2013 COA 24
Colo. Ct. App.2013Background
- NURA appeals a trial court summary judgment favoring the Adams County Assessor and BOCC.
- The 1992 Northglenn Urban Renewal Plan authorized TIF funding for redevelopment.
- In 2004, the plan was amended to add several tracts; in 2009, TIF was suspended for properties without active renewal projects.
- In 2009, the Assessor calculated TIF by excluding suspended property from total assessed value but not from the base value.
- NURA sought mandamus and declaratory relief tochallenge base-value calculation and TIF duration for added properties; the trial court denied mandamus and addressed declaratory claims.
- The court resolved the declaratory claims and this appeal addresses statutory interpretation and TIF calculation issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether TIF was properly calculated after suspension. | NURA argues base value should also exclude suspended property. | Assessor contends no statutory directive requiring base removal. | Trial court erred; calculation misaligned with statute. |
| Whether the twenty-five-year TIF period for added properties applies from 1992 or from their addition. | NURA contends each added property starts a new 25-year period. | Plain language ties 25-year period to the original provision's effective date. | TIF expires in 2017 based on 1992 effective date; 2004 addition does not extend period. |
| Whether the renewal plan and statutory provisions control timing of TIF for the entire area after modification. | NURA emphasizes modification could alter timing. | Statutory text allows modification but 1992 provision governs timing for base/added areas. | Plain language and modification authority control; 1992 provision governs timing for added areas. |
Key Cases Cited
- City & County of Denver v. Block 173 Assocs., 814 P.2d 824 (Colo. 1991) (reaffirms TIF structure and base value concept)
- East Grand County School Dist. No. 2 v. Town of Winter Park, 739 P.2d 862 (Colo.App. 1987) (legal framework for TIF computations under renewal law)
- Sheridan Redevelopment Agency v. Knightsbridge Land Co., 166 P.3d 259 (Colo. App. 2007) (de novo review of statutory interpretation in renewal context)
- Board of Assessment Appeals v. Sampson, 105 P.3d 198 (Colo. App. 2005) (rebuttable presumption of assessor value correctness; context of valuation)
- Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Byrne, 618 P.2d 1374 (Colo. 1980) (tax allocation structure relation to project financing)
- Leavell - Rio Grande Central Associates v. Board of Assessment Appeals, 753 P.2d 797 (Colo.App. 1988) (standard of review for assessment decisions and statutory interpretation)