Prosecutor finds Loveland councilor violated charter, recommends no charges - Reporter-Herald
Thomas Clayton
Kathy Haddock urges Loveland City Council to pursue censure instead of trial for Ward 3 representative
A special prosecutor retained by the Loveland City Council to review alleged City Charter violations by member Erin Black found that there is sufficient evidence to file criminal charges against her, but recommended against taking the case to trial.
In an eight-page decision, former Boulder City Attorney Kathy Haddock wrote that while the Ward 3 representative’s conduct toward Loveland Police Chief Tim Doran constitutes interference with his duties, moving forward with a prosecution would go against the best interests of the city.
“Effective punishment of a councilmember interfering with the duties of the Police Chief does not occur by jail or paying a fine,” Haddock’s report reads in part. “Corrective action for council members is available through a censure by the council as recommended by the investigator, or the voters at an election.”
The alleged charter violations by Black were uncovered during an investigation into a harassment complaint filed against the councilor in June 2024 by Doran, claiming harassment on the basis of his religious beliefs.
A third-party investigation by a Grand Junction-based law firm concluded that the chief’s claims of anti-religious discrimination had merit and that Black’s actions towards him since her November 2023 election were likely a violation of charter section 8-5, which prohibits council members from interfering with the duties or “exercise of judgment” of a city employee.
In December, after the investigation report was made public, the council voted 5 to 3 to retain a special prosecutor to evaluate whether Black’s conduct merited criminal prosecution under Section 15-7 of the City Charter. In that provision, willful charter violations are deemed a misdemeanor, carrying a potential penalty of up to 364 days in jail or a $2,600 fine or both.
A couple of months later, in February, members voted to hire Haddock for a second stint looking into charter violation claims by Loveland City Council members.
In March 2024, she was hired as a special prosecutor to review potential violations of open meeting rules by Pat McFall, Dana Foley, Steve Olson and Andrea Samson, and found that no criminal conduct occurred.
In coming to her conclusions in Black’s case, Haddock wrote in her report that she reviewed evidence in the harassment investigation, including emails and audio recordings. She also reviewed Black’s rebuttal to the findings and had a telephone conversation with Doran.
Haddock ultimately determined that Black’s conduct did amount to a willful violation of Section 8-5, citing multiple instances where the councilor directed or interfered with the police chief’s duties, bypassed the city manager in communications and made comments that undermined his ability to lead the department.
“I have no reservations about showing beyond a reasonable doubt that Councilor Black has violated Charter Section 8-5,” Haddock wrote. “Even though this is an unusual case as it is not common to prosecute elected officials for behavior violating the city’s laws, there is uncontroverted evidence, including admissions, of each element of the violation.”
Among the most compelling evidence, Haddock cited a November 2023 email in which Black described her role as providing “oversight” of the police department, language Haddock argued was synonymous with direction and control, both of which are explicitly prohibited by the city charter.
She also noted Black’s repeated allegations that the chief’s religious beliefs impaired his professional judgment, statements Haddock concluded interfered with the chief’s ability to do his job.
The prosecutor also took issue with Black’s rebuttal to the harassment investigation, saying it contained “extensive vitriol, indicating bias,” and includes innuendo and unsupported statements.
Despite those findings, Haddock advised against prosecution, writing that a fine or jail time would neither remedy the situation nor prevent future misconduct. She also noted that a criminal proceeding would pit council members and city staff against each other in a public setting, further eroding trust in local institutions.
“A trial would require city officials to testify against other city officials and be cross examined, deepening existing divides and negatively impacting any opportunity for change to a healthy culture among Loveland elected and appointed officials,” Haddock wrote.
Instead, she urged council members to take responsibility for holding their colleague accountable, through formal censure or another remedy, and leave further punishment to the voters.
“Otherwise, the circus continues and employees, voters and the thriving of the city are casualties,” Haddock wrote.
Despite her findings, Haddock’s report also included a note of praise for Black’s efforts to fulfill her campaign promise of bringing more transparency to the city.
“She seems to be acting in good faith to spend a lot of time helping individuals and working on city issues,” Haddock noted.
Although Haddock recommended against prosecution, her decision does not completely close the door on future legal action. According to City Attorney Vince Junglas, the City Council could, in theory, seek a different special prosecutor willing to pursue charges. But he would recommend against doing so, he said.
“There are serious, very serious considerations that must be taken into account before making such a decision,” he said. “It has the appearance of prosecutor shopping, and, from my experience, that’s certainly not advisable.”
Councilor and mayoral candidate Pat McFall, who introduced the December motion to initiate prosecution, said he was pleased to see that his suspicions about Black’s actions back then were finally proven right in Haddock’s report. However, he was initially disappointed by her reluctance to file charges, though he ultimately came to agree with her reasoning.
“She was unambiguous in the fact that Black not only violated the charter, she did it multiple times,” McFall said in an interview. “But a fine or jail time won’t repair the harm that she’s already done. The bigger question is how we prevent this from happening again.”
McFall added that, with a recall effort against Black already underway, the responsibility may now lie with Loveland residents to decide what kind of leadership they want on the council.
“If the conduct is going to change, it’s going to be up to the voters,” McFall said. “Do they want a more respectful, functional, non-divisive council or are they content with the dysfunction that’s costing the city money, time, reputation and effectiveness?”
McFall said he is not inclined to pursue further action in the case, but is willing to have a conversation about it with those who do.
In a brief statement to the Reporter-Herald about Haddock’s report, Black said: “Great news, no charges. Time to move on.”
 | Tom Clayton Communication and Media Specialist, Public Affairs |
| Commissioners' Office 200 W Oak St, Fort Collins, 80522 | 2nd Floor W: (970) 498-7005 tcla...@larimer.org | www.larimer.org |