Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Sharing Mcwinnie Sentara topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council directs staff to open talks with McWinnie about early termination of sales‑tax credits for Centerra developments
Summary
To help close a projected $10.4 million budget shortfall, the Loveland City Council voted 8-0 to direct the city manager and city attorney to attempt to negotiate early termination or revision of sales-tax credit agreements (sales tax credits/MFA) with McWinnie for Centerra properties.
The Loveland City Council voted unanimously to direct the city manager and city attorney to open negotiations with the McWinnie organization to discuss early termination or revision of sales-tax credit agreements tied to the Centerra (Millennium) area. The motion aims to explore whether changes to those tax-sharing arrangements could return revenue to the city to help address a reported $10.4 million recurring budget gap.
Councilor Laura Light Kovacs introduced the idea as “additional ways that we could increase our city revenues given our financial situation.” She asked staff to enter negotiations with the McWinnie organization "to discuss an attempt to negotiate the early termination of the city sales tax credit for Centerra South and The US 34 Crossroads Urban Renewal Plan to help offset the city's budget constraints," language that council later adopted.
Council members discussed precedent for re‑opening revenue-sharing arrangements and whether prior follow‑ups had occurred; staff told council that the City previously discussed similar topics in Centera South negotiations but did not pursue an early‑termination negotiation at that time because parties were focused on other settlement topics. McWinnie representatives told council they were open to talking. Council approved the motion 8–0; staff emphasized that any agreement reached would return to council for review before becoming binding.
This action is a direction to staff to begin exploratory negotiations; it does not change existing agreements. Council members supporting the motion described it as a responsible effort to seek possible revenue that could reduce cuts for core services. Supporters said discussions would be voluntary and any ultimate changes would come back to council for a final decision.
Next steps: city staff and the city attorney will reach out to McWinnie to open voluntary discussions. Council said it expects any negotiated proposal to be presented again to the council for explicit approval and noted that some types of contract or land‑use changes could trigger public processes or legal thresholds that staff will identify during negotiations.
