Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Metro Districts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council rejects request to extend Lee Farms metro district debt deadline
Summary
Loveland City Council unanimously voted down a developer request to extend the Lee Farms Metropolitan District’s debt-issuance deadline, citing concerns the proposal would not meet the city’s current metro-district standards without a service-plan modification.
Loveland — The City Council voted 9–0 to reject a resolution that would have extended the debt-issuance deadline for Lee Farms Metropolitan Districts Nos. 1–4.
The extension request, presented by attorney David O’Leary of Spencer Fane and supported by materials from the district, would have amended a provision of the district’s 2016 service plan to allow the district more time to issue debt needed for public improvements. O’Leary told the council that a national builder is under contract and intends to move forward with Phase 2 plans, and that the request would extend the district’s authorization through Dec. 10, 2029.
City Attorney Vince Strumless said the matter was a policy decision for council and noted the city’s office was not taking a formal position. He explained the extension would rely on the existing 2016 service-plan standards rather than the city’s updated standards adopted since that time.
During discussion, several council members said the existing service plan does not reflect the city’s current “17‑point” metro-district standards and recommended requiring a substantial modification or additional disclosures before consenting. David O’Leary and city staff suggested the parties could pursue a targeted set of disclosures or a more surgical modification to keep the builder engaged while addressing council concerns.
Members of the public urged caution. Neighbor Cindy Vance Lambert and others asked whether taxpayers and affected homeowners had been adequately protected under the older plan. Linda Rose argued the court case cited by staff did not justify treating leaseback financing as exempt from TABOR requirements.
After debate, council conducted a roll call; the resolution failed on a 0–9 vote. The council record shows no consent was granted, and O’Leary was thanked for his presentation.
