City of Roseville Finance—CFD #5 ‘overlay’ in SPA-3
Date: 1/12/2016 FFNA and Westpark NA Joint Board Meeting
Monty Hanks (Roseville Finance Director), Jeannine Thrash, Roseville Administrative Analyst, and Steve Hicks representing the Fiddyment Farm developers, gave a presentation on the proposed Mello Roos assessment CFD #5, which would replace the current Fiddyment Farm CFD #1 in the “SPA-3” parcels of the Fiddyment Farm area.
Because SPA-3 added a proposed 1,661 more homes to that area in 2014, it was initially expected that the CFD’s would be reduced for that whole area (more and smaller lots by virtue of increasing the number of homes in the same acreage by over 20%. Instead, the City recalculated the “mass tax” (total tax amount due for the tax parcel area), and determined that the share amount would actually be higher. So this triggered the proposed CFD #5 for all of Phase 2 that has not already begun construction, and all of Phase 3. All those areas previously assessed as CFD #1 will now become assessed at the CFD #5 rate (the prior CFD #1 assessment would be paid off so that only the CFD #5 rate would be imposed. [FYI—you may notice it skipped from the 3 CFD’s we now have to CFD #5—City staff indicated that CFD #4 is actually not a West Roseville specific Plan assessment; it actually belongs to another infill area.]
CFD #5 will be on the City Council Agenda for next Wednesday, January 20th for approval.
It was mentioned that the current CFD #1 bond ($80,000,000 initially) will be paid off early in this process. The opportunity is provided to refund the bonds in the 10th year 9/1/2016. This would produce a 5-10% savings. Westpark recently went through the same early pay-off process for the bond. Mr. Hanks indicated Westpark residents should be getting reductions from the adjustment last year. there may be a reduction to the CFD #1 assessments because of that. Nothing has been indicated yet about reductions, and apparently Westpark will continue to build out without need of an overlay for increases.
Discussions also came up over the $5.000 (increased last July) Public Facilities Fee (PFF) that new home residents continue to be assessed with. The PFF assessment is collected from the developer impact fees paid when permits are pulled, and obviously part of our home costs. This fee is most commonly referred to as the Downtown Roseville Fee because that’s where all the money has been designated to go by City Council decision. Sue Cook mentioned her continued objection to the “fee”—that public facilities should be the responsibility of all residents of the City, and all residents should have the opportunity to vote for them and determine where they should be applied. But if it’s called a “fee”, it’s not a tax and does not require a public vote.
Download the presentation here:
There are no comments to display.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.