The Loveland City Council voted 6-2 to approve a modified CEF reduction of 61% on police, fire, park, open space, library and general government services to accommodate a McWhinney request.
Developers in Loveland have paid CEF’s to the city for over 25 years but McWhinney’s decision to build an apartment complex was used as the catalyst to put these fees on trial as excessive or unnecessary but just long enough for McWhinney to get permits for their apartment complex and reapply the same fees again for future developments.
As a result of public input and discussion by the council the proposal was modified to increase the scope by including duplexes and increasing the time the waiver will be generally available to all developers. Mayor Pro Tem Clark pointed to the fact no other developer would be likely capable of building within the next 5 months but expanding it another year means others can realistically take advantage of the waiver.
McWhinney advocates on council tried to sell the waiver for McWhinney’s development as a “stimulus” for building in the community (a popular concept) even though the very narrow time window proposed meant only McWhinney’s currently proposed 303 unit apartment building development would likely qualify. The council directed changes that were passed certainly expanded the benefit beyond only McWhinney but also created more questions about its impact on city services.
Councilman Walt Skowron, who is now running for Mayor, asked City Manager Don Williams what impact the waiver will have on Loveland’s 10 year capital improvements plan. Williams responded it would certainly impact it but couldn’t provide details until the issue is studied.
The law requires the city to provide a “rational nexus” between the fees charged for new development and the one-time costs to the city for expanding services to accommodate the growth in population. Loveland, as required by law, maintains the monies collected for CEF’s in separate accounts dedicated exclusively for the capital costs of expanding those services for which the money was collected.
While the city staff is going to prepare a review of the fees for council later this year, McWhinney claimed they needed the fees reduced immediately as they are submitting a letter of intent on their project to HUD (Housing and Urban Development) to obtain government subsidized loan guarantees to finance their project. McWhinney also induced their now routine threat that if they had to pay the normal taxes the project could not go forward.
The Mayor at first attempted to skip any public comment after McWhinney was allowed to address the council for 30 minutes in a give and take of questions and answers. He finally acquiesced and allowed public comment after it was pointed out to him that McWhinney is not the applicant and legally should have no extra-ordinary rights than any other residents impacted to address the council.
I watched that meeting but was doing house chores so not too involved until the end when this issue came up.
My husband is an attorney and said the city attorney may have really screwed this one up but in a good way for developers. The rational nexus argument they need to make to justify those developer fees just went out the window. I watched that part of the meeting and it was clear this was done simply for McWhinney and the agreement was to close the door on the waiver later.
Here is my husband’s opinion. No developer can now be compelled to pay those fees under a claim of the 14th Amendment (Equal Protection Clause) and the rational nexus argument since they have in public admitted the fees are ARBITRARY and not based on real costs to the city.
He points out that they put at risk their legal claim that anyone who paid already isn’t owed a refund from the city and any subsiquent developments who are charged full freight later can legally object and probably win their case.
I guess it has to do with the CEF being a fee and that he said under law it is considered a “taking” because people can’t develop their property until the fee is paid. If it were an approved tax the law would treat it differently.
Carol what they did was unethical – who cares about legal? These are the same group of DUMMIES who just approved the new CEF’s late in 2008 based on staff recommendation!
Why did they keep talking about the CEFs like it was a mystery? That is the same group of DUMMIES who unanimously approved the CURRENT CEF not that long ago after being presented with a study. I can assure you everyone on staff was appalled! I don’t even think Don agreed but he supported it to keep his job as McWhinney runs city hall. The CEF is not some crazy number but based on what it really costs Loveland to serve all those new apartments.
It was also highly UNETHICAL for the creepy mayor to try and prevent public input while good ole’ chad mcwhiner could talk uninterrupted as long as he wants!
I have come to the conclusion that people in Loveland could just be STUPID and well represented by the DUMMIES on council. Maybe they deserve to be ripped-off by chad cause they don’t seem to give a dam!
Non of this is new. McWhinney has been laughing all the way to the bank with our money for years! Like a thief who doesn’t get caught he just keep making-up new excuses and coming back to the DUMMIES for more.
My point wasn’t that it is illegal but that Loveland’s entire CEF program is now in legal jeopardy due to what the Mayor and City Council just did.
In other words, they cannot really just go back and raise the CEF’s the way the city attorney said they could during the meeting. Just because the fees are established by Resolution (which doesn’t require public input) doesn’t also mean they are arbitrary. The process doesn’t dilute the importance or responsibility of the council.
It was my understanding the fees are based on real studies of costs so we agree.
By the way Mr. or Mrs. Gem, name calling is not necessary and really only makes you look bad. If you want to have an impact here you need to use better manners!
And one more thing COLORADO GEM….why don’t you take a exploration hike out of Colorado and learn how to spell. Go digging for some coal.
Most would agree that you need to watch your manners. I bet you don’t even live in Loveland….easy to say the citizens are DUMMIES. Carol was simply offering her opinion from a legal standpoint and having some personal background, but I have a feeling your anger/hate on the issue had you spewing out your frustration.
As a sidenote, show up at council and express your anger. Might make more of an impact.