On August 31, hearing officer Karen Goldman ruled that Greeley’s $115 million financing decision was “administrative” and therefore couldn’t be challenged by voters. The Greeley City Council had passed it legislatively on May 6. By the time Greeley residents vote February 24, the city will have spent $60 million of that money.
The billion-dollar project would bring a Colorado Eagles arena, water park, and luxury hotel to west Greeley. The City Council approved financing by leasing 46 city buildings—including City Hall, the police department, and three fire stations—as collateral for $115 million in pre-development costs. The February 24 referendum doesn’t address that financing. It asks whether to repeal zoning for the 834-acre site.
Greeley residents submitted 8,993 signatures August 6 seeking to repeal the financing ordinance—more signatures than any petition in Greeley history. Two days later, four residents filed a protest challenging the petition’s legality. The protest was filed by Leonard Wiest, Greeley’s former city manager who worked for developer Martin Lind’s Water Valley Company from 2005 to 2013, along with Tom Hacker, John DeWitt, and Zach Bliven.
Hearing officer Karen Goldman ruled August 31 that “while adopted through an authorized legislative process, Ordinance 2025-15 is not a legislative ordinance.” The initiative was blocked. Goldman’s reasoning pivoted on distinguishing how the City Council chose to implement the project from the decision to undertake it—the implementation she deemed administrative despite the council vote.
Colorado’s initiative process allows citizens to challenge legislative decisions but not administrative ones. The distinction traces to a 2013 Colorado Supreme Court decision involving an Aspen highway entrance. Cities can now label council-passed ordinances “administrative” to block citizen challenges.
Complete Colorado contributor Cory Gaines wrote in October that Goldman’s ruling created “a blueprint any Colorado government that takes offense at your attempt to hold them in check can use.” Lakewood faced a similar challenge to citizen initiatives months later. The Greeley City Council appointed Goldman as hearing officer August 5—one day before the petition was filed.
After the financing petition was blocked, Greeley Demands Better filed a referendum targeting the project’s zoning instead. They submitted 7,763 signatures October 16. The city clerk determined 4,554 signatures were valid—32 short of the 4,586 required.
The group submitted additional signatures November 3. The clerk certified 4,888 valid signatures November 7. The Greeley City Council voted December 2 to refer the question to voters rather than repeal the ordinance themselves.
The city had drawn $45 million from the $115 million financing by August 2025. City Chief Financial Officer Allena Portis told the council the city expected to draw another $15 million before month-end—before the referendum petition was even certified.
Councilman Tommy Butler warned the council in May when voting against the financing: “When we’re getting into this, we are mortgaging a lot of things in our future by taking out these COPs. I just want to make that clear as day.” Butler and Councilwoman Deb Deboutez cast the only votes against both the May financing ordinance and the September zoning ordinance. The votes were 5-2 each time.
The 46 buildings leased include City Hall, City Center North, the Greeley Police Department, the Ice Haus, the Rodarte Center, the Family Funplex, the Greeley History Museum, and Fire Houses No. 3, No. 5, and No. 7. The buildings were leased to Zions Bancorporation, National Association. Division Treasurer Robert Miller told the council in May that the $115 million would be repaid in 15 to 25 months when the city issues $641 million in bonds for the main construction phase.
The city maintains that Certificates of Participation are “standard financial tools” used by cities across Colorado to fund projects without raising taxes. City documents state that COPs can be approved by ordinance rather than requiring a vote, and that Greeley has used the financing method before, including for fire stations. The city projects the entertainment district will generate revenue to repay the financing without requiring new taxes.
Developer Martin Lind owns both the Water Valley Company developing the project and the Colorado Eagles team that will anchor the new arena. The Eagles signed a 30-year lease with two five-year extension options. The team currently plays in Loveland.
Lind sued petition organizers Pam Bricker and Dan Wheeler for defamation in October 2025. Bricker is the former executive director of the Greeley Downtown Development Authority and a founding member of the Greeley Creative District. The lawsuit remains pending in Weld District Court.
The City Council approved the Pre-Development Services Agreement with Water Valley Company on April 15, 2025, by a 5-2 vote. That agreement contains financial projections showing the hotel and waterpark operating at 65.5% occupancy in 2028, increasing to 83.5% by 2037. The first full year of operation in 2029 projects 69.7% occupancy generating $24.7 million in gross profit. The arena projects 505,234 annual visitors.
Ballot Issue 1A asks whether to repeal Ordinance 30, 2025, which approved Planned Unit Development zoning for the 834 acres north of Highway 34 and east of County Road 17. A “yes” vote reverts the property to Holding Agriculture zoning, limiting development unless future council action changes it. A “no” vote maintains the PUD zoning the council approved.
Ballots were mailed February 3. Drop boxes opened February 6 at Aims College, Greeley City Hall, the University of Northern Colorado, and the Weld County Election Office. All ballots must be received by 7 p.m. February 24.
The referendum repeals zoning, not financing. Whether voters approve or reject the project, the $115 million in Certificates of Participation remains—money borrowed against City Hall and police stations that citizens never got to vote on approving.
Support Independent Local Journalism — High Country Advocate was created as a real alternative to regional media that too often silences dissenting voices while taking sides in the political struggle. Producing in-depth, unflinching reporting like this series and others is expensive: servers, editing, research time, and legal review all add up quickly. If these articles have informed you or given you new perspective, please consider supporting HCA with a paid subscription — every subscriber helps keep this reporting strong and independent. 