Littleton council approves revised 1st Street Farms incentive package in 4-3 vote

Littleton City Council voted 4-3 on June 9 to approve a revised public-private partnership for the proposed 1st Street Farms project at RiverPark, including a $2 million performance-based city loan, about $531,000 in fee and use-tax waivers, and a five-year sales-tax share-back capped at roughly $2.97 million. During the same meeting, council amended the agreement to replace references to Gastamo Group LLC with First Street Farms LLC before approving the resolution, according to the official meeting video.

The June 9 package differed from an earlier April proposal that contemplated a larger city loan and a different sales-tax reimbursement structure. At the June 9 meeting, staff said council had previously asked for several changes, including removing beer-garden revenue from projections, limiting city-backed funds to public-facing infrastructure, converting the subsidy into a performance-based loan, and adding a comparison to inclusionary-housing fees under a hypothetical residential alternative.

Under the updated agreement summary, the June 9 packet says the city loan would be tied to public improvements such as a turf field, trail connections and park-related features, with payments in tranches at 50%, 75% and 100% completion. The packet says repayment would be triggered if the improvements are not completed within five years, requiring outstanding principal and accrued unpaid interest to be repaid.

The same packet describes a restaurant, event venue, public turf field, trail links and gathering spaces near South Platte Park Open Space. It also says the city would receive reserved free uses of the event venue for city and nonprofit events, public access to the ball field during operating hours, and nonprofit uses of the field.

Supporters said the project could become a regional draw and better connect Aspen Grove, downtown Littleton and the RiverPark area. In the meeting presentation and packet materials, staff and consultants said the project could generate hundreds of jobs and produce a positive long-term fiscal return; the June 9 packet projects 260 permanent jobs, about 324 total ongoing jobs, and a 30-year net fiscal impact of about $21.5 million nominally, or $7.8 million in present value.

Opponents, including some public commenters, called the package an unnecessary taxpayer subsidy, questioned sharing back sales-tax revenue for years, and argued the money could be better spent on needs such as housing, streets or other city priorities.

During the June 9 discussion, the city attorney said the loan would come from business use-tax revenue in the city's capital projects fund, not from the general fund, reserves or the voter-approved capital improvement sales-tax fund.

Some details of the final executed agreement remain unclear in the public record reviewed for this story. The June 9 packet and meeting record support the framework council approved, but the city materials reviewed did not clearly show whether any terms beyond the entity-name amendment changed in the final signed document after the vote.