HomeMy WebLinkAbout20060968.tiff RESOLUTION
RE: ACTION OF THE BOARD CONCERNING PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR
REFUND OF TAXES -JEFFREY AND LAURA RICHARDSON
WHEREAS,the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to
Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of
administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS,the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, State of Colorado, at a
duly and lawfully called regular meeting held on the 3rd day of April, 2006, at which meeting there
were present the following members: Chair M. J. Geile, and Commissioners William H. Jerke,
David E. Long, Robert D. Masden, and Glenn Vaad, and
WHEREAS,notice of such meeting and an opportunity to be present has been given to the
taxpayer and the Assessor of said County,and said Assessor, Stan Sessions, being represented
by Mike Sampson, and taxpayerJeffrey and Laura Richardson, being represented by Attorney Brad
Laue, and
WHEREAS,the Board of County Commissioners have carefully considered the attached
petition, and are fully advised in relation thereto.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld
County,Colorado,that the Board concurs with the recommendation of the assessor and the petition
be and hereby is, denied, and an abatement or refund be allowed as follows:
CORRECTION
TO ASSESSED ABATEMENT TAX
VALUATION OR REFUND YEAR
$0.00 $0.00 2003
$0.00 $0.00 2004
•
2006-0968
: fIS fET,
AS0063
00
V9-0'-06
TAX ABATEMENT PETITION - JEFFREY AND LAURA RICHARDSON
PAGE 2
The above and foregoing Resolution was,on motion duly made and seconded,adopted by
the following vote on the 3rd day of April, A.D., 2006.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COU , COLORADO
ATTEST:
. J. `:t
Weld County Clerk to th r� ie, C air r) r
op)
`♦ Q. � David E. Long, Pro-Tem /
Deputy Clerk to the Board ' V
Wil " m H. Jerke
e Q
1A0mneY
AS TO Fasd n
Glenn Vaad
Date of signature:O41/1 54‘,
2006-0968
AS0063
• PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES
Please submit in duplicate copies and answer all questions. I I
County Name Weld Date Received �C�)
ie
Use Assessor's or Commissioners Date Stamp
PETITIONER:Complete Section I on this side only RECEIVED
Section I:
Date: 2/ 6/ 2006 FEB 0 7 2005
Month Day Year
Petitioner's Name: Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR
Petitioner's mailing address: 373 50th Avenue Greeley, Colorado
Greeley. CO 80634
City or Town State Zip Code
SCHEDULE OR PARCEL NUMBER(S) PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
095903131027 373 50th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80634
Petitioner states that the taxes assessed against the above property for property tax year 2003&2004 is
incorrect for the following reasons: (Briefly describe the circumstances surrounding the incorrect value or tax.
(The petitioner's estimate of actual value must be included.) Attach additional sheets if necessary.
See letter accompanying this application.
•
Petitioner's estimate of actual value$ N/A 1 1
Value Year
Petitioner requests•an abatement or refund of the appropriate taxes associated with a reduction in value.
I declare,under penalty of perjury in the second degree,that this petition,together with any accompanying exhibits
or statements,has been examined by me,and to the best of my knowledge,information and belief,is true,correct
and complete.
Daytime Phone Number j
etitioner's Signature
By / Daytime Phone Number( 970)352-4805
Agents Mature' '
`Letter of agency must be attached when petition Is submitted.
Every petition for abatement or refund filed pursuant to section 39-10-114,C.R.S.,shall be acted upon pursuant to
the provisions of this section by the board of county commissioners or the assessor,as appropriate,within six
months of the date of filing such petition. 39-1-113(1.7),C.R.S.
Section II: Assessor's Use Only
Tax Year
Assessed Value Tax
Original
Corrected
AbatelRefund
•
• . .;(FOR ASSESSORS AND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS USE ONLY)
RESOLUTION OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Resolution No.
Section is in accordance with 39-1-113(1.5), C.R.S., the commissioners of County authorize
the assessor to review petitions for abatement or refund and to settle by written mutual agreement any such petition
for abatement or refund in an amount of one thousand dollars or less per tract, parcel, or lot of land or per schedule
of personal property.
The assessor and petitioner mutually agree to an assessed value and tax abatement/refund of:
•
Tax Year
Value Tax
Original •
Corrected
Abate/Refund
PLEASE NOTE:THE TOTAL TAX AMOUNT DOES NOT INCLUDE ACCRUED INTEREST, PENALTIES, AND
FEES ASSOCIATED WITH LATE AND/OR DELINQUENT TAX PAYMENTS, IF APPLICABLE. PLEASE
CONTACT YOUR COUNTY TREASURER FOR FULL PAYMENT INFORMATION.
Petitioner's Signature Date
Assessor's or Deputy Assessor's Signature Date •
•
If Section 1 is not complete and/or if petition is for more than $1,000, Section II must be completed. Submit an
original petition and a copy to the Division of Property Taxation.
Section II: Assessor's recommendation:
Approved'or Approved in part$
led in . (if a protes was filed, please attach a copy of NOD.)
Denied fo the following reason(s):�7/(/ ends „›.4.44/ — 15 /S ,y-/e ,9i
j e `vim �l7dritr E XSA- e 4h/Are - �9/tic/ 7 / / � 4-S,.S'ScrP S' �C
C6/'/e - r /Iv / / S /ti/e?"-e7%;/ -77 /`Z //WC-
c-- -__L3/ • s.,
•
Assessor's or Deputy Asses a Signature
Section iii: WHEREA , he County Commissioners of County, State or Colorado, at a duly
and lawfully called regular meeting held on / _I , at which meeting there were present the following
mo day yr
members: •
with notice of such meeting and an opportunity to be present having been given to the taxpayer and the Assessor of
said County and Assessor _(being present/not present) and
Name
petitioner (being present/not present), and WHEREAS,The said
Name
County Commissioners have carefully considered the within petition, and are fully advised In relation,thereto, NOW
BE IT RESOLVED,That the Board (agrees/does not agree)with the recommendation of the assessor •
and the petition be (approved/denied) and an abatement/refund be (approved/dented) for property tax year
. The taxes tb be abated or refunded are$ which represents an assessed value of
Chairperson of the Board of County Commissioners' Signature
t, , County Clerk and Ex-officio Clerk of the Board of County
•
Commissioners in and for the aforementioned county, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing order is truly
copied from the record of the proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said County
at , this day of
Time Date Month Year
•
County Clerk's or Deputy County Clerk's.Signature
•
• ACTION OF THE PROPERTY TAX ADMINISTRATOR'
Denver, Colorado
• Month Day Year
The action of the Board of County Commissioners, relative to the within petition, is hereby
Approved; ' Approved in part$ ; Denied for the following reason(s):
•
Secretary's Signature Property Tax Administrator's Signature
<MIS Re..5A eATEIFQRMREV 1.2000
6 WELD COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
915 TENTH STREET
P.O. BOX 758
GREELEY, CO 80632
WEBSITE: www.co.weld.co.us
O PHONE: (970) 336-7235
FAX: (970) 352-0242
COLORADO
December 19, 2005
Bradley D. Laue
Winters, Hellerich &Hughes, LLC
5754 W. 11th Street, Suite 101
Greeley, Colorado 80634
RE: Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson
Dear Mr. Laue:
Your letter dated December 5, 2005 has been forwarded to this office for review and response.
There appears to be a misunderstanding concerning the statutory assessment of taxes due.
As I understand the facts, Mr. and Ms. Richardson built a residence on land that they owned, on
or before 1998. The property in question has been assessed as vacant land through 2004, until
the assessor's office discovered that a residence had been built upon the property. The treasurer
then adjusted the tax due for the tax years 2003 and 2004 for omitted improvements to the
property. Since Mr. and Ms. Richardson paid the taxes on the property which had been assessed
as vacant land, they do not believe they should have to pay the taxes for the improvements which
were not previously assessed for the tax years 2003 and 2004.
Section 39- 5- 125 CRS provides for such a situation:
(1) Whenever it is discovered that any taxable property has been omitted from the
assessment roll of any year or series of years, the assessor shall immediately determine the value
of such omitted property and shall list the same on the assessment roll of the year in which the
discovery was made and shall notify the treasurer of any unpaid taxes on such property for prior
years.
The actions of the assessor and the treasurer in this matter complied with state statute. The
omitted improvements to the property were discovered in 2005, and were added to the
assessment roll. The assessor notified the treasurer of the unpaid taxes for prior years. Colorado
courts have determined that the collection of taxes assessed on previously omitted property is
EXHIBIT
Letter, B. Laue
December 19, 2005
page 2
limited to the most recent six (6)years. See Chew v. Board of Assessment Appeals, City and
County.of Denver, 673 P.2d 1028 (Ct. App.1983), which cites 39-10-101 (2)(b) CRS. It is not
clear from your letter when the residence was actually placed on the subject property, but records
which were recently reviewed indicate that the residence was built sometime in 1997, and was
complete by January, 1998. In any case, the taxes have apparently been assessed for only two
prior years.
The taxes on the previously omitted property are due and owing. Additionally, as unpaid taxes,
they are accruing interest at the statutory rate for each month they remain unpaid. Payments on
the unpaid taxes should be made to the Weld County treasurer's office,
If you have any questions, or would like to further discuss this matter, do not hesitate to contact
me.
Very Truly Yours,
C dy Giauque
Assistant Weld County Attorney
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Bradley D.Laue 5754 W.11th Street,Suite 101 Thomas E.Hellerich
Greeley,Colorado 80634-4811 William W.Hughes
blaue@wh-h.com PHONE: (970)352-4805 • Fax:(970)352-6547 William W.Hughes II
www.whhlawpractice.com Julie A.Scroggins
Jerry D.Winters
February 6, 2006
Stanley F. Sessions
Weld County Assessor
1400 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson
Dear Mr. Sessions:
As you know, I am the Richardsons' attorney and am authorized to act on their behalf.
Enclosed are an original and one copy of a Petition for Abatement or Refund of Taxes. Could
you please return a date-stamped copy of the Petition to this office in the enclosed postage-
prepaid return envelope.
You have received several letters from this law firm concerning Mr. and Mrs.
Richardson's property in this matter. Copies of those letters are enclosed. The purpose of this
letter is to restate everything that was stated in those letters. I have also enclosed copies of the
letters I have sent to the County Attorney in this matter.
Briefly, the reason my clients are requesting the abatement is that it is the position of this
law firm that Colorado law does not allow the Assessor to collect taxes for an assessment that
was not done correctly on a parcel of property already on the tax rolls. The assessment in this
matter involved property for which only the value was incorrectly assessed. Section 39-5-125,
C.R.S., and the court cases accompanying that statute state that only property that was omitted
completely off the tax rolls is subject to being reassessed for past years and not because the
property was incorrectly assessed. If you look at my letter of January 10, 2006 to Cyndy
Giauque, you will see my legal reasoning concerning the difference between an "omitted
property" situation and an "omitted value" situation. This matter is clearly an "omitted value"
situation.
As I stated in my other letters, the Richardsons are willing to pay the 2005 taxes based on
the assessment done.
RECEIVED
FEB 07 2006
WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR
Greeley, Colorado
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Stanley F. Sessions
Weld County Assessor
February 6, 2006
Page 2
I respect the County Attorney's position in this matter. Cyndy Giauque and I have been
friends for a long time, and I have all the respect in the world for her. I just respectfully disagree
with her opinion of what the court cases state in this matter.
Lastly and most importantly, my clients are asking for a two-year abatement of taxes. I
do realize that this is the end of January 2006, but my clients are asking that the 2004 and 2003
unpaid amounts, as alleged by the Assessor's Office, be completely abated. Ms. Giauque
indicated to me that she believed that Mr. Richardson had known that the assessment was being
done wrong when the Richardsons had some refinancing done. I talked to the Richardsons, and
that is not true. They did not know that the assessment had been done wrong by the Assessor's
Office.
As I stated above, I have all the respect in the world for the County Attorney's Office and
Cyndy Giauque. I think Cyndy's position is that an improvement, such as a home, is actually a
separate piece of property that is an "omitted" piece of property under the court cases.
Obviously, as I stated above, we do not agree with that assessment. The property is defined in
the statute as the whole piece of property described by the legal description. That includes the
land and the home. There is no way to split the property and say that the home, as an
improvement on the property, is somehow a separate piece of property from the land. I do not
believe the courts would agree with the County Attorney's position if this matter were to come to
litigation,which I am sure it will not.
Sincerely,
Bradley D. e
BDL/kja
Enclosures
pc: Clients (w/copy of Petition only)
Cyndy Giauque, Assistant Weld County Attorney(w/copy of Petition only)
M:\R0918\001\0011t005.bdl.doc
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
• Attorneys at Law
Bradley D.Laue 5754 W.11th Street,Suite 101 Thomas E.Hellerich
Greeley,Colorado 80634-4811 William W.Hughes
blaue@wh-h.com PHONE:(970)352-4805 • Fax:(970)352-6547 William W.Hughes II
www.whhlawpractice.com Julie A.Scroggins
Jerry D.Winters
October 26, 2005
Stanley F. Sessions 1�- , t I g
Weld County Assessor , Li
1400 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: . Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson
Dear Mr. Sessions:
This firm represents Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson. They received a Corrected Notice
of Statement of Taxes Due, a copy of which is enclosed. It is my understanding that this is a
correction for the years of 2003 and 2004, during which time my clients' home allegedly was not
correctly assessed. The home has been assessed as vacant land over the years, and I believe that
Mark Lusby of your office finally found out that there is a home on that land.
I just want to make it clear that I do not believe my clients owe any back taxes. My
clients will gladly pay the corrected amount for 2005, which I believe is the amount of
$1,311.64. This seems to be correct for a home that is worth approximately $200,000.00. My
clients do not believe that they owe the $883.24 for 2003 and 2004 since it was clearly the fault
of the Assessor's Office that their home was not correctly assessed.
My clients also do not owe the $883.24 because they or their bank paid exactly what was
billed them by the Treasurer's Office. As you probably know, if a bill is paid as presented, that
acts as an accord and satisfaction. When a person receives a bill,he or she pays that amount, and
the creditor cannot claim that an additional amount is due. Claiming that my clients owe the
2003 and 2004 taxes purely based on the mistake of the Assessor's Office is like Xcel Energy
billing a person two years later for an electric bill that was too low.
It was also reasonable for my clients to believe that $800.00 was the amount for taxes on
their piece of property. As you know, taxes fluctuate a couple of hundred dollars every year, and
my clients' were taxed approximately between $500.00 and $800.00 for the whole time since
they have owned this home. Mr. Richardson built the home, and they would not have any other
tax notices from homes that they previously owned or from this home to which to compare the
$800.00 bill. My clients would not know the difference, whether the taxes were $800.00 or
$1,500.00. Even myself, as an experienced real estate lawyer, would rely totally on the amount
from the Assessor's Office as to whether or not the tax amount is correct. I, frankly, do not
know how to calculate property taxes, and neither do my clients.
t 1
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Stanley F. Sessions
Weld County Assessor
October 26, 2005
Page 2
In addition, a person would not know the amount of his or her neighbor's taxes, so there
would be absolutely no reason for a person to compare his or her taxes to a neighbor's taxes.
People generally do not talk about those types of matters. Mr. Lusby had intimated that
Mr. Richardson was obligated to notify the Assessor's Office that he thought there was a mistake
in his bill. My clients clearly received the bill and paid it as presented. They are under no
obligation to notify the Assessor's Office, even if they did know there was a mistake. Of course,
they would not know there was a mistake since it is the job of the Assessor's Office to correctly
assess the home.
Moreover, my clients may have actually been over-taxed for a vacant lot designation. _
The lot was only worth approximately $28,000.00, which was the amount my clients paid. My
clients paid taxes of$956.76 for 2003 and $895.72 for 2004. Those amounts are obviously over-
taxation for a vacant lot, the determination of which, of course, was the fault of the Assessor's
Office. If my clients owe an additional $449.76 for 2003 and$433.48 for 2004, that means that
my clients are owed refunds for the years 2003 and 2004 if they only owe the taxes for vacant
land for 2003 and 2004. Their home is worth $200,000.00. Taxes for a vacant lot that is worth
approximately ten percent of the $200,000.00 should be approximately$100.00 to $200.00. My
clients have obviously been overtaxed for the vacant land designation of 2003 and 2004.
If you would please forward to me, in writing, a letter from the Assessor's Office
indicating that my clients do not owe any additional taxes for 2003 and 2004, within ten days of
the date of this letter, I would appreciate it. As I stated above, my clients had absolutely no
knowledge that these taxes were allegedly underpaid. My clients,paid the amounts that were
billed to them. I think the law is clear in this matter that you cannot collect more taxes that the
amounts that were billed.
I look forward to receiving your letter within ten days of the date of this letter. Please
call me if you have any questions.
Sin rely,
Bradley . Laue
BDL/kja
Enclosure
pc: Clients (w/o enc.)
Mark Lusby,Residential Appraiser (w/enc.)
Lee Morrison,Assistant County Attorney(w/enc.)
M:\R0918\001\D011t001.bdl.doc
Report Date: 10/13/2005 01:46PM WELD COUNTY TREASURER Page: 1
STATEMENT OF TAXES DUE
SCHEDULE NO: R6892197ASSESSED gg
373 50 AVE TO: uO � QT 0 CT 1 y
RICHARDSON JEFFREY W & LAURA A i tt /₹ �oo�GREELEY, CO 80634
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
GR 8WBW L27 BLK5 WEBER WEST 8TH REPLAT SITUS: 373 50 AV GREELEY 80634
PARCEL: 095903131027 SITUS ADD: 373 50 AV GREELEY
TAX YEAR CHARGE TAX AMOUNT INTEREST FEES PAID TOTAL DUE
2003 TAX 1,360.96 ANIMIS 0.00 956.76 419
2004 TAX 1,311.64 7t 0.00 895.72 ` li.3,S,i/
TOTAL TAXES St
GRAND TOTAL DUE GOOD THROUGH 11/14/2005 .45(f15. zV. _
ORIGINAL TAX BILLING FOR 2004 TAX DISTRICT 0600-
Authority Mill Levy Amount Values Actual Assessed
WELD COUNTY 19.957 302.55 RESIDENTIAL 190,387 15,160
SCHOOL DIST#6 44.711 677.82 r _
NCW WATER 1.000 15.16 TOTAL 190,387 15,160
GREELEY 11.274 170.92
AIMS JUNIOR COL 6.328 95.93
WELD LIBRARY 3.249 49.26
TAXES FOR 2004 86.519 1,311.64
ALL TAX LIEN SALE AMOUNTS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE DUE TO ENDORSEMENT OF CURRENT TAXES BY THE LIENHOLDER
OR TO ADVERTISING AND DISTRAINT WARRANT FEES. CHANGES MAY OCCUR AND THE TREASURER'S OFFICE WILL NEED TO BE
CONTACTED PRIOR TO REMITTANCE AFTER THE FOLLOWING DATES: PERSONAL PROPERTY AND MOBILE HOMES-AUGUST 1,
REAL PROPERTY-AUGUST 1. TAX LIEN SALE REDEMPTION AMOUNTS MUST BE PAID BY CASH OR CASHIERS CHECK.
P.O. Box 458
Greeley, CO 80632
(970) 353-3845 ext.3290 ,32St
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Bradley D.Laue 5754 W.11th Street,Suite 101 Thomas E.Hellerich
Greeley,Colorado 806344811 - . William W.Hughes
blaue@wh-h.com PHONE: (970)352-4805 • Fax:(970)352-6547 William W.Hughes II
www.whhlawpractice.com Julie A.Scroggins
Jerry D.Winters
December 5, 2005
Stanley F. Sessions
Weld County Assessor
1400 N. 17th Avenue -
Greeley,CO 80631
RE: Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson
Dear Mr. Sessions:
This letter is a follow-up to the letter I sent you on October 26, 2005 regarding Jeffrey
and Laura A. Richardson, a copy of which is enclosed. To date I have not heard back from you.
I would like to hear your decision on the issues brought up in my letter of October 26,
2005 within seven days of the date of this letter. Thank you very much for your cooperation
with regard to this matter.
Sincerely,
Bradley D. aue
BDL/kja
pc: Clients
M:V20918W01\0011t002.bdldoc
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Bradley D.Laue 5754 W.11th Street,Suite 101 Thomas E.Hellerich
Greeley,Colorado 80634-4811 William W.Hughes
blaue®wh-h.com PHONE:(970)352-4805 • Fax:(970)352-6547 William W.Hughes II
www.whhlawpractice.com - Julie A.Scroggins
Jerry D.Winters
December 20, 2005
Cyndy Giauque
Assistant Weld County Attorney
P.O. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
RE: Jeffrey and Laura A.Richardson
Dear Cyndy:
Thank you for your letter of December 19, 2005 regarding my clients, Jeffrey and
Laura A. Richardson. We will respond to your letter once I have had an opportunity to talk with
my clients. This will probably not happen until after the first of the year since I will be out of the
office next week.
Sincerely,
Bradley Laue • •
BDL/kja
pc: Clients (w/copy of Ms. Giauque's letter)
M:U20918t00110011t003.bdl.doc
•
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Bradley D.Laue 5754 W.11th Street,Suite 101 Thomas E.Hellerich
Greeley,Colorado 80634-4811 William W.Hughes
blaue@wh-h.com PHONE:(970)352-4805 • Fax:(970)352-6547 William W.Hughes II
www.whhlawpractice.com Julie A.Scroggins
._... .. Jerry D.Winters
January 10, 2006
Cyndy Giauque
Assistant Weld County Attorney
P.O. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
RE: Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson
Dear Cyndy:
This letter is in response to your letter of December 19, 2005 regarding my clients,
Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson. I appreciate the position of the County in this matter, but the
fact remains that my clients had absolutely no idea that the property had been assessed as vacant
land, and they should not be penalized for that amount. Obviously, my clients are like most
people and cannot instantly come up with approximately$1,800.00.
I also appreciate your interpretation of §39-5-125 (1), C.R.S. However, §39-5-125 (1),
C.R.S. states, "Whenever it is discovered that any taxable property has been omitted from the
assessment roll for any year or series of years . . .(emphasis added)" That is not the situation
here. This property had been taxed over the years but had not been omitted from the assessment
roll. There is difference, of course,between a piece of property being omitted completely, which
is the situation covered by §39-5-125 (1), C.R.S., and the situation of my clients where the
property had been assessed and taxes have been paid on the property.
The Assessor has the authority to assess taxes retroactively on property previously
omitted from the assessment rolls, including the value of improvements located on land. Chew
v. Board of Assessment Appeals, 673 P.2d 1028 (Colo. App.`1983), and RTD, LLC v. Grandote
International Ltd., 937 P.2d 768 (Colo. App. 1996). These cases, which are clearly on point, I
believe, state that this section (meaning § 39-5-125), and 39-10-101.(2) (a), C.R.S. authorizes
retroactive assessments and additional property taxes only against "omitted property" and not
against "omitted value." Cabot Petroleum Corporation v. Yuma County Board of Equalization,
847 P.2d 152 (Colo. App. 1992), rev'd. on other grounds 856 P.2d 844 (Colo. 1993). One other
case completely supports my clients' position. It states that this section (39-5-125) does not
authorize retroactive assessments against previously under-valued property, because such
valuation increases do not involve omitted property. See In Stitches, Inc. v. Denver County
Board of County Commissioners, 62 P.3d 1080 (Colo. App. 2002).
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Cyndy Giauque
Assistant Weld County Attorney
January 10, 2006
Page t
It is obvious that the foregoing-cited cases do not allow the County to retroactively
reassess Mr. and Mrs. Richardson's property, and, obviously, these cases were made to protect
taxpayers against exactly what the County is trying to do to my clients.
As I indicated in my letter of October 26, 2005 to the Weld County Assessor, my clients
would have absolutely no idea whether or not the property was correctly being assessed. That is
the responsibility of the Assessor's Office. My clients paid whatever was billed to them. As I
also indicated in my letter of October 26, 2005, it looks like maybe the vacant property •
designation had also been assessed incorrectly since my clients paid $956.76 in 2003 and
$895.72 for vacant land designation. The taxes on their $200,000.00 house for 2005 will be
$1,311.64. Since the lots in that area are worth no more than$40,000.00, why did my clients pay
the amounts above for 2003 and 2004? Those assessments for the vacant lot seem incorrect.
My clients would like to be reasonable in this matter, but they still do not believe that
they are liable for any back taxes based on the case law and the vacant lot designation being
incorrectly assessed.
If the Assessor's Office and the Treasurer's Office are going to insist that these taxes are
due and owing, please let, me know so that I can set up a time to speak with the County
Commissioners to present my clients' side of the story and then they can make a determination
as to whether or not the taxes are due and owing.
Frankly, the cases I cited above, prevents the County from collecting any taxes against
my clients retroactively because their situation is not "omitted property" but an "omitted value"
situation. It is not that their property was left off the tax rolls, it just was not assessed correctly,
and the"omitted value"was allegedly left off of their tax notice.
I look forward to hearing back from you regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Bradley D Laue
BDL/kja
pc: Clients
M:\R09181W 1\0011t004.bdl.doc
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Bradley D.Laue 5754 W.11th Street,Suite 101 Thomas E.Hellerich
Greeley,Colorado 80634-4811 William W.Hughes
blaue@wh-h.com PHONE:(970)352-4805 • Fax:(970)352-6547 William W.Hughes II
www.whhlawpractice.com Julie A.Scroggins
Jerry D.Winters
March 27, 2006
HAND DELIVERED
Weld County Board of Commissioners
P.O. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
ATTENTION: Donald D. Warden, Clerk to the Board
RE: Your Schedule Number R 6892197
Our Clients: Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson
Dear Mr. Warden:
Please find enclosed applicable documentation that I request be distributed to the County
Commissioners on the matter of Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson, which is before the County
Commissioners on April 3, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. As I and Jeffrey Richardson will more fully
explain when we meet with the County Commissioners, we do not believe that the Richardsons
are liable for the extra taxes which the Assessor's Office is now trying to assess on their property
because of a mistake made by the Assessor's Office for the tax years of 2003 and 2004.
The Richardsons believe that it is clear in Colorado case law, as more fully explained in
my letters, copies of which are enclosed, which were sent to Cyndy Giauque, the Assistant Weld
County Attorney handling this matter, the Richardsons' situation is an "omitted value" situation.
The Court cases make it clear that if it is an "omitted value" situation, the Assessor's Office
cannot retroactively reassess the property and ask that extra taxes be paid for past tax years.
Please call me if you have any questions. I will look forward to meeting with the Board
of County Commissioners at 9:00 a.m. on April 3, 2006.
Sincerely,
Brad ey D. au
BDL/kja
Enclosures
pc: Clients (w/o enc.)
M:\R0918\001\0011t006.bdl.doc
fC -lFF , AS
•
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law ..
Bradley D.Laue 5754 W.11th Street,Suite 101 Thomas E.Hellerich
Greeley,Colorado 80634-4811 William W.Hughes
blaue@wh-h.com PHONE:(970)352-4805 • Fax:(970)352-6547 William W.Hughes II
www.whhlawpractice.com Julie A.Scroggins
Jerry.D.,Winters .
February 6, 2006
hibprY
Stanley F. Sessions
Weld County Assessor
1400 N. 17t Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Jeffrey and Laura A.Richardson
Dear Mr. Sessions:
As you know, I am the Richardsons' attorney and am authorized to act on their behalf.
Enclosed are an original and one copy of a Petition for Abatement or Refund of Taxes. Could
you please return a date-stamped copy of the Petition to this office in the enclosed postage-
prepaid return envelope.
You have received several letters from this law firm concerning Mr. and Mrs.
Richardson's property in this matter. Copies of those letters are enclosed. The purpose of this
letter is to restate everything that was stated in those letters. I have also enclosed copies of the
letters I have sent to the County Attorney in this matter.
Briefly, the reason my clients are requesting the abatement is that it is the position of this
law firm that Colorado law does not allow the Assessor to collect taxes for an assessment that
was not done correctly on a parcel of property already on the tax rolls. The assessment in this
matter involved property for which only the value was incorrectly assessed. Section 39-5-125,
C.R.S., and the court cases accompanying that statute state that only property that was omitted
completely off the tax rolls is subject to being reassessed for past years and not because the
property was incorrectly assessed. If you look at my letter of January 10, 2006 to Cyndy
Giauque, you will see my legal reasoning concerning the difference between an "omitted
property" situation and an "omitted value" situation. This matter is clearly an "omitted value"
situation.
As I stated in my other letters, the Richardsons are willing to pay the 2005 taxes based on
the assessment done.
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Stanley F. Sessions
Weld County Assessor
February 6, 2006
Paget
I respect the County Attorney's position in this matter. Cyndy Giauque and I have been
friends for a long time, and I have all the respect in the world for her. I just respectfully disagree
with her opinion of what the court cases state in this matter.
Lastly and most importantly, my clients are asking for a two-year abatement of taxes. I
do realize that this is the end of January 2006, but my clients are asking that the 2004 and 2003
unpaid amounts, as alleged by the Assessor's Office, be completely abated. Ms. Giauque
indicated to me that she believed that Mr. Richardson had known that the assessment was being
done wrong when the Richardsons.had some refinancing done. I talked to the Richardson, and
that is not true. They did not know that the assessment had been done wrong by the Assessor's
Office.
As I stated above, I have all the respect in the world for the County Attorney's Office and
Cyndy Giauque. I •
think Cyndy's position is that an improvement, such as a home, is actually a
separate piece of property that is an "omitted" piece of property under the court cases.
Obviously, as I stated above, we do not agree with that assessment. The property is defined in
the statute as the whole piece of property described by the legal description. That includes the
land and the home. There is no way to split the property and say that the home, as an
improvement on the property, is somehow a separate piece of property from the land. I do not
believe the courts would agree with the County Attorney's position if this matter were to come to
litigation,which I am sure it will not.
Sincerely,
Bradley D. e
BDL/kja
Enclosures
pc: Clients (w/copy of Petition only)
Cyndy Giauque,Assistant Weld County Attorney(w/copy of Petition only)
MAR0918\001\0011t005.bd1.dce - - -
PETITION FOR ABATEMENT OR REFUND OF TAXES
Please submit In duplicate copies and answer all questions.
County Name Weld Date Received
Use Assessors or Commissioners'Date Stamp
PETITIONER:Complete Section I on this side only
Section I.
Date: 2/ 6/ 2006
Month Day Year
Petitioner's Name: Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson
Petitioner's mailing address: 373 50th Avenue
Greeley. Co 80644
City or Town State Zip Code
SCHEDULE OR PARCEL NUMBER(S) PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
095903131027 373 50th Avenue
Greeley. CO 80634
Petitioner states that the taxes assessed against the above properly for property tax year 2003&2004 is
incorrect for the following reasons: (Briefly describe the circumstances surrounding the incorrect value or tax.
(The petitioner's estimate of actual value must be included.) Attach additional sheets if necessary.
See letter accompanying this application.
Petitioner's estimate of actual value$ N/A ( 1
Value Year
Petitioner requests.an abatement or refund of the appropriate taxes associated with a reduction in value.
I declare,under penalty of perjury in the second degree,that this petition,together with any accompanying exhibits
or statements,has been examined by me,and to the best of my knowledge,Information and belief,is true,correct
and complete.
Daytime Phone Number f )
oilers Signature
By Daytime Phone Number 970)352-4805
Agent's semi•
*Letter of agency must be attached when petition Is submitted.
Every petition for abatement or refund filed pursuant to section 39-10-114,C.R.S.,shall be acted upon pursuant to
the provisions of this section by the board of county commissioners or the assessor,as appropriate,within six
months of the date of filing such petition. 39-1-113(1.7),C.R.S.
Section II; Assessor's Use Only
Tax Year
Assessed Value Tax
Original
Corrected
Abate/Refund
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
• Attorneys at Law
Bradley D.Late 5754 W.11th Street,Suite 101 Thomas E.Hellerich
Greeley,Colorado 806344811 William W.Hughes
blaue@wh-h.corn PHONE:(970)3524805 • Fax:(970)352-6547 William W.Hughes II
www.whhlawpractice.com Julie A.Scroggins
Jerry D.Winters
October 26, 2005
Stanley F. Sessions
Weld County Assessor
1400 N. 17t Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
• RE: . Jeffrey and Laura A.Richardson
Dear Mr. Sessions:
•
• This firm represents Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson. They received a Corrected Notice
of Statement of Taxes Due, a copy of which is enclosed. It is my understanding that.this is a
correction for the years of 2003 and 2004, during which time my clients' home allegedly was not
correctly assessed. The home has been assessed as vacant land over the years, and I believe that
Mark Lusby of your office finally found out that there is a home on that land.
I just want to make it clear that I do not believe my clients owe any back taxes. My
clients will gladly pay the corrected amount for 2005, which I believe is the amount of
$1,311.64. This seems to be correct for a home that is worth approximately $200,000.00. My
clients do not believe that they owe the $883.24 for 2003 and 2004 since it was clearly the fault
of the Assessor's Office that their home was not correctly assessed.
My clients also do not owe the $883.24 because they or their bank paid exactly what was
billed them by the Treasurer's Office. As you probably know, if a bill is paid as presented, that
acts as an accord and satisfaction. When a person receives a bill,he or she pays that amount, and -
the creditor cannot claim that an additional amount is due. Claiming that my clients owe the
2003 and 2004 taxes purely based on the mistake of the Assessor's Office is like Xcel Energy
billing a person two years later for an electric bill that was too low.
It was also reasonable for my clients to believe that$800.00 was the amount for taxes on
their piece of property. As you know, taxes fluctuate a couple of hundred dollars every year, and
• my clients' were taxed approximately between $500.00 and $800.00 for the whole time since
they have owned this home. Mr. Richardson built the home, and they would not have any other •
tax notices from homes that they previously owned or from this home to which to compare the
$800.00 bill. My clients would not know the difference, whether the taxes were $800.00 or
$1,500.00. Even myself, as an experienced real estate lawyer, would rely totally on the amount
from the Assessor's Office as to whether or not the tax amount is correct. I, frankly, do not
know how to calculate property taxes, and neither do my clients.
• r t�
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Stanley F. Sessions
Weld County Assessor
October 26, 2005
Page 2
In addition, a person would not know the amount of his or her neighbor's taxes, so there
would be absolutely no reason for a person to compare his or her taxes to a neighbor's taxes.
People generally do not talk about those types of matters. Mr. Lusby had intimated that
Mr.Richardson was obligated to notify the Assessor's Office that he thought there was a mistake
in his bill. My clients clearly received the bill and paid it as presented. They are under no
obligation to notify the Assessor's Office, even if they did know there was a mistake. Of course,
they would not know there was a mistake since it is the job of the Assessor's Office to correctly
assess the home.
•
Moreover, my clients may have actually been over-taxed for a vacant lot designation.
The lot was only worth approximately $28,000.00, which was the amount my clients paid. My
clients paid taxes of$956.76 for 2003 and $895.72 for 2004. Those amounts are obviously over-
taxations for a vacant lot, the determination of which, of course, was the fault of the Assessor's
Office. If my clients owe an additional $449.76 for 2003 and$433.48 for 2004, that means that
my clients are owed refunds for the years 2003 and 2004 if they only owe the taxes for vacant
land for 2003 and 2004. Their home is worth $200,000.00. Taxes for a vacant lot that is worth
approximately ten percent of the $200,000.00 should be approximately$100.00 to $200.00. My
clients have obviously been overtaxed for the vacant land designation of 2003 and 2004.
If you would please forward to me, in writing, a letter from the Assessor's Office
indicating that my clients do not owe any additional taxes for 2003 and 2004,within ten days of
the date of this letter, I would appreciate it. As I stated above, my clients had absolutely no
knowledge that these taxes were allegedly underpaid. My clients,paid the amounts that were
billed to them. I think the law is clear in this matter that you cannot collect more taxes that the
amounts that were billed.
I look forward to receiving your letter within ten days of the date of this letter. Please
call me if you have any questions.
Sin ely,
Bradley . Laue
BDL/kja
Enclosure
pc: Clients (w/o enc.)
Mark Lusby,Residential Appraiser (w/enc.)
Lee Morrison,Assistant County Attorney(w/enc.)
M:Vt0918'00P0011t001.bdl.doc
(
Report Date: 10/13/2005 01:46PM WELD COUNTY TREASURER Page: 1
STATEMENT OF TAXES DUE
SCHEDULE NO: R6892197
ASSESSED TO: OCT
373 50 AVE OCT
JEFFREY W& LAURA ACORRECTED NOTICE
U I 1 4 2005
GREELEY, CO 80634
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
GR 8WBW L27 BLK5 WEBER WEST 8TH REPLAT SITUS: 373 50 AV GREELEY 80634
PARCEL: 095903131027 SITUS ADD: 373 50 AV GREELEY
TAX YEAR CHARGE TAX AMOUNT INTEREST FEES PAID TOTAL DUE
2003 TAX 1,360.96 $ ,v_
0.00 956.76 4. 71v45011.
2004 TAX 1,311.64 glillIn 0.00 895.72 `5/3,5,
TOTAL TAXES
Una
GRAND TOTAL DUE GOOD THROUGH 11/14/2005 -din. z9. IIMS-
ORIGINAL TAX BILLING FOR 2004 TAX DISTRICT 0600-
Authority Mill Levy Amount Values Actual Assessed
WELD COUNTY 19.957 302.55 RESIDENTIAL 190,387 15,160
SCHOOL DIST#6 44.711 677.82
NCW WATER 1.000 15.16 TOTAL' 190,387 15,160
' GREELEY 11.274 170.92
AIMS JUNIOR COL 6.328 95.93
WELD LIBRARY 3.249 49.26
TAXES FOR 2004 • 86.519 1,311.64
•
ALL TAX LIEN SALE AMOUNTS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE.DUE TO ENDORSEMENT OF CURRENT TAXES BY THE LIENHOLDER
OR TO ADVERTISING AND DISTRAINT WARRANT FEES. CHANGES MAY OCCUR AND THE TREASURER'S OFFICE WILL NEED TO BE
CONTACTED PRIOR TO REMITTANCE AFTER THE FOLLOWING DATES: PERSONAL PROPERTY AND MOBILE HOMES-AUGUST 1,
REAL PROPERTY-AUGUST 1. TAX LIEN SALE REDEMPTION AMOUNTS MUST BE PAID BY CASH OR CASHIERS CHECK.
P.O.Box 458
Greeley, CO 80632
1970) 353-38�+
45jext.t.3298 32
51.
7y_ , ..
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Bradley D.Lave . 5754 W.11th Street,Suite 101 Thomas E.Hellerich
Greeley,Colorado 80634-4811 - William W.Hughes
blaue@wh-h.com PHONE:(970)352-4805 • Fax:(970)352-6547 William W.Hughes II
www.whhlawpractice.com Julie A.Scroggins
Jerry D.Winters
December 5,2005
Stanley F. Sessions
Weld County Assessor
1400 N. 17th Avenue — — — -- — --Greeley,CO 80631 •
RE: Jeffrey and Laura A.Richardson.
Dear Mr Sessions:
This letter is a follow-up to the letter I sent you on October 26, 2005 regarding Jeffrey
and Laura A.Richardson,a copy of which is enclosed. To date I have not heard back from you.
I would like to hear your decision on the issues brought up in my letter of October 26,
2005 within seven days of the date of this. letter. Thank you very much for your cooperation
with regard to this matter.
Sincerely,
Bradley D. aue
BDL/kja
pc: Clients
M:Ut0918\001\0011t002.bdl.doc
t r
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Bradley D.Laue 5754 W.11th Street,Suite 101 Thomas E.Hellerich
Greeley,Colorado 80634-4811 William W.Hughes
blaue@wh-h.com PHONE:(970)3524805 • Fax:(970)352-6547 William W.Hughes II
www.whhlawpractice.com Julie A.Scroggins
Jerry D.Winters
December 20, 2005
Cyndy Giauque
Assistant Weld County.Attorney
P.O.Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
RE: Jeffrey and Laura A.Richardson
Dear:Cyndy:
•
Thank you for your letter of December 19, 2005 regarding my clients, Jeffrey and
Laura A. Richardson. We will respond to your letter once I have had an opportunity to talk with
my clients. This will probably not happen until after the first of the year since I will be out of the
office next week
Sincerely,
t . Laue •
BDL/kja
pc: Clients(w/copy of Ms. Gianque's letter)
M:\R0918\001'0011t003.bdl.doc
•
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Bradley D.Laue 5754 W.11th Street,Suite 101 Thomas E.Hellerich
Greeley,Colorado 80634-4811 William W.Hughes
blaue@wh-h.com PHONE: (970)352-4805 • Fax:(970)352-6547 William W.Hughes II
www.whhlawpractice.com Julie A.Scroggins
... •
_._._..._. _._......... Jerry D.Winters
January 10, 2006
•
Cyndy Giauque
Assistant Weld County Attorney -
P.O.Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632 .
• RE: Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson
•
Dear Cyndy: .
This'letter is in response to your letter of December 19, 2005 regarding my clients,
Jeffrey and Laura A. Richardson: I appreciate the position of the County in this matter, but the
fact remains that my clients had absolutely no idea that the property had been assessed as vacant
land, and they should not be penalized for that amount. Obviously, my clients are like most .
people and cannot instantly come up with approximately$1,800.00. .
I also appreciate your interpretation of§39-5-125 (1), C.R.S. However, §39-5-125 (1),
C.R.S. states, 'Whenever it is discovered that any taxable property has been omitted from the
assessment roll for any year or series of years . . .(emphasis added)" That is not the situation
here. This property had been taxed over the years but had not been omitted from the assessment
roll. There is difference, of course,between a piece of property being omitted completely,which
is the situation covered by §39-5-125 (1), C.R.S., and the situation of my clients where the
property had been assessed and taxes have been paid on the property.
The Assessor has the .authority to assess taxes retroactively on property previously
omitted from the assessment rolls, including the value of improvements located on land.. Chew
v. Board of Assessment Appeals, 673 P,2d 1028 (Colo. App. 1983), and RTD, LLC v. Grandote
International Ltd., 937 P.2d 768 (Colo. App. 1996). These cases, which are clearly on point, I
believe,-state .that,this section (meaning § 39-5-125), and 39-10-101.(2) (a), C.R.S. authorizes
retroactive assessments and additional property taxes only against "omitted property" and not
against "omitted value." Cabot Petroleum Corporation v. Yuma County Board of Equalization,
847 P.2d 152 (Colo. App. 1992), rev'd. on other grounds 856 P.2d 844 (Colo. 1993). One other •
case completely supports my clients' position. It states that this section (39-5-125) does not
authorize retroactive assessments. against previously under-valued property, because such
valuation increases do not involve omitted property. See In Stitches, Inc. v. Denver Count+
Board of County Commissioners, 62 P.3d 1080 (Colo.App.2002). • • . . '
WINTERS, HELLERICH & HUGHES, LLC
Attorneys at Law
Cyndy Giauque .
Assistant Weld County Attorney
January 10, 2006
Paget. . - .. . _.._.... __... ._..:.. ..
It is obvious that the foregoing-cited cases do not, allow the County to retroactively
reassess Mr. and Mrs. Richardson's property, and, obviously, these cases were made to protect
taxpayers against exactly what the County is trying to do to my clients.
As I indicated in my letter of October 26,2005 to the Weld County Assessor, my clients
would have absolutely no idea whether or not the property was correctly being assessed. That is
the responsibility of the Assessor's Office. My clients paid whatever was billed to them. As I
also indicated in my letter of October 26, 2005, it looks like maybe the vacant property
designation had also been assessed incorrectly since my clients paid $956.76 in 2003 and
$895.72 for vacant land designation. The taxes on their $200,000.00 house for 2005_will be .
$1,311.64. Since the lots in that area are worth no more than$40,00000, why did my clients pay
the amounts above for 2003 and 20047 Those assessments for the vacant lot seem incorrect.
My clients would like to be reasonable in this matter, but they still do not believe that
they are liable for any back taxes based on the case law and the vacant lot designation being
incorrectly assessed.,
If the Assessor's Office and the Treasurer's Office are going to insist that these taxes are
due and owing, please let me know so that I can set up a time to speak with the County
Commissioners to present my clients' side of the story and then they can make a determination
as to whether or not the taxes are due and owing.
Frankly, the cases I cited above, prevents the County from collecting any taxes against
my clients retroactively because their situation is not "omitted property"but an "omitted value"
situation. It is not that their property was left off the tax rolls, it just was not assessed correctly,
and the"omitted value"was allegedly left off of their tax notice.
I look forward to hearing back from you regarding this matter. '
Sincerely, .
Bradley D Laue
BDL/kja
pc: Clients
M:R0918t001'0011t004.btdcc .. . -
CirhV ‘:'.
CLERK TO THE BOARD
PHONE (970) 336-7215, EXT.4225
FAX: (970) 352-0242
' P.O. BOX 758
GREELEY, COLORADO 80632
C.
COLORADO
February 22, 2006
JEFFREY AND LAURA A. RICHARDSON
373 50T" AVENUE
GREELEY, CO 80634
RE:SCHEDULE NUMBER R 6892197
Dear Property Owner:
This is to advise you that the Weld County Board of Commissioners will hear your petition for
abatement or refund of taxes on the property described as:373 50T"AVENUE GREELEY,CO 80634.
The meeting is scheduled for April 3, 2006, at 9:00 a.m., in the First Floor Meeting Room, Weld
County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado.
The Assessor is recommending that the Board deny your petition. You are not required to be present
at this hearing, however, this is your opportunity to have your position heard, especially if your
position is opposed to the Assessor's recommendation. If you intend to submit any documentation
in support of your position for this hearing, all such documentation must be submitted to the Office of
the Clerk to the Board and to the Weld County Assessor's Office at least seven calendar days prior
to the meeting date in order for it to be considered at the scheduled hearing.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Carol Harding at
(970) 336-7215, extension 4217.
Sincerely,
fausaAth
Donald D. Warden
Clerk to the Board
By:/L/.w1Z12LC ge//.�L//�j
Deputy Cler the board
cc: Assessor
2006-0968
L.
rie:tt
CLERK TO THE BOARD
PHONE (970) 336-7215, Ext. 4225
WI ID FAX: (970) 352-0242
P. O. BOX 758
O GREELEY, COLORADO 80632
COLORADO
May 1, 2006
JEFFREY AND LAURA RICHARDSON
373 50TH AVENUE
GREELEY CO 80634
RE: SCHEDULE NUMBER R6892197
Dear Property Owner:
On April 3,2006,the Board of Weld County Commissioners considered your petition for abatement
or refund of taxes and denied same.
Pursuant to Section 39-2-125(f), C.R.S., you have the right to appeal this decision to the State
Board of Assessment Appeals within thirty days. You may obtain the appropriate forms and
instructions from the Board of Assessment Appeals, Department of Local Affairs, 1313 Sherman
Street, Room 420, Denver, Colorado 80203.
Ve truly your
ipzig
Donald D. Warden,
Clerk to the Board
Bey- Z-4,-.-7-._411
�erk to the Board
cc: Assessor
Bradley Laue
Hello