General Conference of Church of God-7th Day v. Carper
Decision Date | 06 December 1976 |
Docket Number | No. 27063,GOD--7TH,27063 |
Citation | 192 Colo. 178,557 P.2d 832 |
Parties | GENERAL CONFERENCE OF the CHURCH OFDAY, a not-for-profit corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Raymond E. CARPER, Property Tax Administrator, Division of Property Taxation, and Board of Assessment Appeals, State of Colorado as a board and the Individual members thereof, Defendants-Appellees. |
Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Reynard, Dorwart & Booms, P.C., Denver, for plaintiff-appellant.
J. D. MacFarlane, Atty. Gen., Jean E. Dubofsky, Deputy Atty. Gen., Edward G. Donovan, Sol. Gen., Mary J. Mullarkey, First Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for defendants-appellees.
This appeal is from a judgment of the Denver District Court affirming a ruling of the Board of Assessment Appeals holding that property in Colorado held by the General Conference of the Church of God--7th Day was not entitled to an exemption from property taxes. We reverse and remand for further consideration.
The record before us shows that the General Conference of the Church of God--7th Day (hereinafter called the Conference) is a religious organization of some 5,000 members, 200 of whom, or 4%, reside in Colorado. Its objectives include the 'diffusing of religious knowledge,' promoting 'principles of morality, benevolence and charity,' and 'the education of mankind in general.' Prior to 1972, the Conference operated administrative headquarters in Denver. This property was completely exempted from property tax.
In 1972 the main administrative and publishing activities of the group were moved from Missouri to Colorado, and a new facility was constructed on 4.408 acres of land in Adams County. The Tax Administrator initially granted an exemption of 37% Of the value of the land, this constituting his assessment of the percentage attributable to administrative functions. Upon reconsideration, however, the exemption was totally denied.
The Tax Administrator concluded that the case of Young Life v. Chaffee County, 134 Colo. 15, 300 P.2d 535 (1956), was controlling and that there was insufficient 'benefit' to the people of Colorado to justify the exemption. The Board of Assessment Appeals and the district court affirmed.
Article X, Section 5 of the Colorado Constitution provides that:
'Property, real and personal, that is used solely and exclusively for religious worship, for schools or for strictly charitable purposes . . . shall be exempt from taxation, unless otherwise provided by general law.'
1967 Perm.Supp., C.R.S.1963, 137--2--1(6) 1 contains the legislative definition of the classes of property subject to the exemption. 2 Colorado's policy of tax exemptions for all religious and charitable property has counterparts in all 50 states.
In Young Life v. Chaffee County, supra, this court construed the purpose and extent of the constitutional exemption and upheld the denial of a property tax exemption to a camp operated by an out-of-state religious organization. Considering the fact that only 2% Of the people who used the camp were Colorado residents, the court held that:
'a resident or non-resident, non-profit, educational, religious and charitable corporation which is not using its property in this state for the benefit of the people of Colorado is not exempt from the payment of general taxes on property held by it within this state.' Id. at 33, 300 P.2d at 544.
To the extent that Young Life established some requirement of benefit to the people of the state of Colorado as a condition for the property tax exemption of Religious organizations, it is hereby overruled. While such 'social benefit' analysis may have continuing validity in the determination of Charitable exemptions, See WHYY, Inc. v. Borough of Glassboro, 393 U.S. 117, 89 S.Ct. 286, 21 L.Ed.2d 242 (1968), it has no place in the state's evaluation of its treatment of bona fide religious groups. This conclusion is self-evident from the rationale for the grant of a tax exemption that was articulated in Young Life. There the court concluded that the purpose of the exemption was to relieve taxpayers of obligations that they would otherwise have to perform and quoted with approval from Kemp v. Pillar of Fire, 94 Colo. 41, 27 P.2d 1036 (1933):
Young Life, supra, 134 Colo. at 23, 300 P.2d at 539.
This rationale requires that a distinction be made between charitable and religious exemptions; a religious group does not have as a fundamental purpose the providing of services which the state would otherwise have to provide since the state is constitutionally prohibited from such religious involvement. See Note, 29 Rocky MtnL.Rev. 143 (1956--57).
The difficulty of establishing 'benefit' to the people of Colorado in the context of religious worship is evident from the manner in which statistics were utilized in this case. Neither the percentage nor absolute number of membes of a religious group resident in Colorado can alone be dispositive of their treatment. It was argued that only 4% Of the members of the Conference reside in Colorado. Certainly a far smaller percentage of adherents to any of the Protestant or Catholic denominations live in the state. Further, if those 200 Colorado residents constituted the entire religious group we could not, for that reason alone, deny them a constitutionally mandated exemption. Numbers alone can never serve to evaluate the substance or essence of a religious faith.
Nor do tax exemptions for religious organizations, in and of themselves, violate the Establishment clause of the federal constitution. In Walz v. Tax Commission, 397 U.S. 664, 90 S.Ct. 1409, 25 L.Ed.2d 697 (1970), the United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of tax exemptions for a religious organization. In so doing the Supreme Court directly rejected the requirement of a 'social benefit':
'We find it unnecessary to justify the tax exemption on the social welfare services or Id. at 674, 90 S.Ct. at 1414.
The difficulty and danger in...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Maurer v. Young Life
... ... gospel to young people, particularly those without a church affiliation. It also seeks to encourage Christian young ... as written, since it may be presumed that the General Assembly meant what it clearly said." Griffin v. S.W ... West-Brandt Foundation v. Carper, 199 Colo. 334, 608 P.2d 339 (1980); 8 CCR 1301-1, Rules ... Cf. General Conference v. Carper, 192 Colo. 178, 182, 557 P.2d 832, 834 ... ...
-
Catholic Health Init. Color. v. City of Pueblo, 05CA2432.
... ... levels of care for elderly residents, including general elder support, assisted living, and skilled nursing care ... organization affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church; Catholic Health operated its senior care facilities, ... by the Committee on Doctrine of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops; Catholic Health provides services and ... Conference of Church of God-7th Day v. Carper, 192 Colo. 178, 182, 557 P.2d 832, 834 ... ...
-
Christian Reformed Church in North America v. City of Grand Rapids
... ... Brink testified that the various worship services are open to the general public as are the religious-oriented meetings which bring people from many ... Gull Lake Bible Conference Ass'n v. Ross Twp., 351 Mich. 269, 88 N.W.2d 264 (1958). There is ... In General Conference Church of God v. Carper, 192 Colo. 178, 557 P.2d 832 (1976), a denial of tax exemption on grounds ... ...
-
West Brandt Foundation, Inc. v. Carper, 80SC279
... ... Mullarkey, Sol. Gen., Billy Shuman, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., General Legal Services Section, Denver, for respondents ... known as the Singin' River Ranch (Ranch) from The Regular Baptist Church Builders, Inc., which had a property tax exemption for the Ranch. West ... General Conference of the Church of God v. Carper, 192 Colo. 178, 557 P.2d 832 (1976); ... ...
-
Colorado Property Taxation: Exemption, Abatement and Relief Provisions
...6 Colo. Law. 121 (Jan, 1977). 29. 96 Mass. (14 Allen) 539, 556 (1867). 30. 167 Colo. 485, 494, 448 P.2d 967 (1968). 31. ___ Colo. ___, 557 P.2d 832, 6 Colo. Law. 343 (Feb. 1977). 32. See note 21, supra. 33. C.R.S. 1973, § 39-3-101(a). C.R.S. 1973, § 39-1-102(g) defines "Household furnishing......
-
Property Tax Exemptions for Religious and Nonprofit Organizations
...Note (4/17/89) at 3; and Revised Fiscal Note (5/3/89) at 3. 29. See, General Conference of the Church of God, Seventh Day v. Carper, 557 P.2d 832, 833--34 (Colo. 1976). 30. CRS §§ 39-3-101 and 39-3-108-113. 31. See e.g., United Presbyterian Assoc. v. Board of County Comm'rs, Jefferson Count......
-
Colorado State and Local Tax Exemptions for Charitable Organizations-part I
...v. Bd. of County Comm'rs, 3300 P.2d 535, 538, 543 (Colo. 1956). 41. General Conference of the Church of God—Seventh Day v. Carper, 557 P.2d 832, 833 (Colo. 1976). 42. West Brandt Found., supra, note 37 at 568. 43. H.B. 90-1322, 1990 Colo. Sess. Laws 1711. 44. Camps Newfound/Owatonna v......