Bill Tracker

Public notice for bids on special district construction contracts is
currently required when the contract cost is $60,000 or more. The bill
increases the notice threshold to $120,000 or more, and requires the
amount to be adjusted for inflation every 5 years.

• February 28, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report
• February 28, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report
• February 07, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report
• February 07, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report

Most real property is reassessed every odd-numbered year. The bill
establishes a one-time exception by making the reassessment cycle
beginning on January 1, 2021, a 4-year cycle so that the next reassessment
cycle will begin in 2025 instead of 2023.
Under current law, for the 2023 property tax year, the actual value
used for purposes of valuation for assessment is reduced for commercial
real property by $30,000 and for residential real property by $15,000. The
bill eliminates these reductions.
The bill also sets the assessment rates for nonresidential real
property and multi-family residential real property for the 2024 property
tax year, so that they are the same rates as for the 2023 property tax year.
Lastly, the bill ensures that the actual value of property used for
purposes of valuation for assessment does not increase by more than 5%
between 2022 and 2025, for property that does not have an unusual
condition which results in an increase or decrease in actual value.

• March 09, 2023: House Finance Committee Report
• March 09, 2023: House Finance Committee Report

A metropolitan district is a type of special district that provides at
least 2 services from a list of specified services. One of those specified
services is providing parks or recreational facilities or programs. Current
law allows a metropolitan district to levy a property tax to provide
services; however, a metropolitan district can also levy a sales tax for
safety protection, street improvement, transportation services, and fire
protection. Both property taxes and sales taxes require voter approval.
The bill allows a metropolitan district to also levy a sales tax to provide
parks or recreational facilities or programs within the district in which the
tax is levied.

• March 28, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report
• March 28, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report
• February 14, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report
• February 14, 2023: HB23-1062 L.001 House Transportation, Housing & Local Government
• February 14, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report

The Bill includes Special Districts (organized under Title 32) and School Districts under the jurisdiction of the Independent Ethics Commission (IEC)to hear complaints.  When the 2006 Initiative 41 creating IEC was implemented, it included in its purposes “The conduct of local government officials ... must hold the respect and confidence of the people,”[1] and “Any effort to realize personal financial gain through public office other than compensation provided by law is a violation of that trust.”[2] The underlined text sounds as if to mean ALL local officials, but the law went on to define “local government” as counties and municipalities.[3]  HB3-1065 seeks to hold other local government officials in special districts and school districts to account as well.

This is important because there are reports of districts controlled by the developer, not the resident taxpayers, increasing the debt burden on the actual resident taxpayers beyond the objectively documented needs of the district, to enrich the developer.  The definition of an “elector” in the Special District Act [32-1-103(5)(b), and 32-1-808, CRS], developers can elect themselves to the board of a metro districts and retain control of the district in perpetuity, as if it were a fully-owned subsidiary of their corporation.  This bill tries to offer an avenue for accountability to special district and school district directors so as to restore the trust that Amendment 21 contemplates.

The financial accountability of special districts should be improved, and mill levies limited. Guidance and supervision from a central agency are desirable. [LWV 2022-2023 Positions for Action, p, 42: Local Government>Special Districts]

[1] Art. XXIX, Sec. 1(1), Colo. Const.

[2] Art. XXIX, Sec. 1(1)(d), Colo. Const.

[3] Art. XXIX, Sec. (2), Colo. Const.

Under current law, the independent ethics commission created in
article XXIX of the state constitution does not have jurisdiction over
officials or employees of special districts or school districts. The bill
gives the independent ethics commission jurisdiction to hear complaints,
issue findings, assess penalties, and issue advisory opinions on ethics
issues concerning a local government official or local government
employee. Local government is defined to include a county,
municipality, special district, or school district. Existing ethical standards
apply to a local government official and a local government employee.
The bill applies those standards to a local government official or local
government employee through the independent ethics commission.

• May 05, 2023: Senate Appropriations Committee Report
• May 02, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report
• April 28, 2023: House Appropriations Committee Report
• February 07, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report
• February 07, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report

The Bill prohibits a residential metropolitan district board member from purchasing debt issued by their district, or any entity purchasing its debt with whom a director has a conflict of interest; under the Rules of Conduct for Members of Boards and Commission in the Code of Ethics Law. [24-18-109, CRS] 

This prohibition must be

1. In the district’s service plan approved by the governing body of a city or county
2. Approved by the court in considering a petition of organization of the district

This is important because there are reports of districts controlled by the developer, not the resident taxpayers, increasing the debt burden on the actual resident taxpayers beyond the objectively documented needs of the district, to enrich the developer.  Due to the vagaries of the definition of an “elector” in the Special District Act [32-1-103(5)(b), and 32-1-808, CRS], developers can control the boards of special districts in perpetuity, as if it were a fully-owned subsidiary of their corporation.  This bill tries to simply restrict a bit of that power.

The financial accountability of special districts should be improved, and mill levies limited.

[LWV 2022-2023 Positions for Action, p, 42: Local Government>Special Districts]

For any proposed metropolitan district that has any property within
its boundaries that is zoned or valued for assessment as residential,
section 1 of the bill prohibits a local government from approving a
service plan that permits the purchase of district debt by any entity with
respect to which any director of the district has a conflict of interest
necessitating disclosure under current law. Section 2 prohibits a member
of the board of a metropolitan district that approved the issuance of any
debt while the member was serving on the board from acquiring any
interest in the debt individually or on behalf of any organization or entity
for which the board member is engaged as an employee, counsel,
consultant, representative, or agent unless the debt is acquired indirectly
through an investment fund and the member has no input into or control
over the individual securities that the fund purchases.
Section 3 states that proof of a violation of the prohibition set forth
in section 2 is proof that the violator has breached the actor's fiduciary
duty and the public trust.

• March 28, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report
• March 28, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report
• February 07, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report
• February 07, 2023: HB23-1090 L.002 House Transportation, Housing & Local Government
• February 07, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report

The bill requires the state treasurer to transfer 60% of the
severance taxes paid by an entity that are attributable to the developing,
processing, or energy conversion of minerals and mineral fuels subject to
taxation in a county in a given tax year to that same county. A county that
receives a transfer in accordance with the bill shall use the transferred
funds for building or improving roads, schools, or local infrastructure.

• February 13, 2023: House Finance Committee Report
• February 13, 2023: House Finance Committee Report

HB23-1105 would create two task forces: 1) to examine issues in Homeowners’ Associations, created under the Colorado Common Interest Communities Act, Article 33.3 of Title 38 CRS,  and 2) to examine issues Metropolitan Districts, created under the Special District Act 32-1-1004 CRS [the MD Task Force].  The latter of these pursuits have the attention of the LAC Local Government team.

There has been a spate of metro district bills this session, all of which were prompted by complaints from homeowners of possibly unethical behavior by metro district.  There currently awaits action on another bill, HB23-1065, in the House Appropriations Committee to include special districts and school districts in the purview of the Local Government Independent Ethics Committee, which would address complaints on the legality of these actions. In the meantime, HB23-1105 is primed to pass the second house.

The LAC approved the monitoring of HB23-1105 earlier in the session at the request of the Local Government team, since the makeup of the MD Task Force did not include representation of the homeowners’ perspective.  Amendments in the House improved the membership of the Task Force to include a) homeowners residing in metro districts, and b) an attorney who primarily represents homeowners in legal proceedings against metro districts.

While creation of the Metropolitan District Task Force will not solve any the problems that metro district homeowners experience, it will give them a voice to express them in a written report under the auspices of the General Assembly. A couple of the bills this session which would have addressed some of these issues failed by very close votes.  The Local Government team believes that progress can be made on this front by getting true facts in front of the legislature in a well-measured forum.

The problems homeowners are having in some metro districts will not go away.  The Local Government group believes that these problems will continue, and the opposition to the non-democratic process that spawns them will continue to grow and will be felt in future legislative sessions.  

The LG group met and decided it was worth while testifying in favor of the bill at this late stage of the legislative process, if for no other reason that it will a) support Rep. Parenti’s efforts, b) it adds our LWVCO voice to the conversation, and c) may help future bills in future years, which we think are inevitable.

-----------------------------

The financial accountability of special districts should be improved . . . Guidance and supervision from a central agency are desirable. [LWV 2022-2023 Positions for Action, p, 42: Local Government>Special Districts]

LWVCO Supports this bill.

The bill creates the HOA homeowners' rights task force (HOA task
force) and the metropolitan district homeowners' rights task force (metro
district task force) in the division of housing (division) in the department
of local affairs. The director of the division or the director's designee
serves as the chair of both task forces.
Members of the HOA task force must be designated or appointed
on or before July 1, 2023. The HOA task force is required to:
  • Study issues confronting HOA homeowners' rights,
including homeowners' associations' fining authority and
practices, foreclosure practices, and communications with
homeowners;
  • Prepare an interim report regarding its findings and
conclusions, publish the interim report on the division's
website, and submit copies of the report to the metro
district task force on or before September 30, 2023; and
  • Prepare a final report, publish the final report on the
division's website, and submit copies of the final report to
the metro district task force, the legislative committees with
oversight of housing and local government issues
(legislative committees), and the governor on or before
December 31, 2023.
Members of the metro district task force must be designated or
appointed on or before December 1, 2023. The metro district task force
is required to:
  • Study issues confronting metropolitan district homeowners'
rights, including metropolitan district boards' tax levying
authority and practices, foreclosure practices, and
communications with homeowners, and consider the HOA
task force's findings and conclusions as they relate to
metropolitan district homeowners' rights; and
  • Prepare a report regarding its findings and conclusions,
publish the report on the division's website, and submit
copies of the report to the legislative committees and the
governor on or before March 1, 2024.

• April 28, 2023: Senate Appropriations Committee Report
• April 27, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report
• April 10, 2023: House Appropriations Committee Report
• April 10, 2023: House Appropriations Committee Report
• February 23, 2023: House Business Affairs & Labor Committee Report
• February 23, 2023: House Business Affairs & Labor Committee Report

Under existing law, a board of county commissioners (board) may
designate unincorporated areas of a county where it is unlawful to
discharge firearms, except the board may not prohibit discharge of
firearms in shooting galleries, on private grounds, or in residences under
circumstances that do not endanger persons or property. A designated
area must have an average population density of 100 persons or more per
square mile.
The bill repeals the exception for private property, repeals the
minimum population density requirement, and instead requires that the
designated area have 30 dwellings or more per square mile. A board is not
allowed to prohibit discharge of a firearm in a designated area by a peace
officer, in an indoor shooting gallery located in a private residence, or at
a shooting range.

• May 04, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report
• February 08, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report
• February 08, 2023: HB23-1165 L.001 House Transportation, Housing & Local Government
• February 08, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report

Currently, in a county with a population of 70,000 or more, the
board of county commissioners (board) may consist of 3 commissioners
from 3 districts, with one commissioner elected from each district by
voters of the whole county. Alternatively, the board may consist of 5
commissioners, the county may be divided into 3 or 5 districts, and the
commissioners may be elected pursuant to one of 10 alternative methods.
The bill eliminates this discretionary system and instead requires
that all counties with a population of 70,000 or more have 5
commissioners, with at least 3 commissioners elected only by voters
resident in the district from which each commissioner runs for election.
The bill allows the counties to choose between 3 election alternatives:
  • 3 commissioners resident in 3 districts elected by voters
resident in those districts and 2 commissioners elected at
large;
  • 4 commissioners resident in 4 districts elected by voters
resident in those district and one commissioner elected at
large; or
  • 5 commissioners resident in 5 districts elected only by
voters resident in those districts.
The bill makes conforming amendments to statutory provisions
concerning commissioner districts and election petition statutes. The bill
does not affect counties that have adopted home rule.

• March 02, 2023: House State, Civic, Military, & Veterans Affairs Committee Report
• March 02, 2023: House State, Civic, Military, & Veterans Affairs Committee Report

Under current law, county treasurers are ex officio district
treasurers for drainage districts, irrigation districts, and internal
improvement districts that provide services related to drainage and
ditches (collectively, district). The bill removes the duty of the county
treasurer to be ex officio district treasurer and provides that district
treasurers are appointed by the board of directors of the district. The bill
also clarifies that duties of the county treasurer as ex officio district
treasurer are solely duties of the district treasurer. Additionally, the bill
clarifies that irrigation district taxes and internal improvement district
taxes are distributed in alignment with current law for the distribution of
taxes collected by county treasurers.

• March 08, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report
• March 08, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report
• February 14, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report
• February 14, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report

The bill allows a local government to provide temporary property
tax relief through temporary property tax credits or mill levy reductions
and later eliminate the credits or restore the mill levy. The bill clarifies
that a local government may temporarily reduce property taxes due by
providing for tax credits or reducing the mill levy and later eliminate the
tax credits or restore the mill levy.

• April 10, 2023: House Finance Committee Report
• February 23, 2023: Senate Finance Committee Report
• February 23, 2023: Senate Finance Committee Report
• February 09, 2023: Senate State, Veterans, & Military Affairs Committee Report
• February 09, 2023: Senate State, Veterans, & Military Affairs Committee Report

Sections 1, 2, 3, and 5 of the bill make some amendments to the Special Districts Act (Title 32-1-101, et seq) regarding the organization and operation of Metropolitan Districts (MDs), ostensibly under the goal of transparency.  These provisions do not add anything to such districts’ transparency after they are up and running, which is when most of the current complaints arise about the lack of same.

Section 4 of the bill refers to how a director can be issued MD debt which is the provision that would do damage.  It begins “Prior to issuing debt to a director of a metropolitan district or to an entity with respect to which a director of a metropolitan district must make a disclosure under Section 24-18-109.”[1]  The bill’s language assumes that a director can do such a thing, which is obvious self-dealing, a transaction which would represent the most egregious conflict of interest and should be prevented,   [This would specifically be prevented by the enactment of HB23-1090, another currently pending bill, which the LWV should support.]

This is one of the bills that reflects the anger and frustration of residents of MDs across Colorado today, which arise from the all-too-common practice of some developers arranging their MDs so that residents have minimal information on, or control of, their MDs.  All special districts organized under Title 32 are technically “political subdivisions of the state,” but many amendments to the statute have served, over the past 40 years or so, to give real estate development interests a number of ways they can manipulate the organization and operation of MDs so they operate like a wholly-owned subsidiary of the developers, instead of an organization providing service to its residents.  We should consider this to be antithetical to the whole concept of governance.

The financial accountability of special districts should be improved . . . Guidance and supervision from a central agency are desirable. [LWV 2022-2023 Positions for Action, p, 42: Local Government>Special Districts]

[1]  (3)(a) of this section says “A member of any governing body of a government who has a personal or private interest in any matter proposed or pending before the governing body shall disclose such interest … and shall not vote thereon and shall refrain from attempting to influence of other members . . .

Under current law, prior to filing a petition for the organization of
a special district in a district court, the people proposing the organization
of the special district are required to submit a service plan to the board of
county commissioners of each county that has unincorporated territory
included within the boundaries of the proposed special district. If the
boundaries of the proposed special district are wholly contained within
the boundaries of one or more municipalities, the service plan is
submitted to the governing body of the municipality or municipalities. For
a proposed metropolitan district that submits a service plan to one or more
boards of county commissioners or one or more governing bodies of a
municipality on or after January 1, 2024, sections 1 and 2 of the bill
require the service plan to include:
  • The maximum mill levy that may be imposed for the
payment of general obligation indebtedness, as determined
by the board of county commissioners of each county that
is approving the service plan or the governing body of each
municipality that is approving the service plan, as
applicable; and
  • The maximum debt that may be issued by the metropolitan
district, as determined by the board of county
commissioners of each county that is approving the service
plan or the governing body of each municipality that is
approving the service plan, as applicable.
In addition to any other meetings held by the board of directors of
a metropolitan district (board), beginning in the 2023 calendar year,
section 3 requires the board to hold an annual meeting if the metropolitan
district was organized after January 1, 2020, has residential units within
its boundaries, and is not in inactive status. The board is prohibited from
taking any official action at the annual meeting and must ensure that the
annual meeting includes a presentation from the metropolitan district
regarding the status of any of the district's projects and outstanding bonds,
if any, and an opportunity for members of the public to ask questions
about the metropolitan district.
Section 4 specifies that prior to issuing debt to a director of a
metropolitan district or to an entity with respect to which a director of a
metropolitan district must make a disclosure pursuant to current law, the
board is required to receive a statement of a registered municipal advisor
certifying specified criteria regarding the interest rate of the debt.
Sellers of real property are currently required to make various
disclosures regarding the property. On and after a specified date, section
5 requires the seller of residential real property that is located within a
metropolitan district to provide the purchaser of the property with the
official website established by the metropolitan district. The seller is
required to provide the information on the Colorado real estate
commission approved seller's property disclosure.

• March 07, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report
• March 07, 2023: House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee Report
• February 14, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report
• February 14, 2023: Senate Local Government & Housing Committee Report