History
  • No items yet
midpage
Trust v. Bd. of Cty Comm'rs
2019 COA 18
Colo. Ct. App.
2019
Read the full case

Background

  • Two adjacent La Plata County parcels: an east 0.62-acre parcel with the Martins’ residence and a west 0.72-acre unimproved parcel (the "west parcel").
  • Titles shifted: 2014 the partnership held the west parcel and the Martins held the residence; later both were owned by the Trust for 2015–2016.
  • County Assessor classified the west parcel as vacant for tax years 2014–2016; the Trust sought residential classification and appealed through the Board of Equalization and the Board of Assessment Appeals (BAA).
  • The BAA (de novo) upheld the 2014 vacant classification, but for 2015–2016 partially reclassified two-thirds of the west parcel as residential based on view-preservation use.
  • The Court of Appeals majority (Judge Carparelli) reversed the partial reclassification, holding the west parcel remained vacant for all years; Judge Vogt concurred; Judge Hawthorne dissented.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether a contiguous unimproved parcel can be "residential land" under § 39‑1‑102(14.4)(a) The Trust: contiguous vacant land used to enhance enjoyment (e.g., protecting views) is "used as a unit" with the residence and should be residential. County/Assessor: contiguous parcels must have residential improvements or otherwise not qualify; passive/view preservation use is insufficient. Held: Reversed partial residential classification; contiguous vacant parcel without residential improvements that are integral to the residence is vacant. "Used as a unit" requires more than passive looking-through use.
Whether the statutory definition of "residential improvements" (§ 39‑1‑102(14.3)) requires man-made improvements on contiguous parcels for residential classification Trust: single-parcel cases expand "use" to allow adjacent vacant land classification when used to benefit residence. County/Majority: to give meaning to the second sentence of § 102(14.3), contiguous parcels must have buildings/structures/fixtures/fences/amenities or water rights that are integral to the residence. Held: Majority: contiguous parcel can be residential only if it contains residential improvements (man-made or water rights) integral to the neighboring residence; otherwise vacant. (Dissent disagreed.)
Whether "used as a unit" includes passive uses (e.g., view preservation) Trust: "Used" need not be active; protecting views counts as use in conjunction with residence. Majority/BAA: passive uses like view protection do not satisfy statutory "used as a unit" requirement for contiguous vacant parcels. Held: Majority: passive/view-preservation alone insufficient; use must relate to residential improvements on the parcel(s). (Vogt concurs on narrow ground; Hawthorne dissents.)
Whether record title determines "common ownership" for classification Trust: functional/beneficial ownership (Martins controlled both parcels) suffices to show common ownership. County/BAA: record title distinctions (partnership vs. individuals) meant separate ownership in 2014. Held: Majority did not reach common-ownership issue for 2014; dissent (Hawthorne) would find the Martins functionally owned both parcels and would have reversed 2014 classification.

Key Cases Cited

  • Farny v. Bd. of Equalization, 985 P.2d 106 (Colo. App. 1999) (BAA factual determinations on acreage used with a residence are entitled to deference)
  • Gyurman v. Weld County Bd. of Equalization, 851 P.2d 307 (Colo. App. 1993) (passive uses such as keeping people off land and observing wildlife can support residential classification for single-parcel cases)
  • Sullivan v. Board of Equalization, 971 P.2d 675 (Colo. App. 1998) (discussed as dicta regarding whether undeveloped contiguous parcel must itself contain a residence)
  • Vail Associates, Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 765 P.2d 593 (Colo. App. 1988) (legislative purpose of residential classification statutes is to grant homeowners modest tax relief)
  • Boulder County Bd. of Equalization v. M.D.C. Construction Co., 830 P.2d 975 (Colo. 1992) (constitutional principles on classification and uniformity of property taxation)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Trust v. Bd. of Cty Comm'rs
Court Name: Colorado Court of Appeals
Date Published: Feb 7, 2019
Citations: 2019 COA 18; 467 P.3d 1141; 17CA0938, Martin
Docket Number: 17CA0938, Martin
Court Abbreviation: Colo. Ct. App.
Log In
    Trust v. Bd. of Cty Comm'rs, 2019 COA 18