeway has on there that they're still paying. I mean, the rest of that, that, complex is typically 90% paid. It's just that there's 55,000ft² that rolls up to a real estate investment trust.
So it's not popped up on anybody's radar. And it's and my understanding is that that it has changed hands is what I thought I heard, the city representative say the other night, but that, they were only thinking about maybe redoing the parking lot, but to for that property to really be an asset for this community and add value to this community, it has to be redeveloped.
Yeah. So I, I'm in favor of us figuring out a way that, you know, as long as it's not going to do any damage to us. I do believe that we should support it because we live here. This is our community. This is the entrance of our community. Why wouldn't we want, something to happen there that would benefit all of us?
And that's why, you know, there's been some really good points raised, and I'm, It's good to hear that you have seen, positive things happen with this tool. And, it's so difficult because there aren't that many tools right? Because I yeah, over the years, there have been developers that have looked at that property and, you know, even considered redeveloping it.
But when they pencil out the numbers, it's just to it doesn't make sense. They're not in business to lose money. Right. So, you know, with some of the caveats that you've said, and some of those considerations, I mean, I think it would be at least helpful for me to sort of, see kind of what you're you know, what you think the recommendations could be?
Because what I heard was, you know, the time of agreement, maybe we, you know, maybe it's not 25 years or, you know, whatever concessions we need to make sure that we, you know, I didn't think about with hotels that they'd have a swimming pool and certainly a number of, you know, toilets and things and whatever, and restaurants that typically use a lot of water.
You know, we obviously need to take in consideration our parks, IGA, but then so. Are you thinking Castle Pines North Metropolitan District is kind of the largest chunk of the tax revenue that's coming in? I mean, I, I could look or the other entities are larger, because if it's the library than the libraries also. But wouldn't the library also be giving up their portion?
Kim:
Yeah, the library would be smaller. we do a lot of library districts and their, their levies are, you know, 4 or 5 at max, I think, I think this one is like four and a half or something like that.
Tera:
So as long as we can protect, you know, our as we go into to negotiations and basically make sure there's no harm done to us.
I mean, I do feel like we are in a different situation than South Metro Fire or the library or Cherry Creek or some of these other entities in that we do. You know, we are able to pretty much have development pay for itself and or put in the infrastructure to our, to what we say needs to be done to our specifications.
And we are, you know, able to do, user fees. Right? Yeah. So I feel like we're in a different situation than some of these other.
Kim:
Yeah, absolutely. And if you that that chart that I drew that I think
Tera:
Which I appreciate so much.
Kim:
Right. It's easy to see it isn't it. If it's
Nathan:
Jana got a question for you too but.
Kim:
Oh hang on one second, Jana. What that doesn't show is that over those 25 years, if that works out the way it shows on that chart, your user fees line would be going up. So, you know, your revenues for user fees is on. It has nothing to do with that chart. It would be on top of it increasing all the way.
So you benefit where, something like the library district, they're going to have more users coming in, they're going to buy more books. They're going to have to and, you know, do all that, but they don't have any revenue source that's going to increase over that time period. They're going to be flat. So there's quite a bit of difference for you.
And yeah Jana okay.
Jana:
So something I still don't yet really wrap my head around Kim is that okay. So if we did not participate in this and we did not give our increments and this URA took off. Great. It's still going to need to have this art infrastructure etc. so wouldn't we still even if we didn't bet on it, wouldn't we still get an increase in revenue?
Kim:
Yes. Yeah, you would get so you would get
Jana:
So our bet sounds less risky if we bet. No. Like let's not participate. We still could ride that wave of revenue.
Kim:
The chances that there's a wave go way down if you don't participate. So the theory is the property hasn't developed. It's something's wrong with it that has to be fixed before the wave will will occur.
Okay. So you're participating in getting rid of those impediments to the wave. And then the wave occurs. You get your increased fees but your taxes stay lower and then in in 27 years your taxable take up 25 years your tax take off okay.
Jana:
Thank you. Yeah.
Jason:
Hey, Nate, I got a question for you. This, this territory. How much of this budget are we really talking about?
Like, how much revenue do we begin as a percentage on that territory today?
Nathan:
In terms of the property taxes we collect per the property taxes? Yeah, I'd have to. I'd have to sic Phyllis and Sadie on it to break down commercial properties and figure out what's what's inside of those boundaries. I think the city's in there. There was a kind of a, summary of historically what we've done.
And I, we can even do the same thing for, revenue. I mean, the vast majority of our high use stuff is all out nature ways, large irrigators. There's not a lot of really, really heavy water usage in there now. But I could definitely break that down and just, like, get a general idea of what.
But on average, our monthly rates are for the area inside the boundary. But it's just a matter of going and pulling all those addresses and looking up usage history. Off the top of my head, I, I'm not sure. I think there is a little bit of just kind of a passing thought, especially while they're redoing this.
There are definitely, some advantages in terms of just opportunities to better improve the water system through there as well. It's we're it's in terms of our total pipe, it's not in a bad it's not a bad set up, like we're we're pretty okay with our utilities out there. But there's like I said earlier, there's loops that ultimately need to be made.
There's some pipe sizes that could be better served. I think that through that there are some benefits to us in terms of our overall system health moving forward. potentially as well. on that. And as long as like Tera said, we may we may. Whoops. Sorry. We're protected, from having like a negative financial increase like the those new developments coming in upsizing some of our facilities closing loops, putting valves in place, all of that could, could really help us out, especially in the long term.
Jason:
There's was more curious on how much of our budget are we gambling here? Like if it's a small percentage,
Nathan:
It's not very much. It's like percent. I mean, less than our to remember that only ten or a maximum of 10% of our total revenue can come from these property taxes anyway. So it's, you know, a percentage of 10% of our budget that we're gambling over all the vast 90% of, like Kim was alluding to, 90% of the money we take in is rates and fees anyway.
And so we're pretty heavily protected. You know, it's just the percentage of the property taxes in that area, which is less than 10% of our total budget anyway.
Kim:
I think you could calculate it. Again, I'm not a math guy, but I think if you dig 338,000 and divided by our total tax revenue, yeah, that should be the number you're looking for.
The percentage that we I can say that
Jason:
that was and that was that annually. Yeah okay okay. Yeah. Yeah I mean and I'm still in favor of this and you know, it sounds like small sounds like a small nut really when we look at our grand budget. So. Yeah.
Kim:
And again it may be nothing, you know, just
Tera:
And again, if the property doesn't improve, we're not there's no downside.
We're not losing anything. Yeah. If this doesn't take off and go. So what we're doing as we are. And in answer to Jana's question though, we don't really have an option to not not do an item right, to not participate. That's not an option. We can try to negotiate whatever. But if we what I remember asking the other night is what happens if we don't do it?
And they basically say, you go to, mediation or something, arbitration or whatever. So it's not we can't opt out of it. But yeah.
Jana:
Thank you Tera.
Kim:
I guess another another way to say this is, this is about opportunity cost. So you have an opportunity to raise additional taxes. Maybe, if you participate. And if you do, then there's a big reward at the end.
If it all works out. If if it turns out that nobody really needed to kick start, then you've actually lost money.
Nathan:
So does this also apply to, you know, the city gets their new 12 mil through the parks open open space IGA. Does that. Does this URA also theoretically apply to the mill levy that they get inside of that area?
So if they've got a parks trails and open space because the I mean, the 338,000 is based on us taking the 15 plus mils. And if we're only if we reduce that to seven, I mean, that number goes down by a little more than half. And then the remainder of that 12 would have to come to get that 338 that I have to capture it from there on New Mill Levy.
Kim:
Yeah. Okay. Yeah. And that's part of the conversation they need to have with you.
James:
That was my whole question is like, you know, where are we there. So yeah.
Kim:
Yeah, the interplay between the Parks and Rec and us is something I have to figure out with their attorney.
James:
Yeah, it wasn't a huge concern. It was just the fact that we didn't have the information.
So. Yeah. Yeah. Just got to have that conversation.
Nathan:
Yeah. That's just how long it took me to process your question and put it in.
Kim:
This stance really it's it's hard to think about. But you know, again the bottom line is it's an opportunity cost. And if you don't participate the likelihood of it happening is decreases a lot. And if you do participate, then you just give up the opportunity to make that little wedge, big wedge.
And at the end it jumps.
Leah:
So what are the next steps? What are the next steps?
Kim:
The next step is we can go ahead. And it sounded like you, you want to hear options from Nathan and I and Phyllis want to get Phyllis involved. And we can bring those to you. Probably not by Monday, but certainly by the next board meeting or next, work session.
And then we can talk about what we want to change in here. And again, it's not a lot.
Leah:
If we're interested in having like or submitting an application for someone on the board to be part of the URA, what were the next steps and timing for that Again?
Kim:
I would say on Monday, if one of you is interested and the board wants to appoint that person as, so we just have a motion to appoint one of you to, to be in the running for the URA board.
And then we'll put together a letter saying, hey, we want we want our representative on the board. And then the city will decide.
Leah:
Am I allowed to ask who's interested?
Jason
Could we, I was going to say, could we? Because I think there's a couple people here that are interested. Can we have more than one nominee from here, or can we only have one nominee?
Kim:
I think we have to do one, but I will figure that out before Monday.
I'm gonna have to look at the statute.
Leah:
No, I but but yeah, I was just curious. Are we allowed to share like who or if people feel comfortable. Like if, if you're interested.
Kim:
Again, I'm gonna have to look at the statute because it depends. If the statute says we can have one seat on the board, then yeah, you could, you could alternate.
But if it says one person as a representative, then you could. Yeah.
Nathan:
But almost have to be one seat functionally. Right. Because this board is not just here for 25 years. Right? I think we have multiple positions.
Leah:
That wasn't my question. That's true. Sorry. That wasn't my that wasn't I don't think that was my I don't think you answered what my question was.
Okay. So I'm going to try again. are we allowed to talk amongst ourselves or share if any of us are interested in applying for that seat? I feel like that could be helpful just to gauge. Like, can we like for example, I think it's great and I'd love to have representation, but I don't think I'm the right person.
I just would be curious about the rest.
Kim:
Yes. And the way you should do that, you need to do it in a public meeting if you're going to be talking amongst yourself, because this is part of the district business.
Jason:
Do you want to talk about it now? I mean, if not then we're good.
Kim:
You can talk about now and then vote on it
On Monday. Okay.
Jason:
Yeah. yeah. If anybody's interested in, being part of the board,
Tera:
Well, keep in mind. Go. Jana. Go ahead.
Jana:
I want to and get real fast here, and then I'll turn it back over to you. I have experience in this, but I do not have enough work, so, so I'm counting myself out, but I would be able to assist somebody if they had questions about it, because as an engineer for, for, with the planning department and things like that, and I can weigh in from experience, but I don't think that I have I don't think I would say that.
Tera:
So it's not appointing a person to the board. It's pointing a person to be in the running that could be selected. Could be South Metro, I don't know, I can't remember the letter from South Metro, I don't know, I think they let us know their interest. I don't know if they asked us to support them. Again, I don't know that we really it's important to have somebody from the metro district on because we're in a different position, because we have an ability to cover what we need to cover with our fees, and they're kind of more at the mercy, which is probably why they've been.
You said it looked like they'd been more involved. So I just want to make sure we're all on the same page about we're not saying I mean, it's going to ultimately be appointed through all the districts. One person that represents everyone. So if it was the metro district person on the board, they'd be representing South Metro fire, Urban Drainage, you know, some of these other ones that just want to make sure that the library we're not saying that if we put somebody forward, but from my perspective, I don't even think we need to put somebody forward.
I'm certainly not that.
Jana:
Thank you for clarifying that.
Jason:
Yeah, yeah. That's understood. what you just said. Perfect. And so yeah, but if somebody on this board wants to be part, then I will support them and let them go. And it's nothing I would to do.
Tera:
But yeah, the majority it sounds like we don't have interest.
James:
So but I mean the last last week I said I it's interest in this but my interest again I, I, I would like to see the other candidates and see who they're putting forward for the for the seat on the board.
And if there's a better candidate, then I kind of agree that, we're necessarily a different situation, but, it would really depend on, you know, the candidates and whether or not, you know, I thought somebody like myself could do a better job in that position. And if I can, great. If I think there's a better candidate. And you know what makes sense?
And know we have to have that conversation.
Jason:
When do candidates need to be?
Tera:
It was a long time ago. It's actually already passed.
Nathan:
Oh so they the yeah, they adjusted the, time frame. I think they basically gave us as long as we needed to determine that, would it be appropriate for me to reach out to the city and just see who else has voice interest?
As far as I know? Yeah, you could. As far as I know, the only other one of the special districts that has voiced interest, is South Metro. Ihere I got there was a couple, and if you go back and look, there were a couple of replies to one of those initial messages, that came through and basically said that they weren't interested.
Parker water was one of them, said that they weren't interested. They could reach out to the city, see if there's even anybody beyond South Metro, and try and get that answer for you.
Tera:
You know, you could look at those because, like, if I look at the I think the smaller ones that I went to, it's like urban drainage and flood control, Cherry Creek Basin Water Quality Authority, urban drainage and, flood South Platte.
So, you might be able to
Nathan:
I'll reach out to the city and see if we can figure out who said who said what and who who all is interested who were, I don't want to say up against, but who the other potential candidates are.
Kim:
The other thing you may want to do is, when that person is determined, just reach out to him and say, hey, you know, come every six months and give us a report or every month we want something.
And because they're your representative, so,
All right. That's all I have. Unless you have more questions.
Nathan:
So I will plan on. I'll reach out. I'll go ahead and add that to the agenda for Monday's meeting. That way it's there. We can always scratch it if we don't need it, but we'll have it just in case.
Jason:
Very good. Anybody else have any other questions regarding this?
James:
I had one. we went through the numbers and the overall plan for the property, and we have equivalent units, you know, housing units, and we had hotel rooms and things like that. And I was just wondering if you can kind of come back and tell us what the equivalency is, compared to a housing unit for a hotel room and maybe some of the larger properties.
What we think we're looking at as far as a burden and whether or not any of those present a potential issue for capacity or ability to service, that it didn't sound like it. But I, you know, if you can kind of just give an equivalency of what that looks like and just, you know, kind of voice that in the next meeting or something like that.
Nathan:
Yeah, I can look at it. And that was, I was taking a few notes. I was planning on kind of going down that road anyway. And that was why I asked the earlier question, if this is, you know, their total plan area, square footage, is this what they plan to add or what they tend to plan to already have there?
It's really even off the top of my head. It's not that much of an increase. We already that the entire apartment complex sits within this boundary. And so if they're not looking at adding if those are, the things are going to add that they don't have anything listed there for apartments. And I do know that they talked about wanting to move away from having apartments here anyway and putting in like condos and those kind of thing.
So a lot of them are going to be like a one for one exchange. Unless somebody wants to do something like an indoor skiing facility or something. Absolutely. Just a that's an absolute water hog. I don't think it'll be that big of a deal, but I'll definitely go back through, look and see what we've got in terms of fees there now and compare it to the proposed.
James:
So I didn't see a water park. Right.
Jason:
All right. Well that's everything for tonight. I think we can adjourn the meeting so I don't have to have a second or anything. So meeting adjourned.