Metropolitan District Homeowners’ Rights Task Force

Comments/Considerations On The Task Force's Interim Report

• Share Attended first meeting yesterday- here are my thoughts on Facebook Share Attended first meeting yesterday- here are my thoughts on Twitter Share Attended first meeting yesterday- here are my thoughts on Linkedin Email Attended first meeting yesterday- here are my thoughts link

  Attended first meeting yesterday- here are my thoughts

  by mls324, about 2 years ago

  First, some feedback about a couple things that took aware from the meeting. The phone line wasn't set up for iPhone users. There is a protocol that allows the iPhone user to do a 1-touch connection and won't have to fumble for the password. It took me 3x to get in on the phone line. And homeowners already feel powerless when these metro districts crop up and make self-serving, non-transparent decision. Chris Elliott feedback was condescending and disrespectful. If he cannot fully attend the meeting, he probably shouldn't attend. His answer put the responsibilty on homeowners to educate themselves. That... Continue reading

  First, some feedback about a couple things that took aware from the meeting. The phone line wasn't set up for iPhone users. There is a protocol that allows the iPhone user to do a 1-touch connection and won't have to fumble for the password. It took me 3x to get in on the phone line. And homeowners already feel powerless when these metro districts crop up and make self-serving, non-transparent decision. Chris Elliott feedback was condescending and disrespectful. If he cannot fully attend the meeting, he probably shouldn't attend. His answer put the responsibilty on homeowners to educate themselves. That response, makes me wonder if he has any idea how corrupt these metro districts are or if it truly isn't of importance to him, especially based upon the distraction creating by being in Starbucks with lots of background noise.

  The reality of Lennar, headquartered in FL, (where even FL created regulations and laws on builders regarding HOA governance and metro districts) is that they pass along alleged infrastructure created and paid for through a bond that levy's higher taxes on the subdivision home buyers, and the metro districts are not interested in the community or it's residents.

  In Elizabeth, the metro district and the Town of Elizabeth Board seem to be very cozy, in fact too cozy. The Town of Elizabeth Board shows favoritism for Board candidates, such as Steve Freer, who was not elected as the HOA president, but there was a secret vote for him to switch places with the president and he is running for a Board position. He was invited to special meetings where the other trustee candidates were not. He didn't even need to produce a resume. He is serving as the HOA president, and stated there isn't a conflict b/c his role as HOA president only "takes an hour a week" and when there are issues impacting his neighborhood, he will recuse himself. Isn't that the point of having residents on the board? Wouldn't there be a conflict of interest? My concern is that is what the Metro District wants.

  Another issue, is the Town administrator, Patrick Davidson, was fired from the Town of Gillette for unethical actions and was censured. Who would hire him for this role, especially within months of having acted unethically and being censured/terminated?! Within a few months, he was hired by the Town of Elizabeth, netting $180K a year. Whatever the Metro District sees fit is supported by the Town Administrator and perhaps that is all that matters.

  (Here are links to the stories recently shared with me regarding this matter

  https://images.app.goo.gl/MACouCrh4wF3Y5hj6

  https://www.wyopress.org/news/no-reason-for-secrecy/article_505e3d28-8290-11eb-a41a-a7f721bf5937.html

  The Metro District, formed by Lennar and stocked with their family members and business associates, like many of the other metro districts are creating division between the established residents and those homeowners see as intruders. Those intruders are paying a higher % in taxes which will help the metro district fill it's pockets and support the town.

  I find if very difficult as a CO resident since 1983, CSU Alumni Association member, Regis Alum, and having owned 5 different properties in that 40 year time span, that the Governor and the state of CO DORA condone this blatant abuse and profiteering. It is non-transparent. In response to Mr. Elliott's flippant remark about homeowners needing to educate themselves, the only information given at the time of closing (too late to educate themselves at that time) is the % of taxes is higher than the rest of the town.

  I believe this is real estate law at it's worst, and being bought and sold by the one with the most money and most interest in making money without paying the cost of doing business in CO. It's extremely sad. It is concerning as a homeowner about the ability to not continue to pay higher and higher taxes based upon the whims of a rogue metro district operating without any oversight. CO natives and long time residents will continue to migrate out of a state they love, based upon these types of experiences and the lack of government regulation to protect the homeowners.

  
  

  
  
• Share Metro to HOA transition on Facebook Share Metro to HOA transition on Twitter Share Metro to HOA transition on Linkedin Email Metro to HOA transition link

  Metro to HOA transition

  by kchan, about 2 years ago

  Districts take time to build, but when the builder has left the district and it is resident run the primary function of the district is to maintain the district and pay off the debt.
  
  Upon paying the debt residents can decide to transition the district to a common interest community, such as a 501c4 Home owners association. Both of these entities are tools, but because the district is a quasi-government entity we need to consider the additional cost of insurance, taxation of services bought through the HOA entity vs the Metro entity. I would also like to evaluate how communities... Continue reading

  Districts take time to build, but when the builder has left the district and it is resident run the primary function of the district is to maintain the district and pay off the debt.
  
  Upon paying the debt residents can decide to transition the district to a common interest community, such as a 501c4 Home owners association. Both of these entities are tools, but because the district is a quasi-government entity we need to consider the additional cost of insurance, taxation of services bought through the HOA entity vs the Metro entity. I would also like to evaluate how communities can continue to maintain the local infrastructure if not everyone decides to pay their HOA dues.
  
  I believe that these entities are tools and each has its pros and cons, but as a resident I'm far more concerned about the tax planning and maintenance as a tax and dues payer.
• Share Metro District Covenant Enforcement and Responsibilities to Homeowners on Facebook Share Metro District Covenant Enforcement and Responsibilities to Homeowners on Twitter Share Metro District Covenant Enforcement and Responsibilities to Homeowners on Linkedin Email Metro District Covenant Enforcement and Responsibilities to Homeowners link

  Metro District Covenant Enforcement and Responsibilities to Homeowners

  by Stoney, about 2 years ago

  I reside within a Metro District that currently provides:

  • Operation and maintenance of parks and open space
  • Median landscaping and trail maintenance
  • Entry monuments
  • Trash service
  • Architectural Review
  • Covenant enforcement

  The last item, covenant enforcement, is sadly ignored by the District Board. This covenant has the typical restrictions you would find in HOA covenants. However, the covenants also include an Article specific to Mandatory Social Membership in a Country Club within the community. The Club is a separate entity from the District although it is part of the District's covenants. The District Board always states they have no jurisdiction over... Continue reading

  I reside within a Metro District that currently provides:

  • Operation and maintenance of parks and open space
  • Median landscaping and trail maintenance
  • Entry monuments
  • Trash service
  • Architectural Review
  • Covenant enforcement

  The last item, covenant enforcement, is sadly ignored by the District Board. This covenant has the typical restrictions you would find in HOA covenants. However, the covenants also include an Article specific to Mandatory Social Membership in a Country Club within the community. The Club is a separate entity from the District although it is part of the District's covenants. The District Board always states they have no jurisdiction over the Club whenever a homeowner requests assistance from the District regarding the Club, especially concerning resident social member dues increases. Instead, the District would rather devote their time and energy address their other services in lieu of addressing homeowner concerns or frustrations with the Club. They also do a poor job in enforcing the restrictions defined in the covenants and publicly micro-manage/criticize their service providers in lieu of executive sessions.

  My primary question is will this Metro District Task Force be addressing the covenants that typically are owned by an HOA as well as the typical quasi-government functions?

  If so, shouldn't the District be required to actively support homeowners concerns/desires regarding the Club, especially with regard to currently unfair mandatory social membership practices in the Club?

  Lastly, shouldn't the District be active in amending the covenants based upon homeowner requests so that the mandatory social membership "Article" is better balanced not only solely in favor of the Club but also be more beneficial to the homeowners/resident/members of the District?

  
  
• Share Hoa Taskforce on Facebook Share Hoa Taskforce on Twitter Share Hoa Taskforce on Linkedin Email Hoa Taskforce link

  Hoa Taskforce

  by Summerbreeze , about 2 years ago
  I believe the HOA task force has a good understanding with the problems wuth HOAS. One suggestion was a lack of education for board members. There are many resources to educate board members if they choose. I think there needs to be some kind of communication to inform board members of the resources available to them.

  I believe the HOA task force has a good understanding with the problems wuth HOAS. One suggestion was a lack of education for board members. There are many resources to educate board members if they choose. I think there needs to be some kind of communication to inform board members of the resources available to them.
• Share What They Aren't Telling Us on Facebook Share What They Aren't Telling Us on Twitter Share What They Aren't Telling Us on Linkedin Email What They Aren't Telling Us link

  What They Aren't Telling Us

  by CleanAirCO, about 2 years ago

  Imagine residing in a community that pledges to uphold the principles of welfare and social equity we all value deeply—a place where the air is clean, peace is a given, and trust in our local governance isn't a luxury but a steadfast guarantee. Yet, the harsh reality we confront today is a jarring departure from these ideals. The Independence Overly Metropolitan District, burdened with the critical responsibility of safeguarding our community's welfare, offers a scant 24-hour notice for its meetings, relegated to a mere post on their website. This practice, which can only be condemned as arbitrary and capricious... Continue reading

  Imagine residing in a community that pledges to uphold the principles of welfare and social equity we all value deeply—a place where the air is clean, peace is a given, and trust in our local governance isn't a luxury but a steadfast guarantee. Yet, the harsh reality we confront today is a jarring departure from these ideals. The Independence Overly Metropolitan District, burdened with the critical responsibility of safeguarding our community's welfare, offers a scant 24-hour notice for its meetings, relegated to a mere post on their website. This practice, which can only be condemned as arbitrary and capricious, effectively mutes our voices, rendering meaningful participation and the advocacy for our rights an uphill battle. How are we to ensure our concerns are recognized and addressed when given such fleeting notice?

  Additionally, their sole effort to meet legal notification requirements for the existence of this task force was through a PDF document, hidden on their website. This method is starkly inadequate for disseminating such crucial information. It reeks of a deliberate ploy to keep us uninformed, almost as if the existence of the task force was a secret they wished to keep from us, their residents. This doesn't merely fall below our expectations; it feels like a profound betrayal, compelling us to question the value of our voices and concerns to those at the helm. This blatant disregard for transparency and accountability is not only disappointing but also deeply alarming, eroding the trust we have in our local governance.

  The situation becomes even worse with the Independence Water & Sanitation District. This entity, charged with managing our vital water and sanitation services, operates two exceptionally large emergency backup generators that have bypassed the scrutiny of the Colorado Department of Public Health's Air Pollution Control Division. The failure to include these generators in the state's air permitting program is not a trivial oversight but a significant dereliction of duty on the part of the metro district, casting doubt on their commitment to our community's welfare and environmental stewardship. Each generator which is undoubtedly subject to federal regulations, especially those of considerable size, must be subjected to a thorough assessment for pollutants via the Air Pollution Emission Notice (APEN). This is essential to ensure our air quality meets health-based National Ambient Air Quality Standards, safeguarding social equity by protecting the most vulnerable among us.

  This failure to assess the environmental impact of these generators uncovers a wider trend of regulatory neglect, potentially subjecting residents to harmful air pollutants. This issue transcends environmental concern, touching on public health, social equity, and the overall welfare of our community. The air we breathe could be at risk, placing the most significant burden on the elderly, children, and individuals with pre-existing health conditions, something we shouldn't have to deal with after the traumatic COVID era. This raises a troubling question: What other regulatory duties are being overlooked by the Independence Metropolitan Districts and other similar districts?

  As members of communities overseen by metropolitan districts, passivity is not an option. The well-being of our community, the pursuit of social equity, and the fundamental right to a healthy environment command our urgent focus and action. We demand a governance model from our metropolitan district that embodies transparency and accountability, ensuring environmental and health protections are not merely optional but a core aspect of their operations.

  Now is the moment for us to come together, championing a call for exhaustive transparency and environmental scrutiny, insisting that the welfare of our community and the principles of social equity take precedence in our local governance. We must amplify our voices, engage with our community leaders, and advocate for the pristine, safe, and equitable environment we all rightfully deserve.

  For an in-depth understanding of this issue and to explore more, please refer to the interactive map provided by the Colorado Department of Public Health: Interactive Air Quality Map. United, we stand as advocates for environmental integrity, social equity, transparency in our governing bodies, and the welfare of our community.
• Share Anita Kabrick on Facebook Share Anita Kabrick on Twitter Share Anita Kabrick on Linkedin Email Anita Kabrick link

  Anita Kabrick

  by Snickerdoodle, about 2 years ago

  It is my opinion that Green Valley Ranch Metro District No 7 (GVRE MD 7), which includes The Reserve, was created in a quasi ponzi scheme format. The developer, Clayton Properties, dba Oakwood Homes has their finger in the pot of all entities affecting the community. They have financial interest in, or majority seats on the Boards of the following:

  Nest Mortgage (financing and closings)

  Shazam (warranty work)

  The Reserve at Second Creek Ranch

  Westwind Management Group (CC&R)

  GVRE MD 6, 7, & 8 (currently a vacancy in No 7 with an impasse to fill the position)

  I have no... Continue reading

  It is my opinion that Green Valley Ranch Metro District No 7 (GVRE MD 7), which includes The Reserve, was created in a quasi ponzi scheme format. The developer, Clayton Properties, dba Oakwood Homes has their finger in the pot of all entities affecting the community. They have financial interest in, or majority seats on the Boards of the following:

  Nest Mortgage (financing and closings)

  Shazam (warranty work)

  The Reserve at Second Creek Ranch

  Westwind Management Group (CC&R)

  GVRE MD 6, 7, & 8 (currently a vacancy in No 7 with an impasse to fill the position)

  I have no quarrel with the concept of Metro Districts. The Reserve put forward a qualified and willing homeowner to fill the GRVE MD 7 Board seat. Oakwood is unwilling to relinquish their majority on the board, so the position goes unfilled. I ask you to investigate the control that developers have by not furthering resident representation on the Boards. Developers have the finances and legal representation to lobby our legislators, which gives them another unfair advantage over the homeowners. I seek a voice at the table.

  Thank you for your attention to this.

  Anita Kabrick, homeowner
• Share Severance Shores development oversite cost to residence on Facebook Share Severance Shores development oversite cost to residence on Twitter Share Severance Shores development oversite cost to residence on Linkedin Email Severance Shores development oversite cost to residence link

  Severance Shores development oversite cost to residence

  by Troy W, over 2 years ago
  There have been other stories submitted about my neighborhood, but some big things for the residence that will be living in these developed neighborhoods. Some type of developmental oversite and guarantee of work/warranties. Our neighborhood not even 4 years old have road that are like riding on a roller coaster (No compactions or soil treatment completed) The sewer was put in too high that residence in a new neighborhood have to have injections pits to pump out sewer. Drainage issues with minimal sloping all around the development. Water sitting in gutters for days after storms with no drainage. Cheep installation... Continue reading

  There have been other stories submitted about my neighborhood, but some big things for the residence that will be living in these developed neighborhoods. Some type of developmental oversite and guarantee of work/warranties. Our neighborhood not even 4 years old have road that are like riding on a roller coaster (No compactions or soil treatment completed) The sewer was put in too high that residence in a new neighborhood have to have injections pits to pump out sewer. Drainage issues with minimal sloping all around the development. Water sitting in gutters for days after storms with no drainage. Cheep installation of trees to make sure they were taken care of for the first year. This is a concerns for all residence of Colorado as these developers come in charge this expense of a metro repay, but then the tax payers and the cities are on the hook to repair/ replace and fix the short coming of the developer. Small cities don't have the resources to manage and monitor these large projects and the developers just high high profile attorneys to scare and push their agendas through. I heard in the meeting about city incentives for having these, I would sure hope the incentive is enough to fix the millions it going to cost to replace our roads. This is just the beginning as these developers are praying on small communities and they can just push them around. I sure hope this committee looks at how to protect the residence of Colorado no just push more requirement for paperwork, as developers will just hire an attorney to file the paperwork, they have to be accountable for what they want to paid back for.
• Share Filling a Vacancy on the Board Issues, Special Meetings vs. Regular Meetings, and Quorum Issues--Green Valley Ranch East Metro District No. 7 on Facebook Share Filling a Vacancy on the Board Issues, Special Meetings vs. Regular Meetings, and Quorum Issues--Green Valley Ranch East Metro District No. 7 on Twitter Share Filling a Vacancy on the Board Issues, Special Meetings vs. Regular Meetings, and Quorum Issues--Green Valley Ranch East Metro District No. 7 on Linkedin Email Filling a Vacancy on the Board Issues, Special Meetings vs. Regular Meetings, and Quorum Issues--Green Valley Ranch East Metro District No. 7 link

  Filling a Vacancy on the Board Issues, Special Meetings vs. Regular Meetings, and Quorum Issues--Green Valley Ranch East Metro District No. 7

  by Patty, over 2 years ago

  This is a situation that I suspect is pretty common to others in Oakwood Homes communities. I will say that although I am sharing my opinion today as a homeowner in this district, I am one of two homeowner directors on the GVRE MD No.7 board. Previously this board was comprised of three Oakwood Homes associates on the board with two vacancies. The Oakwood Home associates are also directors on many other metro district boards that are being developed by Clayton Properties Group, Inc. dba Oakwood Homes. In fact, I've already seen their names in some of these Stories.

  Due... Continue reading

  This is a situation that I suspect is pretty common to others in Oakwood Homes communities. I will say that although I am sharing my opinion today as a homeowner in this district, I am one of two homeowner directors on the GVRE MD No.7 board. Previously this board was comprised of three Oakwood Homes associates on the board with two vacancies. The Oakwood Home associates are also directors on many other metro district boards that are being developed by Clayton Properties Group, Inc. dba Oakwood Homes. In fact, I've already seen their names in some of these Stories.

  Due to the fact that the makeup of the GVRE MD No. 7 board consists of two Oakwood Homes associates and two homeowner directors, the homeowner directors immediately set out to outline a protocol for filling the 5th seat. At our first official metro district meeting we had this on our Agenda. When it came time for this topic to be addressed we were told by district counsel that there is no set procedure for filling a vacancy. It can be as simple as holding a hand vote, us appointing someone with no process, or we could go through an entire submission process. We presented our ideas and wanted to hold a vote on the process for filling the vacancy. Approximately a 10 minute discussion of timeframes and dates and times for the process of filling the vacancy was hashed out. When we attempted to make a motion to approve the process we were then advised by one of the Oakwood Homes directors that this was only a Discussion item and not an Approval item; we could not make a motion to vote on the process. This was frustrating and a bit confounding that we were new directors and neither district counsel nor any of the Oakwood Homes directors advised us upfront that we would not be able to hold a vote on the matter. They allowed us to spend valuable time and resources on this topic and only advised us of the semantic difference when we attempted to make a motion. Chalk it up to our naivete.

  In the ensuing month or so, district counsel and two board members worked out the written process for how to fill the board vacancy and what to present at our next board meeting for a vote. The Oakwood directors wanted to use the longest possible timeframe and the homeowner directors wanted to use a much more expedient timeframe so we could have the board completely filled before the budget approval process. When it came time for a vote at our board meeting it was dead-locked two to two. Eventually both sides compromised for a timeframe in the middle. In the interim time before our next meeting on October 16, 2023, the vacancy candidate process ensued. On the last day for candidates to self-nominate for the vacancy another Oakwood Homes associate self-nominated for the position by virtue of holding a contract for purchase of 1/5 of a Directors Parcel. This made four self-nominated candidates for the one vacancy on the GVRE MD No. 7 board. Three homeowner candidates who live in the district and one Oakwood Homes associate who does not reside in the district but who serves on several other metro district boards in Oakwood Homes communities. The GVRE MD No. 7 homeowner directors requested to see this contract for purchase as proof of eligibility to serve on the board. Hold this thought--

  Fast forward to our next educational moment--the Special meeting vs. Regular meeting issue. As the October date approached and we were sent Notices of Study Sessions for our district for the upcoming budget approval process, the homeowner directors inquired as to why we hadn't received a director packet or agenda for our October GVREMD No. 7 board meeting. We were then advised there was no Regular meeting scheduled. We did not know that the monthly dates discussed for meetings were not voted on and scheduled. They were only discussed. Apparently, prior to our election to the board, when the board was comprised of all Oakwood Homes associates, all of our metro district board meetings were set as Special meetings with only the December meeting scheduled as a Regular meeting for the purpose of approving the next year's budget. When we requested a Special meeting be set for the same October 16 date of the Study Session because we wanted discussion to fill the vacancy on the board among other items. We were advised that the Oakwood Homes associate director who is also the President of our metro district board did not see a need for the meeting. The other Oakwood Homes associate director never responded to the request in any way at all.

  This began our education regarding a Quorum to even call a board meeting for GVRE MD No. 7. Since our board is comprised of two homeowner directors and two Oakwood Homes associate directors we were unable to agree about even holding a meeting. District counsel advised she could not provide direction. In the end the board meeting was held with the two homeowner directors and community members as well as a representative of District Counsel's office, CLA, etc.; however, the meeting could not be called to order or any votes held on anything. Neither Oakwood Homes associates directors of the board attended. The community was advised of the status of filling the board vacancy and of the number of candidates and that there were three homeowner candidates and one Oakwood Homes candidate. Updates were also provided regarded community manager reporting, and other issues of interest to the community.

  At the Regular meeting of GVRE MD No. 7 on December 5, 2023, all four directors went into Executive Session with District Counsel for legal advice regarding the filling of the board vacancy and eligibility to be a candidate. After reconvening the board meeting, the two homeowner directors made a motion for election of the homeowner candidate (who lives in the district) to fill the vacancy. I'm sure you can guess how this went down. The Oakwood Homes associate directors made a motion for election of their Oakwood Homes associate candidate. The vote was dead-locked. Discussion among board directors ensued repeatedly. Pointed questions were asked by homeowner board directors. Non-answers to many questions were given by Oakwood Homes associates directors. There were several motions made for the vote on the homeowner candidate. All dead-locked. At one point the President of the board attempted to adjourn the meeting and pick up his belongings and leave but the homeowner directors refused to vote for adjournment. What happened in this meeting that ended 2 1/2 hours after its scheduled end? Dead-lock 2-2. To date we have no 5th director on the GVRE MD No. 7 board. The residents of the community we represent were witness to this meeting and well-aware of the dynamic and are not happy. In spite of three well-qualified, interested, experienced homeowner candidates we have a board that is two homeowner district board directors and two Oakwood Homes associate district board directors. What a great use of the thousands of dollars it costs to hold each of these meetings that are paid by developer advances from bond funds. But that is a whole other issue.

  I understand (somewhat) the reasons that metro districts may have a place in the very beginning of development for economic reasons for cities; however, the original intention has now morphed into a fiscally irresponsible and non-constructive situation for future homeowners in these communities. By the time homeowners understand the implications of the past actions by developers the train has not only left the station--it is on the other side of the country. This is where we need this Task Force to create a recommendation to legislators for more legislated protections of homeowners in metro district communities for oversight and transparency and intervention over developers doing whatever they please before homeowners even become a part of it. Rather than a cohesive and team approach to transferring responsibility from the developers to the community over time, the developer directors on the board take advantage of homeowner directors who accomplish getting on these boards and attempting to serve their communities in this capacity. The developers plan and premeditatedly thwart the wishes of the communities they develop. As a homeowner or a board member if you don't know the questions to ask or the specific right way to ask the questions the information is not offered to you.

  To state the obvious, it almost seems like the developers are only interested in saddling our communities in bond debt and subordinate bond debt and the huge sums of interest that is generated. Those bonds are bought up by LLCs and then the developers spend the rest of their time until they are built out protecting that debt and the interest it creates. This is not an occasional occurrence by developers; it is a formula and is being done all over this state to many of your constituents. Please address this in your report to our legislature. Feel free to contact me if you need more information. Thank you.

  
  

  
  

  
  
• Share Please ask DORA WHY the Audited Financial Statement Reports were removed from DOLA on Facebook Share Please ask DORA WHY the Audited Financial Statement Reports were removed from DOLA on Twitter Share Please ask DORA WHY the Audited Financial Statement Reports were removed from DOLA on Linkedin Email Please ask DORA WHY the Audited Financial Statement Reports were removed from DOLA link

  Please ask DORA WHY the Audited Financial Statement Reports were removed from DOLA

  by Liam in Broomfield, over 2 years ago
  Audited Financial Statements are the key document in understanding what has occurred in a Metropolitan District#2. For some reason, these AFS are being housed in another website which requires interested parties to go thru a Gatekeeper to obtain a special access code.

  Audited Financial Statements are the key document in understanding what has occurred in a Metropolitan District#2. For some reason, these AFS are being housed in another website which requires interested parties to go thru a Gatekeeper to obtain a special access code.
• Share We were the Poster Child for Metro District Dissolution on Facebook Share We were the Poster Child for Metro District Dissolution on Twitter Share We were the Poster Child for Metro District Dissolution on Linkedin Email We were the Poster Child for Metro District Dissolution link

  We were the Poster Child for Metro District Dissolution

  by Liam in Broomfield, over 2 years ago

  The information presented below was extracted from Colorado’s Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) website (Financial Statements and End of Year independent Audits, Annual Reports with Budgets, Intergovernmental Agreements [IGA]) and the City and County website and is believed to be accurate. The following Annual audits were not available on DOLA, 2011, 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022. After 2019, Annual Financial Statements Audits were relocated to another state website.

  
  

  Please list this posting under disappointment with Metropolitan District Operation and Board Oversight.

  
  

  I live in a Metropolitan District of 2,650+ homeowners and ten or more commercial property owners. Within seven years... Continue reading

  The information presented below was extracted from Colorado’s Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) website (Financial Statements and End of Year independent Audits, Annual Reports with Budgets, Intergovernmental Agreements [IGA]) and the City and County website and is believed to be accurate. The following Annual audits were not available on DOLA, 2011, 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022. After 2019, Annual Financial Statements Audits were relocated to another state website.

  
  

  Please list this posting under disappointment with Metropolitan District Operation and Board Oversight.

  
  

  I live in a Metropolitan District of 2,650+ homeowners and ten or more commercial property owners. Within seven years of the beginning of property accumulation, the Metropolitan District #1 was extinguished and the 30 year, straight line amortization had begun with an average interest rate of 5.138% and outstanding bond balance of $15,070,000. The community was NOT cash strapped, in 2004, there were approximately 2,550 completed homes with another 100 to come on line by 2014. The annual principal and interest payment approximated $980,000 or 14.7 Mill Levy in 2025. Our community was the Poster Child for Metro District Termination Study, well positioned to provide PERMANENT TAX RELIEF to our homeowners, with Federally Related Mortgages to repay.

  
  

  But wait, the Developer controlled Board and -or Bond Providers were NOT ready to release this Cash Cow MD#2. In 2012, GASB, issued statement #61 and the MD#2 was encouraged to adopt this new accounting mythology, permitting the Refunding of current 2004 Bonds and adding $2,000,000 (approximately) to the Metro Districts’ total outstanding obligation, (the entire amount of the new $2,000,000 funding was used for bond issuance expenses, no cash out to the Metro District), and changing the straight line bond amortization re-payment to an Interest amortization based on a reduced bond repayment schedule the first ten years of the new bond issuance. Issuing new Refunding Bonds does not necessarily equate to paying off the initially issued bonds. Colorado case law supports the theory that all MD#2 are obligated to repay ALL bonds issued by the MD#2. In 2013, our MD#2 had issued at least $27,000,000 in Bond Obligations, but only trace the last bonds issued.

  
  

  A long story short, instead of only owing $5,500,000 bond principal after 20 years, (2024) our Metro District#2’s outstanding bond balance is almost $11,000,000. Now our homeowners are being asked to repay approximately 66% of the total Refunding Bond obligations in the next ten years, in my opinion, adversely impacting the homeowners’s ability to repay their Federally Related Mortgage Transactions. It appears the early reduction of bond principal payment is designed to set up the MD#2 to seek another refinancing and push the termination deadline into 2054! Colorado Revised Statutes 32-1-xxx, requires Metropolitan Districts to Dissolve as soon as possible, in order to free up resources for other public service needs or General Obligation payments. The spirit of 32-1-xxx is to prevent unnecessary proliferation and fragmentation of local governments and to avoid excessive diffusion of local tax sources!

  
  

  Colorado legislators have a history of eliminating provisions in transactions, not in the public interest of its citizens ( remember the Rule of 78 and Default Judgment Clauses in consumer contracts?). It would be wise for the legislators to prohibit GASG Statement 61, and require all MD#2 to adopt Straight Line accounting methodology.

  
  

  If this transaction is a pattern or practice imposed on MD#2s, then a lot of money is being drained from MAIN STREET and given 17th STREET!

  
  

  The community was told the refinancing was necessary to take advantage of lower interest rates and the outside Auditor proclaims how much less the MD#2 is paying in Bond Principal and interest in the new Refunding bond issue compared to the original bond issue. Simply NOT true, are comparing Apples to Oranges because over $1,000,000 was expenses in administration cost and not classified as interest expense. Of course, if the bonds are again Refunded, none of their misstatement about rate reduction will never come true.