Board OKS revenue agreement for URA

Vote split 4-3 after lengthy public comment

The Thompson School Board approved an intergovernmental agreement that would signal its participation in a proposed urban renewal area (URA) in east Loveland along a 4-3 vote Wednesday, after considerable public comment asking the board not to do so.

Signing the agreement means the district avoids mediation with the developer if the URA is approved. Board members Barb Kruse, Dawn Kirk, Pam Howard and Stu Boyd voted to approve the agreement, while board members

Amy Doran, Alexandra Lessem and Nancy Rumfelt voted against.

The proposed URA, located south of the Centerra development in east Loveland, would allow tax money to be diverted from local taxing authorities like the Thompson School District, Larimer County and the city of Loveland to build infrastructure.

Because of a complex formula associated with Colorado’s School Finance Act, according to the district’s chief financial officer, Gordon Jones, the district will always receive the same total revenue. Any revenue diverted to the developer would be backfilled by the state as a result of the act.

If the developer builds new homes and commercial properties in the area, the district would see considerable increases in tax revenue from charging more to the homeowners and businesses that would be located there.

Advocates of the plan, namely associates of Mcwhinney Real Estate Services, the developer of the property, argue that greater development would create a larger tax base for the taxing authorities to draw on, while critics, of which there were many Wednesday night, argue that giving tax dollars to the developer constitutes a giveaway to private interests at the expense of the public.

There were no supporters of the proposed URA who addressed the school board throughout the nearly two hours of public comment at the meeting Wednesday night, although there were many who spoke out in opposition, including Loveland Mayor Jacki Marsh, who opposed the agreement as a private citizen.

Much of the opposition stemmed from the proposed definition of the Centerra South area as “urban blight,” a requirement to be part of a URA, when that land is currently viable farmland, while others said that the agreement was a giveaway of public funds to private developers.

“This is not needed,”

Marsh said. “The parcel directly to the west of this is under heavy development. Commercial along 34, residential behind it. No URA. They are paying for their own roads, their own infrastructure.”

The question of whether the area is blighted is not up to the school district to decide, but current legislation has been proposed by State Sen. Janice Marchman that would clarify the existing law to indicate that it was not intended to be used for agricultural land.

Marsh asked that the school board delay a vote to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the developer until the question of whether the agricultural land can be considered blight is settled.

A similar proposal was echoed by Rumfelt, a vocal opponent of the proposed

agreement.

“Please consider either voting no on this agreement tonight, or we delay the vote to allow Sen. Marchman the opportunity to get her legislation presented and pushed through, and see what else unfolds,” Rumfelt said. “This is so important to the district, the taxpayers, I just, I really ask that we step back and delay.”

In an interview Thursday, Rumfelt also added that although the state will backfill funds lost by the tax revenue diversion, there is no guarantee that the School Finance Act, which provides those funds, will remain in its current form.

After Rumfelt asked for the delay, Kruse said that the board had considered the topic since January, and called for a vote.

Kirk wondered about the jurisdiction the school district

had in the proceedings, worrying that if it declined to participate, it would simply be forced to at a later date in mediation.

“Somebody needs to answer these questions, I’m just not sure that we’re the ones to do it,” Kirk said.

Recent state legislation that requires taxing districts within the URA’S boundaries enter into intergovernmental agreements with the developer means that those taxing districts have broad leeway to hold up the process of URA approval, but must enter mediation with the developer if they decline to approve an intergovernmental agreement.

The final decision regarding whether the area can be considered blighted lies with the Loveland City Council, who will discuss the issue at its meeting on April 18.