Greeley council split on whether November tax question should fund Catalyst alone or include Civic Campus

Greeley City Council is split over whether to ask voters this November to approve a temporary half-cent sales tax for the Catalyst project alone or to pair it with the Civic Campus project, leaving key financing decisions unresolved with a Sept. 1 deadline approaching for ballot language.

During Tuesday’s work-session discussion of Item 7, city staff outlined a possible 0.5% sales and use tax increase, which would raise the city rate from 4.11% to 4.61% and is estimated to generate about $16 million a year, excluding food. City Manager Melissa McDonald said staff understood council’s earlier direction as exploring a November ballot question to help fund both projects, while also easing pressure on the Quality of Life fund, food tax and general fund that otherwise would be used for debt payments and other capital needs.

McDonald said Civic Campus is moving toward financing with $85 million in new debt and maximum annual debt payments of about $8 million. She said the Catalyst project already carries $115 million in existing debt, with roughly $92 million to $93 million spent so far, and would also require a $12 million annual economic development payment if it proceeds. At present, she said, there is “no viable financial model” for Catalyst without either a financial partner or a dedicated tax.

Council Member Deb DeBoutez argued the ballot question should be limited to Catalyst. She said the city has already committed to Civic Campus through agreements and planned certificates of participation, and that bundling the two projects would confuse voters. DeBoutez said Civic Campus “does not need this tax” to repay its debt and warned that downtown constituents were deeply concerned about tying the projects together.

Council Member Ryan Roth took the opposite view, saying both projects should be combined in one measure to avoid deepening divisions between downtown, west Greeley and other parts of the city. Roth said a combined question would show the city “all pulling in the right direction” and could free up money for other capital improvement projects if voters approve it.

Council Member Johnny Olson said any ballot language should be tightly written and specific, not open-ended. Olson said he wants the tax focused only on paying down debt for the two projects, with excess revenue going to principal rather than future unspecified projects. He also pressed staff for clearer public explanations of Catalyst’s $12 million economic development payment, which staff said is used to provide debt-service coverage and, in early years, would help support reserve funds before potentially flowing back to the city later if project revenues meet expectations.

Mayor Dale Hall said he is “not a big fan of doing a tax increase” and is still not convinced the city has exhausted possible private-sector partnerships for Catalyst. Still, Hall said that if a ballot measure advances, he believes the language should be broad enough to function as an economic development fund, though he later summarized the council as split 3-3 on whether the measure should combine Catalyst and Civic Campus or stay narrower in purpose.

Council members also did not settle on the length of any tax, with 10-, 20- and 40-year options all still in play. McDonald said staff will return with more information about how different terms could affect bond ratings, borrowing costs and how quickly debt could be repaid. Staff also plans to provide a list of capital improvement projects affected if the city proceeds with Civic Campus, Catalyst and the Merge project, along with draft ballot language options.

Because the proposal would require a TABOR election, McDonald said the city’s next chance after this year would be November 2027. Staff told council a resolution to place a measure on the Nov. 3, 2026 ballot must be adopted no later than Sept. 1, and Hall indicated the discussion will likely return Aug. 25.