Elbert County to consider $128.8 million debt plan for Ridge at Spring Valley
Five proposed metropolitan districts would finance roads, utilities and other improvements through property taxes and fees; commissioners are scheduled to hold a public hearing Sept. 9.
Elbert County commissioners are scheduled to consider a service plan for five metropolitan districts tied to The Ridge at Spring Valley, a proposed housing development whose financing model would allow up to $128.8 million in collective debt for roads, utilities and other improvements.
The Board of County Commissioners is scheduled to hold a public hearing Sept. 9, 2026. County staff recommends approval if the districts meet statutory creation criteria, the staff memorandum says
The districts would serve the county-approved Ridge at Spring Valley planned unit development, formerly called Moorstead. The PUD allows up to 1,191 homes on about 1,100 acres north of County Road 174 between County roads 21 and 29. The financial model uses 1,193 homes; the records reviewed do not explain the discrepancy.
The available public materials identify the development area but do not provide full legal descriptions or parcel-level maps for the five districts. Their final boundaries therefore cannot be independently stated from the current record.
What the plan would finance
The districts would finance, build, own, operate and maintain interior roads, drainage and detention facilities, water-quality ponds, pocket parks, trails, and water and sewer infrastructure. The plan estimates about $134.7 million in public-improvement costs, including roughly $27.4 million to expand water production and wastewater treatment facilities.
Water and sanitation improvements would be dedicated to Spring Valley Metropolitan District No. 1, which is expected to own and operate them under intergovernmental agreements. The districts also would coordinate water distribution, sewage collection and customer billing through that arrangement.
The proposal would use a special-district financing mechanism rather than the county general fund. The plan says debt could be repaid through property taxes and fees, with utility and development charges providing additional revenue. The available materials do not establish which future fees or tap charges would be binding instead of modeled assumptions.
What homeowners could pay
The service plan sets a maximum debt levy of 65 mills, subject to adjustments for changes in assessment rates and related tax laws. Residential debt generally could be levied for up to 40 years unless a district board with a majority of resident or end-user members votes to extend the term. The plan does not cap operations-and-maintenance mill levies.
In an illustrative tax-year 2025 model, the debt levy is adjusted to 74.360 mills and the operations levy to 17.160 mills, for a combined 91.520 mills. Those are model figures, not a guarantee of any particular year's levy.
For a hypothetical home with a $631,643 market value, [Anderson Analytics estimates](https://elbertcoco.api.civicclerk.com/v1/Meetings/GetAttachmentFile(fileId=9646) annual property taxes of $6,726 under its tax-year 2025 assumptions. About $3,113 would go to existing overlapping taxing entities and $3,613 to the proposed districts — approximately $2,936 for debt service and $677 for operations and maintenance. Homeowners also should expect separate homeowners association fees, the report says.
The estimate depends on assessed values, assessment rates, levy decisions, interest rates, development pace and other assumptions. It is not a current tax bill or a promise that every home would have the same value or charge.
The modeled bond structure
The financial model assumes a $76.24 million general-obligation bond issue in 2027 and a $117.115 million issue in 2037. The latter includes $72.875 million to refund the earlier bonds and $46.264 million in new project costs.
Because refunded principal is not counted as new debt, the sources-and-uses tables count $128.765 million toward the five-district debt limit, rounded in the service plan to $128.8 million. The model assumes 5% interest on the 2027 bonds and 4% on the 2037 bonds. The documents describe the timing, rates, phasing and bond sizes as illustrative; actual issuances could differ.
The [financial plan projects](https://elbertcoco.api.civicclerk.com/v1/Meetings/GetAttachmentFile(fileId=9643) homes being delivered from 2028 through 2039 and uses assessed-value and debt-service assumptions to show the proposed financing could support the development. It does not represent a bond sale or debt already incurred.
At the Sept. 9 hearing, commissioners could approve, reject or modify the request after public review. Until then, the districts, their legal boundaries, debt and levy authority, and infrastructure obligations remain proposed.