Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Finance And Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission adopts public infrastructure district policy to guide PID applications, caps residential levy at 5 mills
Summary
The commission approved a county policy setting application requirements and review criteria for Public Infrastructure Districts (PIDs); the policy sets a $10 million minimum infrastructure threshold and recommends a 5-mill cap on primary-residence levies while preserving county discretion and a fee schedule to cover administrative costs.
The Iron County Commission adopted a policy establishing application requirements, review criteria and an approval process for Public Infrastructure Districts (PIDs).
Marcus Keller (Cruz & Associates) and county staff explained PIDs are a state-authorized financing tool that creates a local district able to issue tax-exempt bonds for public infrastructure tied to a project. The creating entity (the county for unincorporated land) controls governance and can authorize taxing or special-assessment authority within the PID's boundaries; bond proceeds typically finance infrastructure that is eventually dedicated to a public entity for operations and maintenance.
Key elements of the approved county policy include: - A recommended minimum infrastructure threshold of $10,000,000 for projects seeking PID treatment (to ensure economies of scale). - A suggested cap of about 5 mills (0.5%) for PID-authorized levies on primary residential parcels as the county's standard maximum; the policy preserved commission discretion to consider exceptions with justification. - A phased review process that begins with a letter of intent and moves to a governing document if the county supports the concept; applicants will provide parcel lists, proposed mill levies or assessment levels, bonding plans, projected impacts on existing tax areas and a public-benefit statement. - An administrative fee structure to be set in the county fee schedule; staff indicated a preliminary review fee on the order of a few thousand dollars would be proposed to recover county administrative costs.
County staff and the commission discussed risks — including administrative burdens on the treasurer when many unique tax areas exist and the potential for creation of overlapping tax districts — and noted the policy includes protections such as minimum project size, public-benefit criteria and a requirement that affected parcels consent to taxation in most cases. The policy also calls for engagement with municipalities and review of Infrastructure Financing Districts (IFDs), a different state tool some developers use when PIDs are not chosen.
Commissioners voted to adopt the policy with a small wording change suggested by staff; the motion carried unanimously. Staff said they will finalize fee schedule language and make the policy available to prospective applicants and municipal partners.
