Littleton council advances planning for South Platte Renew authority

Littleton City Council voted 7-0 Nov. 3 to continue developing a proposed public authority to operate South Platte Renew, the wastewater treatment facility jointly owned by Littleton and Englewood. The vote advanced planning but did not create the authority or approve agreements.

City Manager Jim Becklenberg said staff expects agreements to be developed and brought back to both councils over the next eight to 10 months. He said public discussion will continue, with outreach planned for January and February 2027 to explain the proposal’s potential benefits and risks and gather public input.

Resolution 81-2026 directs staff to continue developing the authority model with Englewood and South Platte Renew and prepare formation and operating documents for future consideration. It also calls for public outreach and a later report on community input. The resolution does not form the authority or approve an agreement, contract, lease or property transfer, the resolution says. Mayor Kyle Schlachter said the council was not making a final decision on the authority.

A governance presentation outlined potential reasons for the authority, including financing flexibility for future capital needs, debt and rate smoothing, utility-specific financing and possible reductions in financing costs. The presentation also described a possible change in liability: operational liability would transfer to the authority immediately, while the cities’ legacy liability would diminish over time, with some remaining. These are potential effects of the proposed model, not terms approved by the council.

Later decisions would address governance and board appointments, the operating agreement and how the authority would obtain rights to the facility’s land and improvements. The cities could consider a long-term lease or a transfer of Littleton’s interest in capital equipment, but neither option has been approved. Staff materials say the authority would need at least extended possessory rights to the land and improvements to secure financing for anticipated capital improvements and unfunded mandates, according to a staff memo in the council packet. The presentation describes a 50/50 board as a planning assumption, not a settled term, and outlines other possible governance and asset arrangements.

The facility currently operates under agreements between the cities covering operations, maintenance, cost-sharing and capital investments. Changes to those arrangements or to asset ownership would require separate action.