Rep. KC Becker

The bill modifies certain statutory requirements applicable to a downtown development authority (authority) in the following respects: In all cases where any plan of development managed by the authority includes an allocation of property tax increment generated by the mill levy imposed by one or more public bodies that are not municipalities, the bill requires that one director of the board of such authority be appointed by agreement of the boards of county commissioners of each county other than a city and county whose property taxes are subject to allocation under any such plan. One director must also be appointed by agreement of the boards of education of each school district whose property taxes are subject to allocation under any such plan and one director must also be appointed by agreement of the boards of directors of each special district whose property taxes are subject to allocation under any such plan. The bill specifies additional requirements applicable to the appointment of board members. In connection with existing statutory procedures permitting an authority to allocate taxes it collects to a special fund to finance a plan of development, the bill clarifies that the taxes that may be allocated are the property taxes of specifically designated public bodies. Before any plan of development containing any tax allocation provisions that allocates any taxes of any taxing entity other than the municipality may be approved by the municipal governing body, the bill requires the authority to notify the governing boards of each other taxing entity whose incremental property tax revenues would be allocated under such proposed plan. Representatives of the authority and the governing body of the municipality and of each taxing entity are then required to meet and attempt to negotiate an agreement governing the sharing of incremental property tax revenue collected within the plan of development area. The agreement may be entered into separately among the municipality, the authority, and each such taxing entity, or through a joint agreement among the municipality, the authority, and any taxing entity that has chosen to enter into that agreement. Any such shared incremental tax revenues governed by any agreement are limited to incremental revenue that may be allocated to a plan of development. The bill gives the parties 120 days to negotiate an agreement. If, after such period has passed, the parties fail to enter into an agreement, the bill requires the parties to participate in mediation on the issue of the appropriate sharing of incremental property tax revenues and the costs of a development project among the municipality, the authority, and any such taxing entities whose incremental property tax revenues will be allocated pursuant to a plan of development and with whom an intergovernmental agreement with the municipality and the authority has not been reached. The mediation is to be conducted by a mediator jointly selected by the parties. If the parties are unable to agree on the appointment of a single mediator, the bill specifies requirements governing the appointment by the parties of a 3-mediator panel, payment of the mediator's fees and costs, and issues the mediator is to consider in making his or her determination. Within 90 days, the bill requires the mediator to issue his or her findings of fact as to the appropriate sharing of costs and incremental property tax revenues, and to promptly transmit such information to the parties. With respect to the use of incremental property tax revenues of each other taxing entity, following the issuance of findings by the mediator, the governing body of the municipality is required to: Incorporate the mediator's findings on the use of incremental property tax revenues of any taxing body into the plan of development and an intergovernmental agreement and proceed to adopt the plan; Amend the plan of development to delete authorization of the use of the incremental property tax revenues of any taxing body with whom an agreement has not been reached; or Direct the authority to either incorporate the mediator's findings into one or more intergovernmental agreements with other taxing entities or enter into new negotiations with one or more taxing entities and enter into one or more intergovernmental agreements with such taxing entities that incorporate such new or different provisions concerning the sharing of costs and incremental property tax revenues with which the parties are in agreement. The bill prohibits any incremental property tax revenues from being allocated to and paid into the special fund of the authority unless the municipality and the authority have satisfied the mediation and other requirements of the bill.(Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.)

Current law authorizes 2 grant programs relating to forest management: One relating to wildfire risk reduction that is administered by the department of natural resources, which is financed by a one-time transfer of $1 million from the general fund, and one relating to landscape-scale forest health that is administered by the state forest service located within Colorado State University, which is financed by annual transfers of $1 million from the severance tax operational fund that ended on July 1, 2016. Section 1 of the bill repeals the grant program administered by the department of natural resources, and section 4 transfers it to the state forest service, renamed as the 'forest restoration and wildfire risk mitigation grant program'. Section 4 also adjusts the composition of the technical advisory panel and specifies that the panel is no longer subject to sunset review. Sections 2 and 3 realign the funding for the new grant program and the healthy forest and vibrant communities fund by allowing $50,000 that had been allocated to the department of public health and environment relating to the air quality impacts of prescribed fire to be used for any authorized purpose of the healthy forests and vibrant communities fund and extending funding for the consolidated grant program for 7 years. Section 2 also allows the forest service to use the existing unencumbered balance of the forest restoration and wildfire risk mitigation grant program cash fund for community watershed restoration purposes. Section 3 also extends the funding for 2 related forest programs for 7 years. Section 5 makes the bill effective on July 1, 2017.(Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)

Section 1 of the bill updates the definition of a broadband network for purposes of telecommunications regulation and deregulation. Section 2 updates how the public utilities commission (commission) makes an effective competition determination for high cost support mechanism (HCSM) funding, which is financial assistance provided to telecommunications companies that provide basic telephone service or broadband service in areas that lack effective competition. Section 3 establishes that HCSM funding cannot be used to support more than one wireline and one wireless line per individual household or individual business. (Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.)