2021 COA 107
Colo. Ct. App.2021Background:
- Jefferson County assessor mailed Yen, LLC a timely notice of valuation (NOV) valuing a commercial car-wash at $99,715 (≈5% increase from prior year).
- After mailing (but before the assessment roll was compiled), the assessor concluded the property was undervalued and mailed a corrected NOV after the May 1 statutory deadline raising the value to $299,099.
- Yen protested the corrected NOV to the assessor (protest denied) and then petitioned the county for abatement or refund, arguing the corrected NOV was void because the assessor lacked statutory authority to issue it after the deadline.
- The Board of Assessment Appeals (BAA) held the corrected NOV void, reasoning it did not fit the statutory exceptions (not a protest-driven correction, not omitted property, and not an error in the assessment roll as required by § 39-5-125(2)).
- The county appealed, arguing it could correct valuations any time before delivery of the tax warrant (January), and that assessors have broader constitutional authority to correct errors; the Court of Appeals affirmed the BAA.
Issues:
| Issue | Yen's Argument | Jefferson County's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether assessor could issue a corrected NOV after May 1 when the assessment roll had not yet been compiled | Corrected NOV void because § 39-5-125(2) applies only to errors "in the assessment roll," and the roll did not yet exist | County may correct valuation errors any time before delivering the tax warrant (i.e., until January) | Court: § 39-5-125(2) applies to errors in the assessment roll; because no roll existed when corrected NOV issued, county lacked authority under that statute |
| Whether § 39-5-125(2) authorizes broad post-deadline corrections of NOVs | Statute is limited to errors ascertainable from the assessment roll, not free-ranging corrections of NOVs | County reads the statute as permitting corrections for any discovered error prior to tax warrant delivery | Court: must give full effect to statutory text; cannot read away "errors in the assessment roll" or the "ascertainable" requirement; county's broad reading rejected |
| Whether prior caselaw (Modular / Telluride) supports county's broader correction power | Relies on dicta and older authority to support broader correction power | County cites Modular and dicta in Telluride to support ability to correct valuations whenever discovered | Court: Modular involved a tax notice, not an NOV before the roll; Telluride's broad language was dictum and cannot override plain statutory text; court declines to apply them to permit the corrected NOV |
| Whether assessors have constitutional or inherent nonstatutory authority to correct NOVs outside statutory scheme | Statutory scheme governs; no extra-statutory power asserted | County asserts plenary constitutional authority to correct valuations outside statutory limits | Court: Colorado Constitution requires determination under general laws; assessors have only the statutory authorities provided by the General Assembly; nonstatutory plenary power rejected |
Key Cases Cited
- Modular Communities, Inc. v. McKnight, 550 P.2d 866 (Colo. 1976) (assessor/treasurer authority to correct errors in assessment roll; court distinguishes this tax notice context from pre-roll NOV correction)
- San Miguel Cnty. Bd. of Equalization v. Telluride Co., 947 P.2d 1381 (Colo. 1997) (assessor must correct erroneous valuations discovered during taxpayer protest; broad language was dictum and not applied to pre-roll NOV here)
- Bea Kay Real Est. Corp. v. Aragon, 782 P.2d 837 (Colo. App. 1989) (discusses statutory avenues for contesting property valuations; distinguishes omitted-property issues)
- Stitches, Inc. v. Denver Cnty. Bd. of Comm'rs, 62 P.3d 1080 (Colo. App. 2002) (statute authorizes retroactive assessments only for omitted property, not omitted value)
- Dep't of Transp. v. City of Idaho Springs, 192 P.3d 490 (Colo. App. 2008) (courts cannot rewrite statutes to improve them)
- Main Elec., Ltd. v. Printz Servs. Corp., 980 P.2d 522 (Colo. 1999) (dictum is not controlling precedent)