Greeley City Council Work Session: GURA, MERGE, and 2026 Ballot Question Discussion - August 11, 2026

The Greeley City Council held a work session on Tuesday, August 11, 2026, at 6:00 PM in the City Council Chambers. The session included a presentation from the Greeley Urban Renewal Authority (GURA) on urban renewal law and Tax Increment Financing (TIF), a progress update on the MERGE (US Highway 34) project, and extensive deliberation on a potential November 2026 ballot question asking voters for a 0.5% sales tax increase to fund the Catalyst (West Greeley) and Civic Campus projects. No formal votes were taken, and several items were tabled for further discussion at the August 25 work session.

Reports from Mayor and Councilmembers

• Councilmember Johnny Olson raised concerns about the closure of a bus route serving Northridge and Toiton, leaving students with a one-mile walk to school. He asked Council to reach a consensus to pause the cancellation pending further evaluation. He also alerted staff to recurring issues with streetlights on 20th Avenue west of the AIMS campus entrance, a heavily used pedestrian corridor in the evenings.
• Councilmember Ryan Roth acknowledged the tragic loss of life resulting from a weather incident (microburst) on Highway 34/85 in East Greeley, thanking the Fire and Police Departments for their swift response. He also issued a lighthearted challenge to country music artist Ashley McBride, inviting her back to Greeley to experience its music and entertainment scene firsthand.

Greeley Urban Renewal Authority (GURA) Presentation and Discussion

• Presenters: Don Threewitt (Interim Community Development Director), Corey Hoffman (GURA Counsel), Kelli Johnson (Deputy City Manager), and members of the GURA Board.
• Purpose: To build a shared foundation of understanding between Council and the GURA Board to inform future visioning work.
• Urban Renewal Framework: Mr. Hoffman explained that urban renewal is a legislative tool to address blight. A property must meet four of several statutory blight criteria. The City Council is the policymaker that identifies blight and approves plans, while GURA implements those policies as a separate body corporate and politic.
• Tax Increment Financing (TIF): The primary tool for urban renewal. A base property value is set. Revenue from the base continues to go to taxing entities. Revenue from increased property value (the increment) is captured by GURA for blight remediation over a maximum of 25 years. City Council can also choose to apply a sales tax increment.
• Expenditure Outside Plan Area: Councilmember DeBoutez asked if TIF from one area could be transferred to another. Mr. Hoffman explained it can only be done with a demonstrable nexus connecting the expenditure to preventing the spread of blight within the originating area. Councilmember Olson suggested that a proposed pedestrian underpass on 17th Street could serve as such a nexus for the Greeley Mall TIF area.
• House Bill 1348 (2015): Compliance is triggered by new plans or substantial modifications. Requirements include expanding the GURA Board to 13 members (with appointees from Weld County, a special district, and the school board) and mandatory negotiations and potential binding mediation with taxing entities. Councilmember DeBoutez sought clarification on what constitutes a "substantial modification"; Mr. Hoffman stated the determination is largely subjective and suggested working with taxing entities to confirm the characterization. Routine undertakings within an existing plan area do not trigger compliance.
• TIF Bonding Authority and Fund Sunset: Bonding capacity is determined by projected TIF generation over the bond term. Unpledged funds in the special fund at the end of the 25-year TIF collection period must be returned to taxing entities on a pro-rata basis, except for sales tax increment and grant-derived funds.

MERGE Council Update

• Presenters: Seth Sorensen (Public Works Director), Matt Bournonville and Scott Richrath (Infrastructure Strategies).
• Status: This was the first of a regular update cycle, with subsequent updates planned for October and December 2026.
• Progress Milestones: The RAISE grant has been finalized. RSNH was awarded the Master Services Agreement and has initiated work towards the 30% design milestone. All sub-teams (interchanges, environmental, utilities, right-of-way) are fully mobilized. A CMGC RFQ has been issued, with interviews for shortlisted firms scheduled for August 25 and 26, and an award expected by early October.
• Schedule and Delivery: Milestones have been met. Initial construction is targeted for late 2027 or early 2028, with the project concluding in 18 to 24 months. Federal grant funds must be utilized by September 30, 2030. Councilmember Olson commended the team for its progress since the March 2026 rebaseline, highlighting that the CMGC method aims to maximize savings.
• Budget and Cost Range: The initial 2025 estimate of $134 million was developed prior to engaging a design engineer and cost estimator. The revised cost range is now $160 million to $190 million, reflecting a clearer understanding of the project's complexity (two interchanges and a mobility hub on US Highway 34). A specific cost figure cannot be provided until the CMGC contractor is onboard.
• Financing and TIFIA: Councilmember DeBoutez asked if the TIFIA loan application could be rejected. Mr. Richrath said a compliant application is expected, but the timing of the rural discount interest rate is critical and requires congressional engagement. Councilmember Olson confirmed the rural designation is a limited resource and the city must actively engage its congressional delegation for support. Mayor Pro Tem McDonald asked directly if the project would be completed; Mr. Richrath and Mr. Bournonville stated a clear path forward exists, with more certainty once the CMGC contractor is onboard.
• Funding Commitments: Councilmember Olson noted that $30 million in voter-approved funds from the 2016 ballot measure (KGM funds) remain part of the project's funding structure, emphasizing the importance of honoring that commitment. Mr. Sorensen noted that state involvement is a hope but the city's strategy is based on funding sources within its control.

2026 Ballot Question Discussion

• Presenter: City Manager Brian McBroom.
• Background: Council directed staff to explore a ballot question following a recent executive session.
• Projects Under Consideration:
  • Civic Campus: $85 million in new debt, with estimated maximum debt payments of $8 million annually, funded through existing revenues. A first COP issuance is tentatively scheduled for September 1, 2026.
  • Catalyst (West Greeley): Existing debt of approximately $115 million ($92-93 million spent). Estimated debt payments would be $7 million annually if converted to long-term debt. An economic development payment beginning at $12 million annually (escalating at 2% per year) is required over the 40-year bond term. Mr. McBroom noted that no viable financial model currently exists without a financial partner or a dedicated revenue source.
• Proposed Tax: A 0.5% increase to the city sales tax rate (from 4.11% to 4.61%) for economic development purposes. A resolution placing the question on the November ballot must be adopted by September 1, 2026.
• Council Positions:
  • Councilmember DeBoutez advocated for separating the two projects into distinct ballot questions. She argued that the Civic Campus funding is already secured and that combining the projects risks voter confusion. She favored a simple question dedicated solely to funding the Catalyst project.
  • Councilmember Rudy expressed philosophical opposition to a tax increase and a preference for finding a private partner. However, he acknowledged that a combined ballot question for both projects would free up general fund monies for deferred capital improvement projects (CIP). He opposed broad ballot language that would allow the council to spend excess revenues on other projects.
  • Councilmember Olson supported a combined ballot question for both projects. He argued that a 40-year tax term (matching the revenue bond term) would enhance the city's bond rating, potentially saving over $100 million in interest. He emphasized the need for very specific ballot language focused on paying down the debt for these two projects, after which the tax would sunset.
  • Mayor Pro Tem McDonald strongly advocated for combining both projects into a single question to unite the community and end the perceived divide between "downtown versus West Greeley." She supported dedicating all excess revenues to deferred CIP projects rather than broad economic development.
  • Councilmember Roth expressed hesitation about the tax increase, citing low public trust, but leaned towards a combined effort to ensure the whole community is invested. He wanted information on the ramifications of not putting a measure on the ballot.
  • Mayor Hall stated he was not in favor of a tax increase, but acknowledged the difficult position created by the Supreme Court ruling (February 24th). He felt private partnership opportunities should still be explored.
• Key Clarifications: CFO Allena Portis explained that the $12 million economic development payment for the Catalyst project is deposited into a supplemental debt service reserve fund to provide a 1.5x debt service coverage ratio. If not drawn upon, the funds return to the city. Mr. McBroom stated that the structural deficit is expected to be resolved in the 2027 budget, and that absent a ballot measure, the three major projects (Civic Campus, Catalyst, MERGE) are covered, but the deferred CIP list would continue to be negatively impacted.

Key Outcomes

• No formal votes or decisions were made on the ballot question.
• Council agreed to place further discussion on the August 25, 2026, work session agenda to allow time for new information to be circulated and reviewed.
• Staff directives for the August 25 meeting:
  • Provide detailed information on how tax term lengths (10, 20, and 40 years) would impact the city's bond rating.
  • Draft separate ballot question language: one combining Catalyst and Civic Campus, and one for a narrower scope.
  • Provide a complete list of deferred Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) that would be impacted.
  • Report on the specific ramifications of not issuing the Certificates of Participation (COPs) for the Civic Campus project by the September 1 or December 31 deadline.
• The meeting adjourned at 8:23 PM.