Loveland council to review 2 lawsuits targeting it

LOVELAND — Two weeks after the city of Loveland petitioned Larimer County District Court to dismiss two lawsuits filed against the city, the Loveland City Council is expected to go into executive session Tuesday night to discuss the cases.

Loveland City Attorney Vince Junglas will present the current status of the lawsuits with council members during the closed-door session and discuss possible strategies.

Loveland-based attorney Russell Sinnett filed both lawsuits against the city earlier this year.

In one, eight plaintiffs including former Loveland City Council members Richard Ball, Dave Clark, John Fogle, Don Overcash and Chauncey Taylor sued the current city council, seeking the ouster of Mayor Jacki Marsh, Mayor Pro Tem Jon Mallo, and council members Troy Krenning, Erin Black and Laura Light-Kovacs, alleging they violated the city charter last Nov. 21 by not calling for a public vote on its rescission of urban-renewal and financial agreements with McWhinney Real Estate Services Inc. approved in April and May 2023 over its proposed Centerra South development. The council in February reversed its decision and reinstated the agreements after McWhinney sued.

The lawsuit said the public vote should have been called because Loveland voters in the same Nov. 7 election that propelled council members less amenable to McWhinney’s plans into office had also approved the citizen-initiated Ballot Issue 301, which gave voters the final say on urban-renewal plans.

In the other case, Ward 1 resident Peter Gazlay claimed unequal treatment under the law because the city failed to conduct a background investigation of Krenning, the winning candidate in Ward 1, and then after he was elected, applied a background test that was different from all other candidates prior to seating him.

Through the offices of Denver-based law firm Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP, the city filed motions in Larimer County District Court on July 1 to dismiss both cases. Sinnett told BizWest on Tuesday that he has until next Monday to respond, and he expects a decision on the dismissal request from District Judge Laurie K. Dean by the end of August.

In the lawsuit filed by the former council members alleging violations of the charter, the city’s motion states, they relied on “the false premise that such a decree is tantamount to a criminal conviction (reached by plea or verdict), plaintiffs demand a decree from this court that the elected officials with who they disagree be removed from city council.” The city claims the plaintiffs, as private citizens, lack standing to bring their claims, and asserts that “the remedy available to citizens who do not agree with a vote made by elected officials lies at the ballot box, not the courthouse.”

The city also asserts that the issue of the Nov. 21 vote to rescind the Centerra South agreements is moot because the council later reinstated them. “In other words,” the city’s motion states, “plaintiffs seek to have this court overturn a City Council vote that was already overturned. The primary outcome plaintiffs purport to seek already has occurred, and there is no justiciable dispute remaining for this court to resolve.” It calls the plaintiffs’ lawsuit a “fundamentally flawed effort to achieve a purely political goal — the reconstitution of City Council in advance of, or in lieu of, a recall election.”

In its motion to dismiss the Gazlay lawsuit, the city claims that the plaintiff “lacks standing to  assert any of his election-challenge claims” and that “any contest regarding the results of the  Nov. 7, 2023, election has been time-barred under the Colorado Municipal Election Code for over six months. … Because plaintiff failed to adhere to the mandatory multi-step statutory procedure applicable to election contests such as this, he cannot state a claim upon which relief can be granted.”

The cases in Larimer County District Court are Richard Ball, Dave Clark, John Fogle, Donald Overcash, Daniel Mills, Chauncey Taylor, Christy Taylor and Claire Haenny v. City of Loveland, case number 2024 CV 30466; and Peter M. Gazlay v. City of Loveland, case number 2024 CV 30469.

on Facebook on LinkedIn