Franklin board reviews draft Infrastructure Development District policy amid public caution

City staff and counsel presented a draft policy framework to govern petitions for real estate Infrastructure Development Districts (IDDs) in Franklin. The policy establishes a notice‑of‑intent and draft‑petition process, four municipal‑benefit priority areas (extraordinary development, infrastructure, attainable housing, redevelopment), and financing preferences that include use of a conduit issuer for special‑assessment bonds and a stated preference for a 3:1 municipal‑benefit ratio (the state minimum is 2:1). Counsel emphasized the city will not use a general‑obligation pledge for these financings and warned the city will incur administrative costs and monitoring responsibilities.

Public speaker Janet Curtis urged the board to proceed cautiously, citing examples in other states where developer‑led special districts left homeowners and counties with long‑term assessments and unfinished amenities. "When private ambition is financed with public risk, communities pay the price," she said, urging strict oversight, solvency requirements and resident protections.

Board members debated whether the draft is over‑engineered and potentially discouraging to developers or should start stringent to protect the city's AAA credit and public interest. Several aldermen asked staff to return with clarifications on county collection mechanics (an interlocal agreement is required for the county trustee to collect assessments), administrative fees (5% proposed), and how the policy would be applied to balance transparency and marketability. Staff said they will revise the draft and return at the next work session for further discussion on Dec. 9.