Loveland City Council declined to place a proposed sales‑and‑use tax increase on the November ballot after a late‑night debate that drew hours of public comment and sharply divided council members. Councilor Steve Olsen introduced an emergency ordinance asking voters to approve a 0.2 percent sales tax for 10 years to fund grants for shelter, outreach and programs intended to move people toward self‑sufficiency. Council voted 5 no, 3 yes, defeating the measure.

The ordinance was presented as a way to create a dedicated revenue stream for grants to faith‑based and nonprofit providers and to incentivize programs the measure described as “transformational.” Olsen said the measure was intended to give residents a direct say after months of contentious discussion about the city’s temporary shelter, the South Railroad Facility (SRF), which is scheduled to close at the end of September. “We need a different plan,” Olsen said, urging voters be given “an opportunity to weigh in.”

Public comment at the meeting was dominated by homelessness issues. More than fifty residents addressed the council; speakers represented a wide range of views and experiences. Supporters of the ballot idea and of additional funding emphasized urgency and the need for a predictable funding source. Several speakers who said they work directly with people experiencing homelessness urged action to avoid deaths this winter and detailed gaps in services and shelter capacity. Opponents — including residents, business owners and some nonprofit leaders — criticized the measure’s language, governance provisions and timing. Many said the proposal either lacked sufficient accountability or duplicated existing efforts and would not pass at the ballot box.

Councilors repeatedly stressed that the question before them was whether to put the proposal in front of voters, not to adopt a final program. City staff and several speakers said a successful ballot measure would require further stakeholder engagement, clearer oversight and alignment with regional partners. Multiple members of the public and several councilors urged use of other funding options — including directing newly available marijuana tax revenue — or a regionally coordinated plan rather than a city‑only ballot measure.

After the vote, Councilor Olsen thanked the council and public for the conversation. Several councilors called for additional, expedited work among staff, nonprofits and faith groups to shape a plan that could gain broader community support. The council adjourned following final comments.