Victorville council forms Community Facilities District 2024-1 after debate over future tax escalators

The Victorville City Council voted on Dec. 17 to form Community Facilities District (CFD) 2024-1 and set a property-owner election date, approving companion measures that will allow the city to levy a special tax within the new district.

Council members approved resolution 24-102 to form CFD 2024-1 and set an election date requested by the property owner, and later certified the election results with resolution 24-103. The council also introduced ordinance 2453 to authorize levy of special taxes in the district (first reading by title only) and adopted council policy CP-24-06 to govern administration of the CFD going forward.

The CFD was proposed to mitigate the long-term fiscal impacts of new development — primarily to fund incremental public safety and municipal services tied to a specific development on about 117 acres with a tentative map for roughly 312 residential units. Staff said the CFD is part of a broader fiscal-sustainability plan the council adopted in 2023. The property owner requested inclusion in the formation process; the final tract map tied to this property (Tract Map 14525) was approved separately on the consent calendar contingent on formation of the CFD.

Council discussion focused heavily on how the district’s annual “enrollment” (the rate the council chooses to levy each year) interacts with a tracked maximum “escalator” (the maximum allowable increase tied to “up to 5% or CPI, whichever is greater”) and a catch-up feature that stores unused capacity. Staff and the city’s consultant said the maximum tax would continue to be tracked each year, and the council retains discretion annually to enroll any amount up to that maximum; they said the catch-up amount is not automatic and would require a council decision. City staff said they expect to bring the CFD’s annual enrollment back to the council each year as part of the regular budget review so voters and the public can see revenues and costs.

Several council members and members of the public questioned the catch-up feature’s potential to produce large, unexpected increases in a single year. Council Member Deborah Jones, who ultimately voted against the formation, said she worried residents could face steep increases if the council later chose to “catch up” — citing hypothetical examples discussed in staff presentations. Jones also noted that the measure had failed on an earlier council vote and was brought back; she said she supported the concept of better funding public safety but could not support keeping the catch-up feature in place without alternatives before the council. Council Member Tiffany Godin also voted no on formation and related items.

Other council members defended the structure as a tool to allocate costs to new development instead of having existing residents subsidize service demands from growth. Staff emphasized the policy they added would require annual transparent reporting and give the council opportunities to phase any increases if large adjustments were needed.

The votes on the key actions were: resolution 24-102 (formation) passed with Council Members Godin and Jones voting no; resolution 24-103 (certifying election results) passed unanimously; ordinance 2453 (introduction for levy of special taxes) passed on first reading with Jones voting no; and resolution 24-107 (adopting council policy CP-24-06 to administer the CFD) passed with Jones voting no. The council received one written public comment that was distributed and posted prior to the meeting.

What happens next: ordinance 2453 will proceed through the ordinance-adoption process (second reading/adoption) under standard procedures. Staff said the CFD administration policy will guide annual reviews, enrollment recommendations, and public reports tied to the city budget process.

Speakers at the meeting included City Manager Keith Metzler and Deputy City Manager Janelle Davidson (staff presenters), consultant Heidi Sheppey (Webb Associates, available by Zoom), City Clerk (certifying ballots), city attorney Dave Wernowski (legal clarifications), and council members Mira Becerra (mayor), Deborah Jones, Tiffany Godin, Greg Irving, and Mayor Pro Tem Tim Harriman. An emailed public comment was received and posted to the record.

The council distinguished discussion from formal action throughout: staff presented options and technical clarifications, council members asked policy and fairness questions, and the council then took the formal votes that established the district and the administrative policy governing it.