Reasons for Loveland council’s about-face remain elusive 

LOVELAND — It may be awhile for a definitive answer on what transpired to cause the Loveland City Council to do an abrupt about-face and reverse its decision to rescind the Centerra South Urban Renewal Area decision.

Members of the council came out of executive session in the early morning hours Wednesday and voted 7-2, with Mayor Jacki Marsh and council member Erin Black opposed, to reverse course and seek a settlement with McWhinney Real Estate Services Inc.

Members of the parties are tight-lipped. Chad McWhinney, CEO of McWhinney, told BizWest Wednesday morning that “we’re pleased with the city decision” and “we’re looking forward to talking with the city and reaching a settlement.”

SPONSORED CONTENT

Commercial Solar is a big investment, but not an overwhelming one

Solar offers a significant economic benefit for commercial property owners while also positively impacting the environment and offering a path to compliance for new municipal requirements like Energize Denver. A local, experienced solar installer will help you navigate the complexities of commercial solar to achieve financial success for your project.

He said he was unable to comment further upon advice of his attorney but looked forward to restoring a relationship with the city, the company’s home base and founding location.

The about-face was somewhat baffling to observers. District Court Judge Carroll Brinegar on Feb. 15 gave the parties more time to file responses to motions for summary judgment. She set a deadline of Monday, Feb. 19, a holiday, to file those motions.

Nothing was filed on that day, leading to speculation that something was afoot.

But on Tuesday, Feb. 20, in the afternoon, two responses showed up in the court’s database but were dated Feb. 19. Those filings showed no movement on positions of the parties.

McWhinney’s attorney, Christopher Murray with Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck LLP, continued to argue that the city did not have standing to challenge an approved urban renewal plan and that its motion to rescind breached a contract that could place the city on the hook for damages in the millions of dollars.

The city’s attorneys, Michael Plachy with Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP and Josh Marks with Berg Hill Greenleaf Ruscitti LLP, argued that no contract existed because the city failed to give 30 days’ notice of the public hearing on the URA, thus rendering the city decisions void.

The case may gain clarity on Thursday when the court has set a status conference to discuss the case. The dates set for the trial, Feb. 29 and March 1, are likely to be vacated.

A call and email to Plachy was returned with “I’m not authorized to speak to the media on the city’s behalf. Please reach out to (city attorney) Moses Garcia. Maybe he can help.”

A call to Garcia was not returned prior to publication time but the city’s director of communication and engagement wrote in an email to BizWest that “ultimately the reason for the decision boils down to (the) council’s desire to do what is best for the city. Regarding next steps, the settlement terms will need to be brought back to (the) council for further direction. The goal is to have this resolved by the end of March.”

While that settlement agreement remains to be negotiated, the city also faces a lawsuit filed in municipal court by multiple former council members alleging charter violations in the city council’s decision to rescind the Centerra South plan. That lawsuit remains active, but attorney Russell Sinnett, who is handling the case for the plaintiffs, said he will be talking with his clients about whether the city’s actions early Wednesday affect what they want to do.

“Our case is not related to the McWhinney case,” Sinnett told BizWest. 

Gathering information on the status of the municipal case has been challenging because Loveland Municipal Court, fearing a conflict of interest, executed an intergovernmental agreement with Greeley Municipal Court so that Greeley Judge Mark Gonzales will hear it. 

Court administrators in Loveland often do not know the status. Court administrators in Greeley also are uncertain about the status. Sinnett said a status conference is set for March 29, although the Greeley administrator did not have that date as of Wednesday, saying that the parties are still talking. 

The city of Loveland has yet to file a response to the complaint, but a deadline for that is Feb. 26.

The district court case is McWhinney Real Estate Services, et al, versus city of Loveland, case number 2023cv30956 filed in Larimer County District Court.