Loveland CO 12-month data center moratorium (2026)

Loveland, Colo. (Larimer County) — 12-MONTH MORATORIUM on processing data center land-use applications, ratified 7-2 by the CITY COUNCIL on TUESDAY NIGHT, SEPTEMBER 15, 2026. OPERATIVE FORMULATION, WHICH IS UNUSUAL AND IS THE POINT OF THIS ENTRY: the council 'agreed to NOT PROCESS ANY LAND-USE APPLICATIONS FOR DATA CENTERS for a period of 12 MONTHS, OR LESS IF THE COUNCIL APPROVES NEW LAND-USE REGULATIONS BEFORE THAT.' THE TERM IS A CEILING THAT SELF-TERMINATES ON ADOPTION OF THE REPLACEMENT REGULATIONS. Almost every other moratorium indexed here runs a FIXED term ending by expiry or affirmative extension (Steuben County IN six-month data center moratorium (2026) six months; ne-gage-county twelve; Sauk County WI 18-month data center moratorium (2026) eighteen; Lawrence County IL two-year data center moratorium (2026) twenty-four). A fixed term creates a known incentive defect — the clock runs whether or not drafting progresses. LOVELAND'S STRUCTURE ELIMINATES IT: the pause ends the moment its purpose is served, so there is no benefit to letting it coast. THIS IS THE DIRECT STRUCTURAL ANSWER TO THE OBJECTION RECORDED AT Gage County NE 12-month data center moratorium (Sept 16, 2026), where Supervisor Rex Adams argued against a longer term precisely because it would 'drag it out.' It also strengthens the active-study showing on which moratorium defensibility usually turns, since the ordinance's own terms tie its life to the drafting work. PROCEDURAL HISTORY: the September 15 vote RATIFIED A DIRECTION THE COUNCIL GAVE STAFF ON SEPTEMBER 1 that it wanted to pause consideration of data center applications until land-use codes could be updated 'to protect the city from negative impacts of such developments.' DISSENT: MAYOR PAT McFALL and Councilmember GEOFF FRAHM voted against, the mayor stating he opposed it BASED ON THE GUARDRAILS IN THE PROPOSAL — the nature of that objection (whether the guardrails were too strict or too weak) IS NOT EXPLAINED IN THE SOURCE and is not inferred here. INSTRUMENT CAUTION: the source calls the measure a RESOLUTION ('the council ratified a direction… voted against the resolution') and frames it as the council agreeing NOT TO PROCESS applications rather than as a prohibition on development. A resolution declining to process is a weaker instrument than an interim ordinance barring a use, and may be more exposed to a mandamus or equal-protection challenge by an applicant, though NO CHALLENGE IS REPORTED. COLORADO CLUSTER: Aurora CO resolution directing data center regulations, moratorium rejected (2026) and Aurora CO evaporative cooling ban ordinance, first reading (2026) (Aurora rejected a six-month moratorium and pursued substantive regulations instead); Adams County CO Data Center Zoning Standards. expires_date IS COMPUTED as 12 months from ratification and is a CEILING, not a fixed end date.