Published in the Longmont Times-Call 12-26-08
METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
BEST WAY TO FUND MALL

Kudos to Councilwoman Sarah Levison for opposing the wasteful $3,000 update study designed to expand the “blighted area” for urban renewal quite beyond Twin Peaks Mall, but the council proceeded anyway. Where does it stop?

Rarely does a consulting study of this kind fail to find blight. If I owned property in the targeted area (between Hover/Sunset and Nelson/Ken Pratt Blvd.), I’d be nervous about having an Urban Renewal Authority (URA) with its eminent domain power and red tape taking over.

The city just funded a separate study regarding the mall’s redevelopment concepts (now they’re into housing?) so that “a partnership between the city and mall-owner could move forward.”

When did this private venture, unlike numerous other businesses around town, become a “partner” with Longmont taxpayers and what kind of financial kickbacks are involved?

Uh-oh, the unfair tax-increment financing scheme (TIF) is back on the table. Which means, as the mall prospers as anticipated, the mall-owner would get to keep the expected increase in city sales-tax revenues that the mall collects (which normally would flow into the city’s general fund to pay for things like police and fire protection) and apply that money to making payments on long-term bonds issued by the URA (no vote required) to fund his improvements. How nice.

In years ahead, the city’s general fund would still get some sales-tax revenue from the mall, but no more than a predetermined base amount, probably the same as this year.

And what if the mall still fails? Longmont taxpayers could be stuck with URA’s bonded indebtedness (viz. city of Englewood, CO.).

Alternative? The Metropolitan District concept is the best and fairest way to keep the financial burden of redeveloping Twin Peaks Mall where it belongs: on the back of the mall-owner and off the backs of Longmont taxpayers.
P.