Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners raise concerns about small‑parcel PIDs, ask staff to research state rules and local policy options
Summary
Following questions about two small PIDs recorded in Garden City, commissioners asked staff to research statutory rules and best practices; the Garden City mayor and staff described their experience with PIDs and offered to share city policy and state contacts.
Rich County commissioners spent significant time Feb. 4 discussing recent property‑improvement districts (PIDs) recorded in Garden City and the county’s options for responding.
Commissioners said they were surprised to find PIDs recorded as small 40‑by‑100‑foot parcels and questioned whether the PID process — intended to finance infrastructure for larger developments — should be used for tiny parcel pieces. One commissioner described the structure as “a loophole for borrowing money,” arguing that a PID that applies to a small portion of a larger parcel creates administrative and tax‑tracking problems.
The mayor of Garden City explained the city had reviewed several PID requests, approved one and denied two, and offered to share the city's PID policy and the state contacts the county will need. Garden City staff said the PID process is heavily state regulated and filings are reviewed by the lieutenant governor's office.
Commissioners and staff discussed possible county responses: require a PID to encumber an entire parcel, set limits on mill rates or allowable uses of PID proceeds, or adopt a county PID policy that establishes where and how PIDs will be considered in unincorporated areas. Several commissioners requested research on the state statute and examples from other counties. Staff and the mayor agreed to follow up and return with documentation.
No formal action was taken; staff were asked to research the statute, PID procedures and record filings and to return with recommendations.
