Estes v. Colorado State Bd. of Assessment Appeals
| Decision Date | 23 November 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 89CA1294,89CA1294 |
| Citation | 805 P.2d 1174 |
| Parties | Vernon ESTES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. The COLORADO STATE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS and the Custer County Board of Equalization, Respondents-Appellees. . V |
| Court | Colorado Court of Appeals |
Rhett K. Dacus, P.C., Rhett K. Dacus, Aurora, for petitioner-appellant.
Duane Woodard, Atty. Gen., Charles B. Howe, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., Richard H. Forman, Sol. Gen., Larry A. Williams, First Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for respondent-appellee The Colorado State Bd. of Assessment Appeals.
Naylor & Geisel, P.C., John R. Naylor, County Atty., Pueblo, for respondent-appellee The Custer County Bd. of Equalization.
Opinion by Judge HUME.
Plaintiff, Vernon Estes, appeals the order of the Colorado State Board of Assessment Appeals (Board) determining that plaintiff's land was not used as a "ranch" within the meaning of § 39-1-102(13.5), C.R.S. (1990 Cum.Supp.) for the 1988 tax year and, thus, was not "agricultural land" for the purposes of assessment. We reverse and remand with directions.
The pertinent facts have generally been stipulated and are not in dispute. In 1972, plaintiff bought a 344-acre parcel of land which he leased to dairy and beef cattle owners for the purpose of livestock grazing during each year until 1983.
In 1983, plaintiff filed a plat which divided the land into nine separate tracts, each of which contained more than 35 acres. Three of the tracts were sold in 1983. A fourth was also sold in 1984, but it was later reacquired by plaintiff.
After the three tracts were sold in 1983, plaintiff continued to lease the remaining six tracts, containing approximately 225 acres, to dairy and beef cattle owners for grazing use during tax years 1984, 1986, 1987, and 1988. In 1985 he allowed the land to remain idle for conservation purposes. No improvements have been erected upon the land in question, and, although it has been platted, no attempt has been made physically to partition the 225 acres by fencing. It remains open grass meadowland and has been used for no purpose other than livestock grazing since 1972, despite plaintiff's acknowledgement that the tracts have been listed for sale from time to time since 1983, and that he hopes and intends that they will ultimately be sold for profit.
The Board found that plaintiff made "only a minimal profit by leasing out his land for grazing." It then concluded that plaintiff's "primary purpose is to offer and sell the subject property for a monetary profit."
Plaintiff contends that the actual surface use of property is the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Douglas County Bd. of Equalization v. Clarke
...must be the focus of any classification of agricultural land for property tax assessment purposes. See id.; Estes v. Board of Assessment Appeals, 805 P.2d 1174, 1175 (Colo.App.1990). We therefore conclude that there must be actual grazing on the parcel, as defined in functional terms, durin......
-
Boulder County Bd. of Equalization v. M.D.C. Const. Co., 91SC293
...that which it does not express). We agree in this respect with the reasoning of the court of appeals in Estes v. Board of Assessment Appeals, 805 P.2d 1174, 1175 (Colo.App.1990), wherein the court stated: There is no requirement in the statute that the property owner be the one who grazes l......
-
Hogan v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs of Summit Cnty.
...purposes." Douglas Cty. Bd. of Equalization v. Clarke , 921 P.2d 717, 723 (Colo. 1996) ; see Estes v. Colo. State Bd. of Assessment Appeals , 805 P.2d 1174, 1175 (Colo. App. 1990) (reversing BAA classification of land as nonagricultural because, even though owner’s primary purpose was to of......