HomeMy WebLinkAbout930743.tiff RESOLUTION
RE: THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, 1993, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
PETITION OF:
BANG-A-WAY INC
% ELITCH GARDENS
4620 W 38TH AVE
DENVER, CO 80212
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: PIN: R 4715786 PARCEL: 120705000047 - 25473-C PT
NW4 5 3 68 BEG S89D52'E 1951.24' FROM NW COR S89D52'E 690.82' SO1D01'W 1319.41'
TO S & E R/W LN ISH DITCH THENCE SWLY ALONG DITCH THENC N89D11'W 167.60' N02D49'E
157.36' N11D45'E 145.08' N06DW 94.21' N50D07'W 42.96' N27D34'W 91.80'
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado,
organized as the Board of Equalization for the purpose of adjusting, equalizing,
raising or lowering the assessment and valuation of real and personal property
within Weld County, fixed and made by the County Assessor for the year 1993, and
WHEREAS, said petition has been heard before the County Assessor and due
Notice of Determination thereon has been given to the taxpayer(s) , and
WHEREAS, the taxpayer(s) presented a petition of appeal of the County
Assessor's valuation for the year 1993, claiming that the property described in
such petition was assessed too high, as more specifically stated in said
petition, and
WHEREAS, said petitioner being represented by Andrew Low, Attorney, and
WHEREAS, the Board has made its findings on the evidence, testimony and
remonstrances and is now fully informed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld
County, acting as the Board of Equalization, that the evidence presented at the
hearing clearly supported the value placed upon the Petitioner's property by the
Weld County Assessor. The Board of Equalization also determined the
classification of agriculture is correct. Such evidence indicated the value was
reasonable, equitable, and derived according to the methodologies, percentages,
figures and formulas dictated to the Weld County Assessor by law. The assessment
and valuation of the Weld County Assessor shall be, and hereby is, affirmed as
follows:
930743
Page 2
RE: BOE - BANG-A-WAY INC
ORIGINAL
Land $ 65,088
Improvements OR
Personal Property
TOTAL ACTUAL VALUE $ 65,088
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a denial of a petition, in whole or in part, by
the Board of Equalization may be appealed by selecting one of the following three
options:
1. Board of Assessment Appeals: You have the right to appeal the
County Board of Equalization's (CBOE's) decision to the Board of
Assessment Appeals (BAA) . Such hearing is the final hearing at
which testimony, exhibits, or any other evidence may be
introduced. If the decision of the BAA is further appealed to
the Court of Appeals, only the record created at the BAA hearing
shall be the basis for the Court's decision. No new evidence can
be introduced at the Court of Appeals. (Section 39-8-108(10) ,
CRS)
Appeals to the BAA must be made on forms furnished by the
BAA, and should be mailed or delivered within thirty (30)
days of denial by the CBOE to:
Board of Assessment Appeals
1313 Sherman Street, Room 523
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: 866-5880
OR
2. District Court: You have the right to appeal the CBOE's decision
to the District Court of the county wherein your property is
located. New testimony, exhibits or any other evidence may be
introduced at the District Court hearing. For filing
requirements, please contact your attorney or the Clerk of the
District Court. Further appeal of the District Court's decision
is made to the Court of Appeals for a review of the record.
(Section 39-8-108(1) , CRS)
930743
Page 3
RE: BOE - BANG-A-WAY INC
OR
3. Binding Arbitration: You have the right to submit your case to
arbitration. If you choose this option the arbitrator's decision
is final and your right to appeal your current valuation ends.
(Section 39-8-108.5, CRS)
Selecting the Arbitrator: In order to pursue arbitration, you
must notify the CBOE of your intent. You and the CBOE select an
arbitrator from the official list of qualified people. If you
cannot agree on an arbitrator, the District Court of the county
in which the property is located will make the selection.
Arbitration Hearing Procedure: Arbitration hearings are held
within sixty days from the date the arbitrator is selected. Both
you and the CBOE are entitled to participate. The hearings are
informal. The arbitrator has the authority to issue subpoenas
for witnesses, books, records, documents and other evidence. He
also has the power to administer oaths, and all questions of law
and fact shall be determined by him.
The arbitration hearing may be confidential and closed to the
public, upon mutual agreement. The arbitrator's written decision
must be delivered to both parties personally or by registered
mail within ten (10) days of the hearing. Such decision is final
and not subject to review.
Fees and Expenses: The arbitrator's fees and expenses are agreed
upon by you and the CBOE. In the case of residential real
property, such fees and expenses cannot exceed $150.00 per case.
The arbitrator's fees and expenses, not including counsel fees,
are to be paid as provided in the decision.
930743
Page 4
RE: BOE - BANG-A-WAY INC
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded,
adopted by the following vote on the 3rd day of August, A.D. , 1993.BOAOF UNTY ATTEST: Li ,y!Q,/��.°""".'� WELRDCOUNTY,COLOR COLORADO
Weld County Clerk to the Board jtitise- step-�1 ��! (AYE)
Constance L Harbert, Chairman
BY: l�4 / q/ '!�� ✓it IL
2.4 (AYE)
Deputy Clerk to the Board \ W. H. W bster, Pro-Tem
APPROVED S TO FORM: u NAY
eo . Barer
NAY
dt Coy AttornAy -Dale K. Hall
7�/f76L/IL J /. �/e17Z!`/V\-- (AYE)
/Barbara J. Kirks-eyer a
930743
BOE DECISION SHEET
PIN ik: R 4715786 PARCEL #: 120705000047
BANG-A-WAY INC
% ELITCH GARDENS
4620 W 38TH AVE
DENVER, CO 80212 Lam" c /_ f/./�2r
HEARING DATE: July 30, 1993 TIME: 4:00 P.M.HEARING ATTENDED? 1,N) NAME: !,nl�'�y�� �--tt�- k-4-4-
AGENT NAME: ANDY LOW
APPRAISER NAME: !,.*l V :, I /�v_i...a <
DECISION:
DECREASE IN VALUATION
INCREASE IN VALUATION
NO CHANGE IN VALUATION
ASSESSMENT RATIO
ACTUAL VALUATION
ORIGINAL ADJUSTED
Land $ 65,088 $ (cs-tir>q<
Improvements OR
Personal Property
Total Actual Value $ 65, 088 $ & Ci c g9
COMMENTS:
MOTION BY ]3 LL? TO 10t;4///0116. -1a,`
SECONDED BY _ (,/1 /�VV Bax -- (Y
` Hall -- (Y
Failed to meet burden of proof Harbert -- N)
Comparables inadequate Kirkmeyer - N)
Other: Webster -- /N)
RESOLUTION NO.
930743
1400 NORTH 17th AVE.
GREELEY, COLORADO 8063i
NOTICE OF DENIAL PHONE (303) 353-3845, EXT. 3656
25473-C PT NW4 5 3 68 BEG S89D52 'E 1'451 .24 'r FROM
�. NW CUR S89052 'E 690. 824 5O1OO1 ' W 1319.41 ° TO S
COLORADO 6 E R/W LN ISH DITCH THENCE SWLY ALONG DITCH THENC
N89011 •W 167.60 NO2D49'E 157.361 N11 0451E 145.081
NO6DW 94.21 ' N5010071 42. 96• N271334 'W 91 .80 '
OWNER BANG-A-WAY INC
ANDY LOW PARCEL 12O7O5OOOC47
PIN R 4715786
P BOX 185 YEAR 1993
DENVER CO 80201 LOG 00009
05/03/199.3
The appraised value of property is based on the appropriate consideration of the approaches to value required by law.The Assessor has determined
that your property should be included in the following category(ies):
REST DENT IAL PROPERTY IS VALUED BY CONSIDERING THE MARKET APP ROACH•
AGRICULTURAL LAND VALUE IS DETERMINED SOLELY BY THE EARNING OR PRODUCTIVE
CAPACITY OF THE LAND, CAPITALIZED AT A RATE SET BY LAW•
ALL OTHER PROPERTY, INCLUDING VACANT LAND, IS VALUED BY CONSIDERING THE COST,
MARKET, AND INCOME APPROACHES•
If your concern is the amount of your property tax, local taxing authorities (county, city, fire protection, and other special districts) hold
budget hearings in the fall.Please refer to your tax bill or ask your Assessor for a listing of these districts,and plan to attend these budget hearings.
The Assessor has carefully studied all available information, giving particular attention to the specifics included on your protest and has deter-
mined the valuation(s) assigned to your property.The reasons for this determination of value are:
NO CHANGE HAS BEEN MADE TO THE ACTUAL VALUATION OF THIS PROPERTY.
COLORADO LAW REQUIRES US TO SEND THIS NOTICE OF DENIAL FOR ALL
PROPERTIES ON WHICH WE DO NOT ADJUST THE VALUE.
PETITIONER'S
ASSESSOR'S VALUATION
PROPERTY CLASSIFICATION ESTIMATE ACTUAL VALUE ACTUAL VALUE
OF VALUE PRIOR TO REVIEW AFTER REVIEW
LAND 65, 088 65,388
IMPS
TOTALS $ - $ 65 $
If you disagree with the Assessor's decision,you have the right to appeal to the County Board of Equalization for further consideration,
39-8-106(1)(a),C.R.S. Please see the back of this form for detailed information on filing your appeal.
WARREN.L. LASELL 06/25/93
By:
WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR DATE 1 5
15-DPT AR Form PR-2O7-87/93 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON REVERSE SIDE 330743
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT To APPEAL i HL: ASSESSOR'S DECINNON
The Nouns Board of Ert' alizationow IIl sit to near upE..ibeen-ethic real " K' �$f t 53 9fs t av Y Ai K' t i GaC-t}4t � t
o an., building) and persona, 1 , August t(? for
d
Sea ;SINS, Chafe
4. ��o tp .`.' la1 it.$ �L��6=. I;dGt"ii Prrl . arid 7 r !•.' S '�D-f.1-1(}A arr C1
tr u ai he Assessor's decisicas
.a I t ,_ preserve your Anita `
Appeal, matt b i (f0 t,
nie
FOR REAL PROP:cm' a
s to ,le 3r,L spout
n-
EL,Dttai. ay . , r0 A 01, . tr iNN
i ' 9 i i5 Tato :tants, A,O ituit: fun
bib ,i< t u,icr<a 'e `. ..
y ;Old OF 'ERRlNO:
_... ., hif the time and place set tor the teats )4 'o 30p eat
i"K.atti
` .
Chitutbrichi ITASARD OF EQUALIZATfON'°» o t' 'RONA'%"I IN:
theCount; Boaro of Equalization must make a decision on your appeal and mail you a c'eteiruination withC five
tinter <, 0r,,.,aty Board must conclude!i.ir1:, f ar r hearings nv August 10.
A ;.,, rWts FOR FURTHER APPEA LS. .-
Arm the Cou'iry Eipatil l Etib li 3tir s S(sir,o , yan , u5 II:0 within its :CL'
a L tar AIL+ .'It+c,' t,... it on's t ntten det J. oft with,ONE o, mu traipsing,:
Board of Assessment Appeals ,fiAA):('c RAA at 1313 Sherman Room 5, '' Colorado .
= � ,5 r.., t
t,s >rr,�', s2 = 'i, (303t s'i6'..f -_
District Court
9th
f ,.nus: I ant 9 h Street, P.O. Box C
Greeley, Colorado 80632
l i eieplusrie (3(3) 356-4000. Ext. 4520
ArbitratFoth
WELD C0UNTN BOARD OF ESQ:aE_ir'ATC0N
'£ '. 10th Street t;,0 Box 758
Gree'ey, Colt-satin 80632
Telephone (303r 356 4000 Ext, 4225
₹you do not t ottceive a determination from the County o?rd of quaiia. . ;u you muTft file
essesement opeols by September 2C
TO PRESERVE YOUR APPEAL RIGHTS, YOU MUST PROVE YOU HAVE FILED A TIMELY APPEAL;THEREFORE, WE RECOMMEND ALL CORRESPONDENCE BE MAILED WITH PROOF OF MAILING.
PETITION TO THE COUNTY BOARD OF EOt3ALIZAT'ION
in the space below, please explain why you disagree with the Assessor's valuation, IN A00ORDANrCE WITl-
39 F3-10E 1,zi. C R c., YOU MUST STATE YOUR OPINION OF VALUE IN TERMS OF A SPECIFIC IC DOLLAR
AMOUNT, Attach additional documents as necessary.
See oette,AL4 \ctfer
14.41 1\14414411 Lc 4 tt rigit tir t1164er
930743 '
DAVIS, GRAHAM & STUBBS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW „
WASHINGTON D.C. OFFICE SUITE 4700 LONDON OFFICE
370 SEVENTEENTH STREET BROOK HOUSE
SUITE 500 _
1200 NINETEENTH STREET, N . DENVER, COLORADO S0202 98/99 JERMYN STREET
WASHINGTON, 0. 20036-2402 LONDON SWIM 6EE
TELEPHONE 202-822-8660 MAILING ADDRESS TELEPHONE 071-930-2308
FACSIMILE 202-293-4794 POST OFFICE BOX 185 FACSIMILE 071-839-8550
DENVER, COLORADO 80201-0105
TELEPHONE 303-892-9400 TELEX 413726 DOS DVR UO
FACSIMILE 303.893.1379 CABLE DAVGRAM, DENVER
ANDREW M. LOW
892-7327
July 15, 1993
Weld County Board of Equalization
915 10th Street
P .O. Box 758
Greeley, Colorado 80632
Re: Petition for Appeal to Weld County Board of
Equalization Concerning Property Owned by Bang-A-
Way. Inc.
Dear Board of Equalization:
Pursuant to C.R.S . § 39-8-106, the Gurtler family,
doing business as Bang-A-Way, Inc. (the "Taxpayer") , appeals from
the Weld County Assessor' s Notices of Denial (attached hereto as
Exhibit A) of the Taxpayer' s objections to the Assessor' s Notices
of Valuation (attached hereto as Exhibit B) on the parcels of
land (the "Property") identified by Assessor Schedule Numbers
120705000011; 120705000013 ; 120705000047 ; 120705000055 ;
120705000056 ; and 120705000057 .
The Property consists of six contiguous parcels of land
located in Weld County and owned by the Taxpayer. For purposes
of 1993 property taxes, the Property has been improperly
classified as "commercial land" or "residential land. " Because
the Property is used to produce agricultural products that
originate from the land' s productivity for the primary purpose of
obtaining a monetary profit, the Property must be classified as
"agricultural . " Therefore, it must be valued solely on the
earning and productive capacity of the land as required by C.R.S .
§ 39-1-103 (5) (a) .
e c .• , s, 7f? 930743
Bang-Away Inc.
17629 Weld County Road 5 „t)
Berthoud, Colorado 80513
July 23 , 1993
Weld County Board of Equalization
P. O. Box 758
Greeley, Colorado 80632
To the Weld County Board of Equalization:
I am the President of Bang-Away, Inc . , the petitioner
in this appeal . I authorize Andrew M. Low, Esq. , of Davis Graham
& Stubbs to act as my attorney and agent in this appeal .
Very t ly your
a4
Sandy ler, President
Bang- y, Inc .
9:34743
Weld County Board of Equalization
July 8 , 1993
Page 2
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The Property is owned by Bang-A-way, Inc . , a family
corporation owned by the Gurtler family. The Property has been
classified or eligible for classification as "agricultural land"
for well over ten years .
Of the approximately 300 acres comprising the Property,
177 acres are irrigated and farmable. Of those 177 acres, 112
acres are planted and harvested each year with alfalfa, grass
hay, corn, wheat, and silage corn. 65 acres of the 177 acres
remain dormant each year on a rotating basis . Another 64 acres
are planted in grass and groundcover, 39 acres are wetlands,
ponds, roads, and other non-arable areas, and 20 acres are
woodlands .
In addition to raising crops for sale, the Taxpayer
harvests some of the crops to feed pheasants and partridges that
are raised in cages on the Property. The birds thus fed and
raised are subsequently set loose on the property, where they
feed on the crops in the field. The birds are then used as game
for hunters in a hunting club sponsored by the Taxpayer. The
hunters pay for each bird they kill .
ASSESSOR' S POSITION
The Weld County Assessor has taken the position that
the Property is not "agricultural" because the raising and sale
of game birds is not an agricultural endeavor. In the words of
the Assessor:
The focus for the Gurtler property
appears to be non agricultural, i .e. , a
hunting club. The primary use of the
property is for persons who hunt pheasants .
The agricultural production appears to
support that use as a hunting club.
Production, compared with other agricultural
property, is very low. And, harvest is late
in the year, well after typical harvest time .
(Letter from Weld County Assessor to the undersigned, dated
June 25, 1993 , attached hereto as Exhibit C. )
The Assessor considered only the crops as agricultural
products . Apparently relying on an erroneous opinion by the
9343743
Weld County Board of Equalization
July 8, 1993
Page 3
Property Tax Administrator,'" the Assessor did not consider the
raising of pheasants and partridges as an agricultural activity.
Legal Analysis
"Agricultural land" is defined by C.R. S . § 39-1-
102 (1 . 6) (a) (I) as :
A parcel of land, whether located in an incorporated or
unincorporated area and regardless of the uses for
which such land is zoned, which was used the previous
two years and presently is used as a farm or ranch, as
defined in subsections (3 . 5) and (13 .5) of this
section, and the gross income resulting from such use
equals or exceeds one-third of the total gross income
resulting from all uses of the property during any
given property tax year, or which is in the process of
being restored through conservation practices . Such
land must have been classified or eligible for
classification as "agricultural land" , consistent with
this subsection (1 . 6) , during the ten years preceding
the year of assessment . Such land must continue to
have actual agricultural use . "Agricultural land"
under this subparagraph (I) includes land underlying
any residential improvement located on such
agricultural land and also includes the land underlying
other improvements if such improvements are an integral
part of the farm or ranch and if such other
improvements and the land area dedicated to such other
improvements are typically used as an ancillary part of
the operation. The use of a portion of such land for
hunting, fishing, or other wildlife purposes, for
monetary profit or otherwise, shall not affect the
classification of agricultural land.
A "farm" is defined by C.R.S . § 39-1-102 (3 .5) as :
[A] parcel of land which is used to produce
agricultural products that originate from the land' s
productivity for the primary purpose of obtaining a
monetary profit .
An "agricultural product" is defined by C.R.S . § 39-1-
102 (1 . 1) as :
1/ It is entirely unclear on what facts the Administrator was
relying in rendering her opinion.
Weld County Board of Equalization
July 8 , 1993
Page 4
[Pliant or animal products in raw or unprocessed state
which are derived form the science and art of
agriculture . "Agriculture" , for the purposes of this
subsection (1 . 1) , means farming, ranching, animal
husbandry, and horticulture .
By the plain language of the statute, the crops grown
on the property and sold for a profit are agricultural products
originating from the land' s productivity for the primary purpose
of making a profit . Merely because production is relatively low
and harvest is relatively late in the year, the Assessor cannot
ignore the plain words of the statute entitling land on which
such crops are grown to be classified as agricultural . Indeed,
the statute only requires that the primary purpose be to obtain a
profit, not that the taxpayer achieve the maximum profit
possible.
Moreover, the fact that crop yields are relatively
small and late is simply a reflection of the fact that the crops
are used in an additional productive capacity: to feed game
birds, which are sold in their raw and unprocessed form for the
primary purpose of monetary profit . As such, the game birds are
agricultural products . See Morning Fresh Farms v. Weld County
Bd. of Equalization, 794 P. 2d 1073 , 1074 (Colo. App. 1990) ("eggs
are an ' animal product' in a ' raw and unprocessed state, ' and
they are sold for a monetary profit as an agricultural product") .
It is clear, therefore, that even if no crops were sold
to third parties, the Property must be classified as
"agricultural" because the game birds are agricultural products
originating from the Property' s productivity and are sold in
their raw and unprocessed form for the primary purpose of
obtaining a profit . The sale of crops is simply another
agricultural use of the land.
It is also significant that even if the game birds were
not raised as agricultural products, the fact that commercial
hunting activities occur on the Property would not alter the
classification. As the definition of "agricultural land" states,
"The use of a portion of the land for hunting . . . for monetary
profit or otherwise, shall not affect the classification of
agricultural land. " C.R. S . § 39-1-102 (1 . 6) (a) (I) .
It is undisputed that the income from the sale of crops
and the sale of birds "equals or exceeds one-third of the total
gross income from all uses of the property. " Therefore, all the
statutory prerequisites for the- classification of the Property as
"agricultural" have been fulfilled.
930743
Weld County Board of Equalization
July 8 , 1993
Page 5
QNCLUSION
The classification of the Property as commercial or
residential land is improper. The Taxpayer respectfully requests
this Board to enter an order requiring that the Property be
classified and valued as agricultural land. Based on the correct
agricultural classification, the Property should be valued at
approximately $15, 000 .
Sincerely yours
LLwlL '
Andrew M. Low
for
DAVIS, GRAHAM & STUBBS
cc: Bruce T. Barker, Esq.
Weld County Attorney
Mr. Sandy Gurtler
930743
'4 EXHIBIT
/n) q' ,sa y
I y7)O ;f4lla
71y"s" ;
`f71scs(c`>
y2- 15r5‘, '
BANG-A-WAY, INC.
JULY 30, 1993
4:00 P.M.
4715886 4714886
4716086 4715086
4716186 4715786
930743
`,14";!<;....',.:.' .. / f,i Ai„ .
L4
T. 7 A
...,,..,,,,„,...., ... r ate, =
g ...._._
: ri .. .,
b
l * £ Yffss++ y
- a: it {i *-- 0. id:-g •"v 'tin-'•" r t nL' sj A`$5x�?4•e
' -IMFcx" "' Imo ti .. '1 -" ..•
1. �y R: '
r T .
•
w T _a 4 < T)"
1 r »' X {f 0%t
•
N •
}
} V
•
r ¢
`u Aerial View ^�• r ` r
5 ti? jar i vary
eG ,t 'r a r c 4t ' ,s vti}'.V- r it *K ,,,.
k.7;
` 1. • ...111���
OQ� �
,yam U� �bna .
ll (/O) ,
cl
SIO
1 O r- ar)to,xv,4I . V Y
tO_3 . . . .
[ ,'#`,! ..(45:".....;::',144, 059 { , •y` L� i ' " -.c..K^ •+
r ; [ .mac ,
at'ti� -t-• a R�', �. 9 i�� Q !447
•
i'f
4'1,40
re jiff • �r♦
f t Cr' }
r 9 I a� rr 1
f —
s Sri.
AN t
i
. .
t : ,.
f X K l■ ' 5 V , t'
�
1 r . 111yyy yr
b
f •
4-! Jt r';-, < ',fir
ik.„....„, w ' . ,et.
E4 1
t.
clam
4
4
u :
QG "
t' `
tail
rm: of i •.r
awl
Ill
hT., { gj.
Cr" Ji• I". 7.' d
,y .
930743
41,144.4"*".,„\\ •
OFFICE OF WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR
PTY A MINI TRATIV OF CES
WELD COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES
1400 N. 17TH AVENUE
1 GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
O february 11, 1993
Ci
COLORADO Legal description: 25473 PT NW4 5 3 68
1207 05 0 00 055 PIN# 4715886
Dear Property Owner:
This letter is to notify you of a possible increase in the assessed valuation
on your land.
Your parcel of land may be reclassified as a tract unless you can substantiate
its agricultural use and submit that substantiation to this office. Colorado
law requires agricultural assessment only for land being used for the primary
purpose of obtaining a monetary profit from farming or ranching (See attached
definitions) . Subdivided land, idle land, and land used primarily for
pleasure animals or recreation generally does not qualify for agricultural
assessment.
In order to meet state requirements, we must have substantiation of
agricultural use. To assure that the land is currently used in an
agricultural endeavor, and has been for the previous two years, additional
information supporting the use may be attached to this letter and submitted to
- our office. The following information may be considered in determining the
current agricultural use and will be treated as confidential information.
* Copy of lease agreement or a receipt of lease payment
* Form 1040 and 1040F or equivalent form from IRS return
* Sales invoices of agricultural products or livestock
* Account balance sheets
* Brand inspection certificates
* Profit and loss or financial statements
Information for the years of 1991 and 1992 must be provided by
• March 26. 1993
We are notifying you of the possible reevaluation so that you will know of the
state requirements and of our objective to value all agricultural and tract
land equitably and fairly.
If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Phyllis
Newby at 353-3845 Ext. 3690
Sincerely,
Vtattiega(
Warren L. Lasell
Weld County Assessor
WLL/pan
9307432
DEFINITIONS:
"Agricultural land" means a parcel of land, whether located in an
incorporated or unincorporated area and regardless of the uses for
which the land is zoned, which was used the previous two years and
presently is used as a farm or ranch, as defined in subsection(3. 5)
and (13. 5) of this section, and the gross income resulting from such
use equals or exceeds one-third of the total gross income resulting
from all uses of the property during any given property tax year, or
which is in the process of being restored through conservation
practices. Such land must have been classified or eligible for
classification as "agricultural land" , consistent with this
subsection(1.6) , during the ten years preceding the year of
assessment. Such land must continue to have actual agricultural
use. "Agricultural land" includes the land underlying any
residential improvements located on such "agricultural land" and also
includes the land underlying other improvements if such improvements
are an integral part of the farm or ranch and if such improvements
and the land area dedicated to such improvements are typically used
as an ancillary part of the operation. The use of a portion of such
land for hunting, fishing, or otherwise, shall not affect the
classification of agricultural land. 39-1-102(1.6)(a)(1)Q, C.R.S.
"Farm" means a parcel of land which is used to produce agricultural
products that originate from the land's productivity for the primary
purpose of obtaining a monetary profit. 39-1-102(3.5) , C.R.S
"Ranch" means a parcel of land which is used for grazing livestock
for the primary purpose of obtaining a monetary profit. For the
purpose of this subsection(13.5), "livestock" means domestic animals
which are used for food for human or animal consumption, breeding,
draft, or profit 39-1-102(13 .5) , C.R.S.
"Actual value determined - when" Once any property is classified for
property tax purposes, it shall remain so classified until such time
as its actual use changes or the assessor discovers that the
classification is erroneous. The property owner shall endeavor to
comply with the reasonable requests of the assessor to
supply information which cannot be ascertained independently but
which is necessary to determine actual use and properly classify the
property when the assessor has evidence that there has been a change
in the use of the property. Failure to supply such information shall
not be the sole reason for reclassifying the property. Any such
recAest for such information shall be accompanied by a notice that
states that failure on the part of the property owner to supply such
information will not be used as the sole reason for reclassifying the
property in question. 39-1-103(5)(c) , C.R.S.
3
930743
DAVIS, GRAHAM & STUBBS
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SUITE 4700 LONDON OFFICE
WASHINGTON O.C. OFFICE BROOK MOUSE
,
370 SEVENTEENTH STREET
SUITE 500 DENVER COLORADO 60202 98/99 JERMYN STREET
1200 NINETEENTH STREET, N.w. LONDON SWIM BEE
WASH N. D.C. 828660 6002 - MAILING AODRESS TELEPHONE 071.930-2306
TELEPHONE 202.8222.68 POST OFFICE BOX 185 FACSIMILE ON-839.8550
FACSIMILE 202-293-4)94
DENVER, COLORADO 80201-0185
TELEPHONE 303.892.9400 TELEX 413726 OGS OVR V0
FACSIMILE 303-893-1379 CABLE DAVGRAM. DENVER
ANDREW M. LOW
892-7327 March 19 , 1993 WELD COLMTY M7 rl
0 CI Thu v
MAR 2 2 1993
U
Mr. Warren L. Lasell GREELEY,C0L0.
Weld County Assessor
1400 North 17th Avenue
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Re: PIN#s u 011 , 055 057 ;
4714886 , 4715086 , 4715886 and 4716186
Dear Mr. Lasell:
We represent the Gurtler family, which owns the
property referenced above (the "Property" ) . Mr. Sandy Gurtler
has asked us to respond to your letter dated February 11 , 1993 ,
which advises that you are considering reclassifying the Property
from agricultural to non-agricultural. As set forth below, the
materials submitted with this letter show that the Property is
agricultural as defined in the statutes and is entitled to retain
its agricultural classification.
The Property consists of approximately 300 acres on
which the family operates a working farm and a hunting club.
Approximately 177 acres are irrigated and farmable. Each year,
on a rotating basis, approximately 112 of these acres are planted
9
and harvested in various
and other nonarable
Twenty
acres
- woodland;
areas;3and
acres are wetlands , ponds, r
64 acres are planted in grass and groundcovers , but are not
harvested. The woodland, wetland and unharvested grass areas
provide food and cover for pheasant and partridge. Your office
has classified the property as agricultural for many years.
There are two principal sources of agricultural income:
( 1) sale of crops; and ( 2) sale of birds shot by hunters. Both
activities are conducted for the primary purpose of making a
profit. The Gurtler family historically has lost money on the
Property as a result of nonagricultural expenses such as costs
related to skeet and sporting clays shooting, tournaments,
promoting the hunting club, and so on. While the family probably
makes a profit from the sale of agricultural products , there has
4
330743
Mr. Warren L. Lasell
March 19 , 1993
Page 2
been no attempt to account separately for agricultural income and
expenses. The family recently has intensified its efforts to
make the Property profitable, even considering the
non-agricultural expenses , and may reach this goal in 1993 or
1994 .
I am enclosing the relevant federal tax return for 1991
(no return has been prepared for 1992) and a 1992 United States
Census of Agriculture. These documents provide some of the
information you requested. Where necessary, additional
information has been provided by the Gurtler family.
Agricultural production and income were as follows for
1991 and 1992 :
1991 . In 1991 the Property was planted as follows:
53 acres in alfalfa, 23 acres in grass hay, 9 acres in silage
corn, and 28 acres in corn. Yields were 192 tons of alfalfa,
lfa
16 tons of grass hay, 318 ,820 pounds of silage corn, and an . Sales, 90
pounds of corn. Sale of these crops totaled $18 ,
',of ,pheasants,and partridge from hunting operations were $72,805,
plus`$10;987 'in fees for processing the birds, for a total of
$83 , 792. Thus, total income from agricultural uses in 1991 was
$102 ,461 . 49 .
As demonstrated by the tax return, in 1991,ythe
Property yielded a total of $265,670 in gross income. The
agricultural income constituted 38.5 percent of total income,
which satisfies the one-third of gross income test.
1992 . In 1992 the Property was planted as follows:
40 acres in alfalfa, 35 acres in grass hay, 9 acres in wheat, and
28 acres in corn. Yields were 211 tons o alfalfa,
o47 ton ctons of
grass hay, 396 bushels of wheat, and 21 ,000 s of thesercrops,_totaled.,$22,855 .93 : Sales of pheasts1and64 in'
partridge from hunting operations were $82,132 , plus
fees for processing the birds, for a total of $94 ,196 . Thus ,
total income from agricultural uses in 1992 was $117 ,051 .93 .
Although no tax return has yet been prepared for 1992 ,
the Property yielded a total of $300 ,584 in gross income. The
agricultural income constituted 38. percent
cente f total income,
which satisfies the one-third of gross to
C.R.S. § 39-1-102( 1.6) (a) (I) provides in part: "The
use of a portion of such land for hunting, fishing, or other
wildlife purposes, for monetary profit or otherwise, shall not
affect the classification of agricultural land. " The Property
5
931)743
Mr. Warren L. Lasell
March 19 , 1993
Page 3
meets all the statutory tests for agricultural land, and the use
of a portion of the Property for hunting does not affect the
classification of the land. Accordingly, we request you to
maintain the longstanding agricultural classification of this
land.
Ver�yoursy
Andrew M. Low((//
for
DAVIS, GRAHAM & STUBBS
cc: Mr. Sandy Gurtler
Enclosures
934x'43 6
yd
• •
I
r I.
•
a12
< x
LI
as
8 ma
5 T2
W
IA
3 a 2 V W a il
i U.3 me to< UI
a a < W .
Ni a : a - W d
• d o a W
o • . • • U <
— = 0
a a
us A. as Ni a
a.s- aa '
US w a. QOle
a.r < .4•
J y
es
N = u 6 C.
< a
a.S J • _• • • U • ar G a
K
4 < y 0232
JV a
a U < S 6. i' V U 6
J r . - . . ... u D-
a r w
us • as i a
a < N a - iaaa
3 is
N a a a a < W
O S W W W K W - 3 i W w
1y a Y Y Y Y W ``4 < = S S Y Y < < _
r i ti Y a a W W . . . . . 6 y i 0.1'
y 6 6 W W = a. a
3
W 3
a
a us
a O a
aa
y d 3 . . . . . . . 3 V y y S 6 a S y 3 S A. 7 y 9
0 Na8
a aI QUODUUaaaaaaa a � atoa & 3 3
W a p V r V V
a. 0 U N r n r M O N a b N ."y O O at N
N 2324 N IN N C CI
J �i 0 b a a N N in A •O 41 N
�• SN b N N J Na a a
3 •• E ^ an a J 0 o n o a n
'ail
P N a a a ?_ h 11 N N N b 05 N {� n J V N N b i
O '. a G5000 •500000000
a • •
i — n r a O O r O O O O O O O O O O O 000000000 11 11 11
0
e e
a g2
a O NI
IV 0 N
a V O .p r O O
0 0. 5 WI 0 0 0 U' r
ow a 0 `• • r 5 w NI a r 0 a 0 a a a a 0 0 0 0' r NI 0
0 a a a e a a o N i. u a U a 31° a 0 0 0 0
3a. la o 0 0aa $ yya ay 0 jQ0aoaa005
w i a Sr
W •
u 8g• =8 J s z$ 1 a[ S a a[ s a
r_ u « 0
_ ≥
y a r U W L S a u a J
< y U Y a a <'O a a a. y O a W O <•N y
a O U
NO
... _
a W
n .. N
a 0
2
aN < =
3 8 `
a a
a i ....
u
. M < J S
W N J i ^ r \ O i N Jr Y i C ^ <
la U ^ 66 yy U a a ^N uai yy ya S =
N •a a A V O IS W V U 1 r J a N ..
W ^ 3 3 n W
'Sia $ N 5 W VV Y
4 B o 8 J „ b .1 P - n .. - - r ea a K1 O vbN r
•
0 < <
0 ≥ ' •.
1 a W r aJ CI
U
J W W2 ma a y < -
r OCa W a S
a aa 4 ` 2 U W 1.-
• i O < a r . r = C J< O et`
r Y a W i
tn
W r i s W CS r .. a a•
a ' a a u o 'a Y •� N. j a
a W i o N '_' 4 pVr i o o < a t pr r
N
S O. r n J N N 101 N a „ N O N PI N a a $ .2 N 2 N N J
a . . . . . .s y
• N Y Y V U U U U Y U U U V U U V L i y 6 J N N G
O p
U U U Y U V V V V
i S.
• N
aaawS333J5 �f 5J 666 66666e66230743 X230743 7
c
d d
, a, , en 1
CC I z z 6
pQw a�a Rp
ON
E 74 CV N O1 %O M
‘..0O
((U� ?: CO t!1 It)c•-4
i
go.
I I I ri
I I I I
r-I N r-I N N r-I N
01 O1 01 O1 O1 S 01
CS1 ON 01
CT r�-I rr-I r--I rri rri rrl
d d z z
rn oa as
0i in
Q CCJ . cn
I--1 r-I M ,�-I (ffl O
3 �S' N
gyp+ W
41
C�
gi
cn
930743
Section V, page 5.5
Definitions
(1 .6) (b) All other agricultural property which does not meet the
definition set forth in paragraph (a) of this subsection (1 .6)
shall be classified as all other property and shall be valued
using appropriate consideration of the three approaches to
appraisal based on its actual use on the assessment date.
39-1-102, C.R.S.
Colorado statutes require agricultural improvements, other than
buildings, be appraised and valued with the land as a unit.
Improvements - water rights - valuation
(1) Improvements shall be appraised and valued separately from
land, except improvements other than buildings on land which is
used solely and exclusively for agricultural purposes, in which
case the land, water rights, and improvements other than buildings
shall be appraised and valued as a unit.
39-5-105, C.R.S.
AGRICULTURAL DESIGNATION PROCEDURES
Before appraisal of the property begins, the proper designation of the
land as "agricultural" or as "all other agricultural property" must take
place. Land which meets the statutory definitions of "farm" or "ranch"
is entitled classification as agricultural land and is to be valued
based on its earning or productive capacity. Land which fails to meet
these definitions but is otherwise used for an agricultural business
purpose is designated as all other agricultural property and valued
using the three approaches to value.
All facts and circumstances must be evaluated for each case when making
the decision of whether land qualifies as agricultural land within the
meaning of Colorado statutes . Resolution of borderline cases depends on
physical inspection, knowledge of pertinent appellate and supreme court
cases, and the use of sound judgment.
AGRICULTURAL LAND DESIGNATION QUESTIONS
Answers to the following questions are generally most pertinent to
determining if land is used as a bona fide farm or ranch and is
therefore eligible for agricultural valuation.
t15-DPT-AS
PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89
Revised 1-93
9
930743
Section V, page 5.6
1. How is the parcel currently being used, what is the ..
predominant use, and has the use changed over the previous
two calendar years?
2. How are adjacent properties used?
3. Does the owner or operator participate in governmental or
private agricultural programs, activities, and
organizations?
4. What is the extent of production from the land?
5. What is the ratio of agricultural use to other uses of the
land?
Careful consideration in determining whether the land is used as a bona
fide farm or ranch and is eligible for valuation as agricultural land
may be assisted by answers to the following questions, each of which may
or may not be applicable to individual situations.
1 . What is the size of the parcel or parcels used; in
particular, is the size economically compatible with the
agricultural use to which the land is devoted?
2. What is the general character of the neighborhood?
3. What is the location of the subject property in relation to
urban areas and services?
4. Has a subdivision plan been submitted for the subject
property or adjacent properties?
5. What is the present and past use of the land?
6. What is the extent of inputs fertilizer, chemicals,
irrigation, labor, to the land?
7. What is the business activity of the owner on and off the
subject property?
8. What is the principle domicile of the owner and family?
9. What was the date of acquisition and purchase price?
10. Is the operation conducted by another for the owner?
15-DPT-AS .)
PUB ARL VOL 3 . 1-89
Revised 1-93
9343'743 10
Section V, page 5.7
11 . What is the extent of farming or ranching experience of the
owner or person conducting the operation for the owner?
12. How productive is the land?
13 . How many livestock are grazed?
AGRICULTURAL LAND CLASSIFICATION QUESTIONNAIRE
An agricultural land classification questionnaire has been developed to
aid the county assessor in the classification of agricultural land. The
questionnaire can be found in Addendum V-C of this section.
Only when additional information is required in making an informed
decision on the agricultural classification of a parcel is the
questionnaire to be used. The property owner is requested to submit any
information which provides evidence the parcel is used in an
agricultural endeavor.
It is important to note the law does not require the property owner to
return the questionnaire. The classification of the parcels should be
based on the current use and consideration of the other criteria listed
above. Before the classification of a parcel is changed, a physical
inspection of the parcel should be conducted to substantiate the change
in classification.
S
CLASSIFICATION AND VALUATION OF LAND AS "ALL OTHER AGRICULTURAL
PROPERTY"
Other agricultural property which does not meet the statutory definition
of agricultural land must be classified and abstracted as "all other
agricultural property". This classification is for land which does not
qualify as a farm where crops are planted, raised and harvested or as a
ranch, where livestock are grazed for the primary purpose of obtaining a
monetary profit. Property classified as "all other agricultural
property" shall be valued using appropriate consideration of the three
approaches to value based on the actual use of the land on the
assessment date.
Examples of "all other agricultural property" include apiaries (bee
farms) , mushroom farms, fur bearing animal farms, aquaculture,
greenhouses; commercial dairies, feedlots, hog farms, poultry farms; and
commercial apple, peach, and potato sheds. Commercial operations are
distinguished from agricultural operations in that such agricultural
operations are part of a greater farm or ranch and animal nutrients are
generated from the productivity of the farm or ranch land.
S 15-DPT-AS
PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89
Revised 1-93
93074311
Section V, page 5.8
Commercial poultry farms are distinguished from egg operations in that •
the primary business enterprise is the slaughter and dressing of
chickens rather than the production of eggs. Aquaculture is
specifically included within the "other agriculture" definition by 35-
24.5-102(2) , C.R.S. which references 39-1-102(1 .6) (b) , C.R.S.
General information and specific procedures on the valuation of other
agricultural land using the three approaches to value can be found in
SECTION I, LAND VALUATION AND THE APPRAISAL PROCESS located in this
manual .
OTHER DESIGNATION ISSUES
Rural Tracts
Special problems of agricultural designation occur where a property
owner chooses to reside in the outlying areas and engages in what is
sometimes called "hobby farming. " A typical example would be a taxpayer
who owns a dwelling, garage, and pole shed on a five acre parcel of
irrigated pasture and keeps a pleasure horse and two sheep. The
statutes applicable to this scenario are as follows.
"Agricultural land" means a parcel of land which was used the
previous two years and presently is used as a farm or ranch. . .
39-1-102(1.6)(a) , C.R.S. •
"Farm" means a parcel of land which is used to produce
agricultural products that originate from the land's productivity
for the primary purpose of obtaining a monetary profit.
39-1-102(3.5) , C.R.S.
"Ranch" means a parcel of land which is used for grazing livestock
for the primary purpose of obtaining a monetary profit. For the
purposes of this subsection (13.5) , "livestock" means domestic
animals which are used for food for human or animal consumption,
breeding, draft, or profit.
39-1-102(13.5), C.R.S.
Before this five acre parcel can be designated as agricultural land, it
must be determined that it meets the definition of "farm" or "ranch."
The important question is whether the use of the parcel by keeping a
pleasure horse and two sheep is "for the primary purpose of obtaining a
monetary profit." In this example, the land is not "functioning" as a
farm or ranch.
15-DPT-AS •
PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89
Revised 1-93
930743
12
Section V, page 5.13
In Vernon Estes v. Colorado Board of Assessment Appeals and the Custer
County Board of Equalization, (Colo. App. No. 89CA1294, November 23,
1990) the Court held the surface use of the land is the determining
factor for purposes of classification and the owner's intentions for its
ultimate disposition is irrelevant. If land is being grazed for the
primary purpose of obtaining a monetary profit from livestock, it should
be classified as agricultural even if it is subdivided and the profit is
realized by the lessee and the owner's actual intent is to eventually
sell the land for a profit.
In Thousand Peaks Timber & Ranch Corp. v. Board of Assessment Appeals,
(Colo. App. No. 87CA1044, October 27, 1988) , the Court held land is not
agricultural land within the meaning of Colorado statute where the
primary use of the land is for the sale of lots. In this case, the
subject properties had been subdivided into lots which were in the
process of being sold but were still being grazed by livestock. More
than half of the lots had been sold and the remaining unsold lots were
listed with real estate brokers. The Court affirmed the decisions of
the district court and the Board of Assessment Appeals that the primary
use of the land was the sale of lots.
The primary use of theland, however, must be for some other purpose
than agricultural use.
In Berry et al v. Board of Assessment Appeals, (Colo. App. No. 87CA1327,
November 10, 1988) , the Court held Colorado statute does not require the
property owner to graze his own livestock on the property for his own
primary purpose of profit. In this case, the subject property owners
purchased their lots from a rancher who had subdivided and sold the land
in 35 acre parcels. At the time of sale, the buyers signed a lease
agreement giving the rancher seller the right to continue grazing the
land for the rent of one dollar per acre per year. The fact the land
had been subdivided and sold in smaller parcels did not disqualify the
land from being agricultural land when the use was primarily for grazing
livestock, even though the owners were not using the land for grazing
livestock.
Egg Production Operations Can be Farms
In Morning Fresh Farms Inc. v. Weld County BOE, et al , 794 P.2d 1075
(Colo App 1990) , the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled certain egg
production operations meet the statutory definition of a farm as stated
in 39-1-102(3.5) , C.R.S. Eggs which are produced within the boundaries
of a larger agricultural endeavor, where animal nutrients are generated
from the farm land, and the eggs therefore emanate from the land's
productivity, meet the statutory definition of agricultural and
livestock products as stated in 39-1-102(1.1) .
® 15-OPT-AS
PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89
Revised 1-93
930743 13
w..
Section V, page 5. 14
The court concluded the operation was a part of such a larger
agricultural endeavor and the eggs are an "animal product, " in a "raw or
unprocessed state, " and are sold for a "monetary profit. " Pursuant to
this decision, similar land devoted to egg production operations should
be designated and valued as agricultural land. For additional
information regarding the assessment of agricultural equipment
associated with egg production operations, please refer to ARL VOLUME 5,
SECTION II- PERSONAL PROPERTY DISCOVERY, LISTING, AND VALUATION.
Separate Parcel for Storage and/or Processing of Crops
Two situations may occur where a parcel of land with improvements is
separated from the farm but is used in conjunction with it. First, a
farmer may deed to himself a small tract on his farm containing a crop
storage building. This is done for similar financial reasons as when
the home is deeded separately. In a related situation, a farmer may
purchase a storage building and a small tract of land surrounding it
from another person. This property may be located adjacent to the
purchaser's own farm or may be located several miles down the road.
In the first instance, the classification of the separately deeded land
underlying the crop storage building depends on whether the building is
still a part of the farm operation. If it is used primarily to store
crops grown on the owner's farm, the underlying land must be designated
as agricultural . The storage building is still an active part of the •
farm, or at least, an ancillary part of it. Because it is part of the
farm operation, the fact there is a separate deed for the land
underlying the storage facility is irrelevant in determining whether the
land is agricultural . The agricultural land definition 39-1-
102(1.6) (a) , C.R.S. , states= in" part, "Agricultural land also
includes the land underlying other improvements if such improvements are
an integral. part of the farm or ranch and if such other improvements and
the land area dedicated to such other improvements are typically used as
an ancillary part of the operation. "
In the second instance, a farmer may purchase an existing crop storage
building located on another farm to store crops grown on his own farm.
The land underlying the storage facility should be designated as
agricultural if all the following conditions are met.
15-DPT-AS 411
PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89
Revised 1-93
930'x'43 14
Section V, page 5.15
1. The storage facility is used primarily to store crops grown
on the purchaser's farm.
2. It is not used primarily to derive rental income from
storing crops grown by others.
3. It is located on land which was classified or eligible for
classification as "agricultural land" consistent with 39-1-
102(1.6) , C.R.S. , during the ten years preceding the year of
assessment. This precludes the land underlying crop storage
facilities located in cities being classified as
agricultural .
4. It is not used for processing crops. Processing means the
sorting, sizing, grading, washing, and bagging of the crops
for movement into the retail market. This requires special
equipment not usually associated with farm storage
facilities.
When storage facilities are used for commercial processing of crops, the
building, equipment, and underlying land should be classified as "all
other agricultural property". This classification is provided for in 39-
1-102(1.6) (b) , C.R.S.
Land in the "all other agriculture property" subclass is not valued on
the earning capacity of the land. Instead, it is valued by
® consideration of the three approaches to value based on its actual use
on the assessment date. Generally, this means land in this
classification is valued by sales of similar tracts of land which were
purchased for similar purposes. The comparable sales should be as
similar to the subject as possible in size, location, and present use.
Income from Agricultural Operations - At Least One-Third of Gross
Requirement
According to 39-1-102(1.6) (a) (I) , C.R.S. agricultural land must meet the
following requirement. Regarding agricultural use of the land, the
gross income resulting from such use equals or exceeds one-third of the
total gross income resulting from all uses of the property during any
one property tax year.
15-DPT-AS
PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89
Revised 1-93
93074.2 15
Section V, page 5.16
Application of the test for this requirement is as follows.
•
1 . Income from farm and/or ranch uses is determined or
allocated.
2. Income from other, non-agricultural uses is determined.
3. The total of the income determined from all uses of the
property is summed and divided into the income from farm
and/or ranch uses. The result must be equal to or greater
than .333.
Description of the Gross Income Requirement
The gross income requirement should not affect the agricultural
designation of the majority of farms and ranches. Designation as
agricultural land must still continue to be based on the use of the
land.
The gross income "test" should only be used in cases where the assessor
knows or believes a large portion of the total income is being derived
from another use of the land such as leasing of land for billboards,
leasing of land for roadside produce stands, or leasing of land for
hunting. If the property is only used as a farm or ranch, all income
would be attributable to agricultural use.
The relevant statutory language is quoted below. •
(1 .6) (a) "Agricultural land" means a parcel of land which was
used the previous two years and presently is used as a farm or
ranch . . . and the'. gross income resulting from such use equals or
exceeds one-third of the total gross income resulting from all
uses of the property during any given property tax year
39-1-102, C.R.S
Before examining the gross income requirement, several points must be
emphasized. First, the land must still qualify under the statutory
definition of a farm or ranch. If it does not meet the farm or ranch
statutory definition, the land should be reclassified based on its
primary use and gross income should not be considered for agricultural
designation purposes.
Second, it must be remembered here the assessor is only determining
gross income for agricultural designation purposes. The non-
agricultural gross income is not to be used in the valuation of the land
once the land has been determined to be agricultural .
15-DPT-AS •
PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89
Revised 1-93
930943 16
Section V, page 5.19
Examples of types of income which should not be included are as follows.
1 . Income from oil & gas leaseholds is derived from the mineral
estate, whether severed or not, and is separately assessed.
2. Income from the extraction of sand & gravel , or other earth
products operations are separately assessed.
3. Interest income from a loan or investment, royalties, or
dividends are not to be considered as part of other gross
income for the purpose of the "at least one-third of gross
income" requirement.
4. Transfer or sale of property rights, e.g. conservation
easements, or severed mineral rights.
Cases where agricultural property generates additional income which is
not tied directly to the land will be rare. In most instances when
other businesses, e.g. service station or convenience store are located
on a parcel of agricultural land, the portion of land occupied by the
business should be reclassified according to its use. Other uses of
agricultural property should be closely examined to ensure the portion
of the property in question still has a primary use as a farm or ranch.
Calculating the One-Third of Gross Income Requirement
( ( The total of the income determined from all uses of the property is
summed and divided into the income from farm and/or ranch uses. The
result must be equal to or greater than .333.
Hunting. Fishing. Wildlife Uses
In 1990, the Colorado Legislature added language to the agricultural
land definition addressing hunting, fishing, and other wildlife uses of
agricultural land.
(1.6) (a) (I) "The use of a portion of such land for hunting,
fishing, or other wildlife purposes, for monetary profit or
otherwise, shall not affect the classification of agricultural
land, "
39-1-102, C.R.S.
15-OPT-AS
PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89
Revised 1-93
930743
17
Section V, page 5.20
If agricultural land has a supplemental use for hunting, fishing, or
other wildlife purposes, it is not to be taken out of the agricultural
land designation based on that supplemental use alone. The use of the
property as a farm or ranch remains the prime criteria in agricultural
land designation. However, gross income from hunting, fishing, and
other wildlife purposes can be considered other income for the purpose
of measuring the minimum one-third agricultural income threshold.
Definitions and Use of Livestock
Definitions
Part of the statutory definition of a ranch is " land which is used
for grazing livestock for the primary purpose of obtaining a monetary
profit. " under 39-1-102(13.5) , C.R.S. In 1990, language was added by
the Colorado Legislature to the livestock definition as follows.
(13.5) "livestock" means domestic animals which are used for food
for human or animal consumption, breeding, draft, or profit.
39-1-102, C.R.S.
While this language does not change the definition of livestock as
domestic animals, it does enlarge the category of grazing livestock to -include those animals used for food for human or animal consumption and
for breeding. For example, this new language could qualify a horse farm
which raises horses for the dog food market or breeds horses.
The determination of whether animals are domestic or not is important to
the understanding of the definition of grazing livestock. Domestic
animals are defined in the dictionary as follows
Any of various animals (as the horse, sheep) domesticated by man
so as to live and breed in a tame condition.
Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary
•
15-DPT-AS L
PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89
Revised 1-93
330743
18
OFFICE OF WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR
PHONE(303) 3533845, EXT. 3656
WELD COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES
1119 €
1400 N. 17TIfAVENUE
GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
COLORADO
May 14, 1993
Colorado Department of Local Affairs
Division of Property Taxation
Mary E. Mu-Weston
1313 Sherman Street, Rm 419
Denver, CO 80203
Dear Ms. Mu-Weston:
During the reappraisal process this year, the question arose
concerning phorsants and partridges. We would appreciate your
opinion on this matter.
We have a property in the county which is used as a gun club.
The pheasants and.parti-idges are purchased, then sold to members
to be shot. The birds may be processed at the site also.
The taxpayer feels the birds qualify as "farm" because they
are a product. of the land. They feel the income fran the sales
and processing of the birds should satisfy the 1/3 income
requirement. They site Morning Fresh Farms as precedent.
We feel this property is totally recreational and "birds"
are not harvested but balled for sport.
We would appreciate your views and any guidance you can offer.
If you need further clarification about the property or have
any questions, please feel free to call.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
awie,c(„6.
Phyllis A. Newby
Weld County Land Appraiser
930743 19
e•cpzo� Colorado Department of Local Affairs
od\9a DIVISION OF PROPERTY TAXATION
y o Mary E. Huddleston
Property Tax Administrator
� s
* /8-76 *
WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR
Roy Romer /-1 .r,P_.__,..._ ..,
Governor June 21, 1993 �1 L'i�"�r- t, / :I`"i � i
I ;
Phyllis Newby, Land Appraiser .:JN I95
Weld County Assessors Office
1400 N. 17th Avenue GREELEY,C0L0.
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Dear Ms. Newby,
I have received your letter of May 14, 1993, regarding whether
land used as a gun club wherein members purchase pheasants and
partridges and shoot them would qualify as agricultural land. In the
absence of any other use as a farm or ranch, as defined by 39-1-102,
C.R.S. , this property would not qualify as agricultural land as either a
farm or ranch.
According to 39-1-102 (1.6) , C.R.S. , agricultural land is defined
as land that was used for the previous two years and is presently used
as a farm or ranch. The term "farm" is defined by 39-1-102 (3.5) ,
C.R.S. , as land used to produce agricultural products that originate
from the land' s productivity for the primary purpose obtaining a
( monetary profit.
The taxpayer's contention that the birds are a "product" of the
land thus causing the land to be classed as a "farm" is an incorrect
interpretation of Colorado statutes. Agricultural products, when
produced on a farm, are generally considered to be crops that are
planted or harvested. Birds are not considered to be agricultural
crops.
The taxpayer's contention that income from the sales and
processing of the birds satisfies the 1/3 income rule stated in 39-1-102
(1 .6) (a) ,. C.R.S. , is an incorrect interpretation of the statute. At
least 1/3 of the income must come from agricultural use of the land as a
farm or ranch, as defined by statute, before possibleagricultural
classification can be considered. My opinion is that any use of the
land to sell , hunt, or process the birds is not an agricultural use as
either a farm or ranch.
I hope this letter answers your questions and concerns about this
property. Please contact me if you have further questions.
Sincerely,
Mary E. Huddleston
L Property Tax Administrator
cc: Warren Lasell in
laiiW
�N�
1313 Sherman Street, Room 419, Denver, CO 80203, (303) 866-2371
• TDD (303) 866-5300 FAX (303) 866-4000 930741 20
J t ar C 5 • d
fr r�
tc
S
iy
' MORNING FRESH FARMS RD. OF EQUALIZATION -to.
: 1073
l
Cite 2 794 P0 1071 CainApp 19Wp
her. The one conceortrce sentence is allowed. We e sere.( c, ncurrent.c ., vacateP, and he
es imper- disagree. :noses rerrandee With 'iirecdons to order
Assem- .. On the da e or the aggravated ado eerie, lefenuant's three rite sentences are so he
ndatory August 19. 1987. 3 Li-11-;99Cllat "ro•vor- served const cuc:vely.
I. ..:font- ed for consecutive sentences of a person
There- "convicted of two separate crimes of cro- '�fETZGER anti CR:SV�'cLL, d.
natter of lence. . ._" This provision was amended, concur.
ttive life effective July 1. 1989, to require consecu-
tive sentences of a person "convicted of 'r,-17\---.--
,O ;Kit
two or more senarate crimes of cio- ,
• lence.. .." (emphasis added) See
n if the § 16-11-309(1)(a), C.R.S. (1989 Cumsupp.).
.on of - [5] Defendant argues that Colo. Sess.
include Laws 1985, ch. 145, § 16-11-309(1)(a), must
tecutive be construed as limited to oniy two crimes MORNING FRESH FARMS, INC.,
ed here i of violence since the General Assembiv Petitioner—Appellant,
ce was meant to change existing law when it v.
against amended the statute to add the words "or WELD COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALI-
more." See Charnes v. Lobato. 743 P.2d ZATION, Weld County Assessor, and
6 Repl. 27 (Colo.1987). This presumption concern- Colorado Board of Assessment Appeals,
'In any -1 ing an intent to change existing law, how- Respondents—Appellees.
with a ever, is not absolute and it has less force
when arguably more specific language is No. 89CA.0457.
er r added. See Peo le v. Hale, 654 P.2d 849
•pazate ?• p Colorado Court of appeals,
:bon in (Colo.1982). Div. II.
endant = [61 Here, the 1988 amendment adding March 22. 1990.
violent the more specific language, "or more," is Rehearing Denied April 19, 1990.
consistent with the General Assembly's in-
tent to punish multiple crimes of violence
lot in-
Certiorari Denied July 23, 1990.
:nt for more severely than individual crimes of
e that violence. See § 18-1-408(3). We find no
legislative history or reasoned support for Taxpayer appealed order of the
ndantBoard of Assessment Appeals denying re-
defendant's interpretation that the General
Assembly intended that only one consecu- quest for exemption of personal property
5cient used on its farm. The Court of Appeals,
tive ve sentence be imposed when crimes of
lot be violence have been committed against mul- Hodges,J., sitting by assignment, held that
tiple victims. Such an interpretation would that portion of farm devoted to egg produc-
C6) not render the entirety of the statutes ef- tion met statutory definition of "farm"
1986) fective and would not achieve a reasonable and, thus, egg handling equipment and
le of items used in cleaning chicken houses and
ation intent as contemplated by the General as vaccinating chickens were exempt from
sembly. See § 2-4-201(1)(c), C.R.S. (1980 personal property tax.
m of -- Repl.Vol. 1B); People v. Hale, supra.
Hence, it is our conclusion that the 1988
Reversed and remanded with di- -I
rections.
amendment was meant to clarify, not to
change existing law. Rather, the legisla-
that, tive intent of § 16-11-309(1)(a), as original- Taxation x211 t
re- ly enacted, was to impose consecutive sen- That portion of taxpayer's farm devot-
sion tences on each and every crime of violence ed to egg production met statutory defini-
c of which a person is convicted. tion of "farm" and, thus, egg handling
'0n' That part of the sentences imposed or- equipment and items used in cleaning I
)nly dering defendant's three life sentences to chicken houses and vaccinating chickens
i
93074,3 21ail
Ss'Er4;7 vf' 3 ' t"' r'FF' iy Lam`i`r ry iti'::47, tj;r .w Ir v- l '`,(tSkr, ' y :&''!,./%'"7..'41I:4,5"--; ,1
1 4 * ,f j - 4� :
„' -O.r M f
.` ..c- ' r t,;. :, .. »' ,..i..•. ._ ,,
r `
r
!s ( Lilo
,.� x ,. ) i_� Coi,r. 791 PACIFIC RF POftTE[:. ::d .rLRI ES
were exempt from personal pron. ex: h. cK ns. he ;AA n • . 1 ..
9 . I 1 I :he eggs were n "animal product a .t sues:, fur "-m)
�' 1 -` .
'ra.v or unprocessed State m tie e ld h l s tin g pod c_
for moneu2r; profit as g ic..l-t.r r.ou- placement i t t ne❑ t e
a l -I]I acs C.R.S 39-1-10211T, ' %i- to e u e rot tail v 'e on
• I�I Sec publication Words m c Phr se of t arm e ou a 3
1,-. � for other Judicial constructions ana (10;a Cum upp 1 I he P i tr t,uued 1 t?.
i
that ["I�his operation s entirely separate e,
' !i from the [plaintiffs a- ns iteration
'li Stientjes and Shaddock. Haria❑ C. beta the production of eggs a place- ;�,
' 1 Stientjes, Greeley, for petitioner-appellant. merit laying hens are totally self >ntained. I j.,,4,,,..
Neither the puilets nor aymg .ens ever
r t' I Duane Woodard, Atty. Gen., Charles B.
�, � touch the ground._.
Howe, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., Richard H.
Forman, Sol. Gen., Larry Williams. First Plaintiff contends that the BA? erred in _
�'i� Asst Atty. Gen., Denver, for respondents- its conclusion that the portion of plaintiffs
appellees Colorado Bd. of Assessment Ap- farm devoted ro the production of eggs
t, I .I peals. does not meet the definition of a farm
-; under § 39 i 102(3.51 We agree-
' Thomas 0. David, Co. -atty., Jan Rundus,
Asst- Co. Atty., Greeley, for respondent-ap- Section 39-1-102(3.5) defines a farm as:
y pellee Weld County Bd. of Equalization and
CCI "a parcel of land which is used to pro-
S ' ; Weld County Assessor.
duce agricultural products that originate
` �' l
i from the land's productivir✓ for the pri-
i
Opinion by Justice HODGES '. mary purpose of oota:.ning a monetary I
Plaintiff, Morning Fresh Farms, Inc., ap- profit"
peals the order of the Board of Assessment Plaintiff's chicken operation meets the
I
kt Appeals (BAA) denying plaintiffs request
•'�" for exemption of personal property used on statutory definition of a farm. The acre-
its farm. We reverse. age is a "parcel of land" and is used to
The facts in this case are undisputed. produce "agricultural products" as defined
under § 39-1-102(1.1), C.R.S. (1989 Cum.
' Plaintiff owns an lfalacre farm on which Supp.). Under § 39-1-102(1.1), agri.-
corn, wheat, and alfalfa are grown on all cultural and livestock products are defined
• ily 40 acres. On those 40 i
E ..; but approximately as "plant or animal products m a raw or
acres, plaintiff has 25 buildings housing unprocessed state which are derived from
yg approximately 750,000 laying hens and the the science and art of agriculture. 'Agri-
equipment necessary to gather, convey, culture', for the purposes of this subsection
wash, candle, weigh, sort, package, and (1 1) means farming, ranching, animal hus-
`n. .. refrigerate the eggs (egg handling equip-
bandry, and horticulture.." There is no re- r
merit). A small percentage of the chicken quirement in the definition of a farm that i;;,.
feed is produced on this farm. Plaint ff would exclude a portion of a farm which is a`
purchases day-old chicks to replace laying ' '
self-contained and within which the live- "r
-
hens, and the replaced laying hens and stock does not touch the ground.
chicken manure are sold. The laying hens
and the chicks are kept in structures and Here, the eggs are an. "animal product"
:-. never touch the ground. in a "raw or unprocessed state," and they
Plaintiff applied for a personal property are sold for a monetary profit as an agri- Y
tax exemption for the egg handling equip- cultural product. Thus, the chicken opera-
ment, and for the items used in cleaning tion falls under the statutory definition of a
the chicken houses, and vaccinating the farm, and eggs, as agricultural products,
k. 'Sitting by assignment of the Chief Justice under and § 24-31-1105. C.R.S. (1988 Repl.Vol. 10B).
provisions of the Colo.Const.,att. VI.Sec.3(3).
.C 0
Yti' 7Y _Y
---2--4 o _ ,
•
. - "t
I
t
i ¢.
COLORADO BD. OF MED. EXAMINERS v. RAEMER Colo. 1075
X, Cite as 794 P2d 1075 iColoApp. 19901
:-' emanate from the productivity of this forming craniosacral manipulation '.vithout iI
farms :and. medical license. Dentist flied counterclaim t7
�:: tr.
Coio.Const. art .l" 3(11(c) seeking judgment deciarin :hat procedure `ti
§ provides: ] q ;
' "'The following classes of personal prop- was within scope of his dentistry license. } s .
e_—v, as defined by law. „hall be exempt The Distr.ct Court. City and County of II '
from property taxation. . livestock; Denver, Warren 0. Martin, J_, entered per-
agricultural and livestock products; and manent injunction and declarator, judq- � as l -
agricultural equipment which is used on menc prohibiting dentist from performing
the farm or ranch in the production. of sacral manipulation, but allowing him to .
agricultural products."
I "�
perform cranial manipulation. Dentist ao-
Hence. this constitutional provision and the pealed, and Board cross-appealed. The ''
' relevant statutes, when viewed as a whole, Court of Appeals. Kelly, C.J., held that ,
ch. clearly provide that the personal property craniosacral manipulation, when used to
- in issue here is "agricultural equipment treat temporomandibular joint dysfunction, "
. which is used on a farm or ranch in the constituted practice of "dentistry," and - - - -
thus was exempt from medical licensing
requirements.
t production of agricultural products."
..
1 If, as here, the facts are not disputed, ^ "
, but the law was erroneously applied to the .Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and : ; �
Ct., facts, the order will not be upheld on re- remanded with directions. E''
,4', view. See Raynor Door, Inc. v. Charnes, ! jzre
+.z. 765 P.2d 650 (Colo.App.1988). . .
The order is reversed, and the cause is 1. Physicians and Surgeons c}5(1) F'
remanded with directions to enter an order Craniosacral manipulation is "osteo-
1' exempting the subject personal property pathic procedure," and thus it constitutes -
used in plaintiff's chicken operation. "practice of medicine" which ordinarily i.; "
must be performed by person holding medi- . , i
SMITH and MARQUEZ, JJ., concur. cal license, unless exemption from licen-
sure i. is applicable. C.R.S. 12-36-106(1)(a), )
w (2).
0 SOFT RUMOR SYSTEM
T See publication Words and Phrases
for other judicial constructions and 1
definitions.
II2. Statutes c+7188 -
The COLORADO BOARD OF MEDICAL To discern intent of General Assembly
i „` EXAMINERS, Plaintiff—Appellee and when construing statute, Court of Appeals a •
,E" Cross—Appellant, looks first to language of statute, giving F#
`� v effect to{ ordinary meaning of words and
W.M. RAEMER, D.D.S., Defendant—Ap- phrases used.
pellant and Cross—Appellee. ,'!
3. Statutes x205, 206 •
No. 87CA1589. When construing statute, Court of Ap-
t Colorado Court of Appeals, peals must consider statute as a whole and --:
Div. IV. give meaning to every word. ? j
s March 22, 1990. 4- Physicians and Surgeons a10 ii
Rehearing Denied April 19. 1990. Statute stating that dentist is person -` a
" Certiorari Granted July 23, 1990. who treats pain or physical conditions of ..
jaw and adjacent structures is not a limit i
on possible methods of treatment, but in-
4--.
m State Board of Medical Examiners stead limits structures to be affected by ..
. brought action to enjoin dentist from per- treatment. C.R.S. 12-35-110(1)(f),
1
-2
3''074,3 23 .
Section VII, page 7.17
Number of parcels
Land value
Improvement value
2125 2225 RECREATION
Land, structures, and improvements used primarily for
recreation and related goods or services are assigned to this
subclass. It includes, but is not limited to, the following
types of businesses.
Amusement parks & rides Golf courses
Arenas athletic & rodeo Movies-indoor & outdoor
Athletic fields and clubs Ski areas (private)
Billiard parlors Swimming pools
Bowling alleys Rinks-ice & roller skating
Country clubs Track & raceways
Game & video centers Theater & stages
Report the following information:
Number of parcels
Land value
Improvement value
2127 2227 GAMBLING
( Land, structures, and improvements designed and used for
gambling establishments should be assigned to this subclass.
Report the following information:
Number of parcels
Land value
Improvement value
2130 2230 SPECIAL PURPOSE
Land, structures, and improvements designed and used for
specific purposes should be assigned to this subclass.
Special purpose buildings are designed and built for a
specific use and usually are not easily converted to a
secondary use. For example, a service station building is not
normally used for a restaurant or office. However, when such
improvements are converted and used specifically for those
purposes, they should be reclassified accordingly. It
includes, but is not limited to, the following types of
businesses.
Auditoriums Fast food service
Auto dealers Funeral parlors
Auction barns (auto & livestock) Garage (parking)
Banks Hospitals
15-DPT-AA
PUB ARL VOL 2 1-84
Revised 1-92
9-30743 24
F`ARC TF': F: PARCEL INQUIRY ASSMT
IN: 4716186 1'Al;C: 120705000057 LAST UPDATE: 0fI06/1r}.;
BANG—A—WAY INC
ACTIVE ON:. 09/16/1986
86
17629 WELD CO RD NA PO:
:
BE I THOt_x) CO 80513
•v•.X AREA
1322
..y .085556
I.SC'5w
DATE LAST ASSESS 04/19/1993
LAST ASSESS S_s LAND 13280
LAST ASSESS BLDGS 0
TOTAL AL LAST ASSESS :13280 2125
13280
PRIOR YEAR ASSESS 4650 TOT L.AND7
REC DT 10/06/81. DEED TF' WDt;;� ti3�w�
NUMBER 9490 01871135 WOL
DCOC FEE 0„00)
25473—D J) PT NW4 5 3 68 BEG SW COR NW4 889D:11 'E TOT BL DOS 0
1803.23 ' N12DE 350 `
,.>,. � TO PT ON S & W ROW LN OF :CSI—I ..l.t:i..r.Al... VALUE 13280
F'F; : PROFILE F'F5:LEGAI...S F'I'B:1••11"—.:X•T PARCEL
r-•F 11 ::r`IENU
PF4: OWNERS PF6:D0C HIST PF10:PL.00 F'F1.2.:REAL
MESSAGE
MB' a M
o-x,001 071007
i .
•
. - 930743 25
PARCEL INQUIRY J ASSITIT Y R: 1993 AT.IIN022
eO-" 5 )0004'7 LAST UPDATE: 07/06/1993
PIN: '��.�.>.�„'136 �'Ar�C;e .L<... .�. t ACTIVECl!~1: 09/16/1986 .
BANG-r",__wr.l Y' INC ACTIVE
ON: / /
17 629 WELD CO RD
S?+l::RT#"ICIUD CO 8051.3
TAX AREA 1322 085556 .1.992
DATE LAST ASSESS 04/19x'1993
'"ST ASSESS LAND l.c3rSf:s0
1..IMrlT ASSESS BLDGS 0
TOTAL LAST :!.:,�: 18800
ASSESS1;x880 .
PRIOR YEAR ASSESS . 180 TOT LAND 18880
REC DT 11/10/75 DEED T'!'-° WD •
NUMBER 7520 01674:507 WOL
DOC FEE 3»'50
r•c•9 52'E 1951 ,.24 FROM TOT BLDGS�'
25473—C 1::...#. NW4 :�; 3 68 BEG :ate 5�'L� .,�:. • �.ir��3f�3�:?
t -'. : SO1D01 'W 1319.41 ' TO TOTAL VALUE
NW cur; 'w<:s'a I}::�:<:. i-: 690.82 '
PFS::LEGAL..S Fi '. ,.NEXTT PARCEL!_•!-.�� PROFILE.. . F'!I:. 'r r��l��:!.��•);.E::•I...c:?r�� 1-•i�1;�:REAL
,L:.
PF-4: OWNERS PF 6 t DOG
MESSAGE: o-000101/016
MB' a
I•I ?I}
PARCEL :CIS#(:1t-�.rl;... Y.T. `�.,.
PARC 111'3 ATITN022
Tl= LAST UPDATE r:?:
PIN: 47150 .. 7O5{•'t;.){iil:!..:? 09/16/1106
1993
Sfa #x'1-1!";1.. .#. ..), ACTIVE (.J!`#:.
BANG—A—WAY INC INACTIVE OI•`#:: /
#''}r',F:'#e
17629 WELD CO RD 5
BERTHOUID CO 80513
TAX AREA 1 522 .085556 1992
DATE LAST ASSESS 04/19/1993
LAST ASSESS LAND • 4680 •
LAST ASSESS BLDGS 0 1f7C3:?
• TOTAL LAST A SSl' �S 4680 2125 TOT LAND li) 4680
PRIOR YEAR ASSESS 40
FEC DT • DEED TP
NUMBER
WOL..
DOE FEE 0.00
2, ,7 3, PT 1'1W4 5 613 BEG AT SE COR NW4 W830 ' TO TOT BLDGS r 0
._..�' T�(:1Ti",L.. VALUE r}i:ac:s>;J
!"'#::.CJ MELY 3510 ' TO 3:RON PEG ON W SIDE ISH DITCI"!
}'F 7::NEXT PARCEL I._ f'1'=:L I. !Y#r�:!`U
t••.l:- PROFILE I !�'r=5pL_EGAL,a :►ti1. iHU
,„ _. :'c2?:,:DoE HIST>T i'-'}=101 PL OC'' P F 1 r PF4: OWNERS MESSAGE: A (:)-0001 01/016
93074:3 26
•
PARCEL :1:Nt:1uJ:I:;:Y A::3SMT YI�::o :1.99.:3. Ar:tIh{o; 2
F�'AF:c; �rF':: R ,
. IN: 4716086 P "sRC:; 12070'5Q0005 LAST UPDATE: 07/06/1993
BANG—A—WAY INC ACTIVE ON:: 09/16/1986
INACTIVE ON:: /
NAPO::
17629 WELD CO R:() 5
BERTHOUD CO 30513
)
TAX AREA 1322 .095556 .1.992
DATE LAST ASSESS E:::awi 04/19/1993 .
LAST ASSESS LAND 1200
LAST ASSESS BLDGS 370 2":4 ",4,, ; ?t)
TOTAL LAST ASSESS 2170 .�_
PRIOR YEAR . ASSESS • 6940 TOTLAND 1.800
REC DT 10/06/81 DEED TI' WI)
NUMBER 9490 0137115 WOL
DOC FEE E 0.00
3702225
25473-B F: SODS0 'W 934.83 ' FROM TOT T:<L.DO
S l i(J b 68 370
.. 577.85' '•+ 5 ' TOTAL... VALUE 2170
'NW COR `.•?�.'Y t.?l?r'r 'L•: 431 . 18 ' �l,t_7D4.1. `G SOD 50 'W 0 W
-'F' '5:LEGALS I-'I- r .NE» PARCEL F h• 11 ..MEN
f'I�';S u PROFILE 1::•i��:L:<::�i��:l:::r'�1...
F'F4: OWNERS PF6:DOC HIST ST PF- 1 O;PLCiG
MESSAGE: o—u,i�i i 01/0 16
Mb^' a A
PARCEL INQUIRY A;. SEA T' YR:. 1993 ATIIN022
( • PARC 'fi'F'n RLAST UPDATE: 04/14/1993
4715886 F'ARC: 120705000055
ACTIVE OH:: 09/16/1996
BANG—A—WAY INC
NAP O: `3:1.4
17629 WELD CO RD
BERTHOUD) CO 805:1.:3
' TAX AREA 1322
.085556
DATE LAST ASSESS 04/19/1993
LAST ASSESS LAND 9560
LAST ASSESS BLD(3S s''i
°°
TOTAL LAST
ASSESS
SS...SS 9560 2125 2 96..
PRIOR YEAR ASSESS 1260 TOT LAND 9560
REC DT 11/21/94 DEED T•I: 6ii:
NUMBER 1050 019294 34 WOL.
DOC FEE 14.00
25473 PT NW4 5 3 69 BEG NW COR Or SEC( c ) 'W, TOT BLDGS •>y rt30
934.S3 ' S1:39D09 '1= 431 . 19 ' 52704:1. 'I577.85 ' NOD !O 'E TOTAL VALUL"-
F.r s„1 PF7.'IIE ;T PARCEL PF:L1 ..MENU
l�'f�3c PROFILE w _1:::(3c•�,i_ci iµ r•:� F'F1�:FtiL:AI...
OWNERS PF6+:DOC HI ST F. :I. ..i:'i...CC
F�'i�4�
MESSAGE: A -c001 01/016M2 "- �
3346 27
•
PARCEL :l:I'�I(;il.li:1�Y ASSMT YR: 1993 A'•f]:IN02�'
i'f, H ,A r!• 120705000011 • LAST UPDATE: 07/06/1993
ACTIVE ON:: 09.f:16/:1.986
(:+r,l.{(:::....r:,....Wr~,`fINC INACTIVE ON: / /
. IYIAPO w 2314
17629 WELD CO RD 5
BERTHC:BUD) CO 20513
TAX AREA 1 :1322 .005556 :1.992
DATE LAST ASSESS 04/19/:1.993
LAST ASSESS LAND 37830 c:c-
4 et .I..1..<::
l..LAST i�fc:i::.;I;:i:S BL.DGS 44 450 .I.1 �1c310
TOTAL LAST ASSESS 82280
PRIOR YEAR ASSESS 27240 TOT LAND 37830
REC DT DEED ..E.P
NUMBER . WO1... 24440
1212
DOC FEE 0.00 2225 200:1.0
25468 NE4 5 3 68 EXC BEG NW COR NE": 4 E1943. 1 ' 44.50
WLY SIDE OF :E:RE� DITCH 93=4:042 'W :1.70 ' i:i.73I?I0 'W 105 ' TOTAL VALUE
i 'FS r.E_.EGAL..;: PI •�::NEXT PARCEL F•l�11..- .�� 'I
f�'1��� PROFILE !='!=':E.:�::::I��I�i-^iL.
PI��4: OWNERS f'I 6::I)oc I••E:l.ST Pr=1aaPLOC:
MESSAGE: c,_o�;:i1 01/016t'�1 E{^` � A
93C1743 28
. - • • ... _ j ` 1 1 e
,rw. • i..).„le" •
TO el s I— w= r
Z Y ..,F =:Uz:..o .
`•VT.4N. \C--y�f ,o •. : • I. • / R. •ice - _ - _. y I t u �i z., li. ...
Sale 2 �, fr /.'' • A T i -.3. .. ,' l.'s:*
Su 1 ject • � • :% f, I1-
Sale 1' •• �.
sb .. / '. -Sale 3 f �r
�. II w,l •
a / „I I
12 J` J •w• � .:Sale 4 rY ►• ,. ` S. ;l . �., ..�"� jr[�nrl;, ~. . � . ..
T,3N. - . � � j'! \
•• - r. y:, /NC,> 5 in .I :\-. I
i : • G.6... Sg
N ••••••••••
.}.
•
a '- .174:9}. 'e ; •• •r •.. _ .. .�..I. �C22
•T2N. - - • ri.. ^J _ '•- • 1 . - - ._ __. _ 1 • : • - - - - [ ..
1>0
_'i' ': :.,.•.i 1
4 t I C x.111 r'•1 IFJ . - - / ,�i�Jlc �▪ � ,{i!
*II
r .1 " T. .c. .1 r vJ 9J°:Q �J� _ .. ._ .. •"•I • I ?4�[ oat worm. • 1 ,
gg
TIN. ! •:G•'. �°1.R , ..,�/ { _ ' i"f: trait/ F ft"A.• ..14:—. j170". Iw1 . it •Q,. -r I ,•4 - •
• I \ a F y
2 . T.:..... "•r y 1 — ___Az I� .• ,V . l� • L{<r (1 /• r//! n _ • ` LINE•'
v Q, 0) Cl v
U m m ca ro
U a a a a a
I!'1 O� r.1 r-1 N
en ON en co
CNI. M N
V>
cn
@ y N
W N 14 CO N N
w
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
r R
VI CO 0
0
VI- VI- VI- cr ur
r v
03 u •
N N
en bp
i!1 td 04 < of cO in r\I N
1 co
E-I N �
0
a
S
g. eo
Neo I �o I 3co eo
1/4O I
S" W en M �y. M [�`L�- M
r-I N en -1- In
93074,3 30
•
58 — • O
i
_
O 56, T5N��. • __ __ __J x `' 11'
S.
r •
CC Is tk1.... ilr. f •ice./-`-i
i
3 5 7 el •9 i ` . �.I' I
46 I
AA . a_ �, . . el. i ) l
•
036?[R3 - _ :` • /...- •• "rat' F tU• :'42 •
yp,ject • •o •
v 1 ,_
36 . _4.:. ,ter.....r,l I_•
) ,-"' ...
1 t\, 1 34 -
31 .. - /ate : t. I 'll�.... rr' '/f 11't..t Ii '�.
72o 66 6 I .,c
)3632 f4rooRe a . I '7. '.,,.,m'l ..
...y _+ '• " \ ' g
�CC / 1
( 1 pmpt$Ii/t:
, , !if 1iV . t
. y4' fir. •
. R`` - I L. 1 '• !A1F / i ' Iii' 1st.
✓i • r,! • )• 1� •,1�",) m �I
1
'/ 1
• t (/• • • i
�10 {I �T •YI \ , i �i
TIN., �' —� YX f'71".' 1 J 1�- r•6 J .I WMl ....� I "� �.p-'z. . . • / •/^� •
... r•IIN ` /,
o l'• II 1 f' q: .. 1, /.. .Z It)+ ti r .( .•
93074,3 . 31
•
-_ _ __ -__ice N
iilO
I N 1/40 N N N ooCr, , a
LL O p a a N a
4 a • u-. .;: SIN .
J
' p O pM Qp r(,pO•O 88M Q`� •
d�0 .
O4 8$a,gm S� 00��'!,1� OnNON. .• SNP
l D I-
I- S 4 1/4O 0i nT- 00 00 N Or��1�� '
� N
Wt 1.' m I xi I - I
is. 2N p SS��pp0 en SS 8O
0000 MOB 0or01�1� JN.T�• Out 0..Y� ����
Q •
Q ,4 NN csi,N a 4 4cO 1O`-INfT 4rl0 •
2 - i 't t t t t l i I t i I i i t N i en +•+ ' i
Q
03
[1111 NiNc2 N •' . L,IN tiocc 8
W n
Z 0+
UI ° 0 C7pNf• O N OOMC.
•
(7 9 N [.i tip. v7 O� cop_ O Q0 O; w O 00 o
_ oZo pc;al
0-.3 -N 03 0Ot •3•
�o O'i' nmo� v`Vi ON
� 5 � 'F. Oa NON a 01.1 in
0It-- - to w
N Q
Jry� m 8 8 N a.
� p
CC m 8 , g p0( N N N
o a po
•U OaC7•
Cl) LI1 I- • • 52mo
JCa CO ��yj ay F
vJ R O •
n O
S • 8 • Ol O •N •'- • N • pC fT O , 1/40 1/40 n O • n O+ a0 cn .
R Q t` `Otri f-I N �' p N r en N r- n en 01 N O 1 R N @J -+ .r @J cif, ti.::
@J '�-I �D W , CO @J c tit . I Off. N
W o . . ? I
Z
Imo , .-4 .� , 4- in •. O M
orl
i .
- l
w • • w Z
po cn
p 8 _
0 R • 8 N CD 1/40
800 N in N U
' J LiI r N N fI 04- N In .- n CO O 0
• N n •
pp i O
W • W
N
. >, ' W i j j
52 -Q� z W ccpo v' 1/40
a coN COn I It
f� Z ≥ 2 �T N co
vl .o N N r ^ .o en
r- I
N
n a cr.O 1 N
fn N 0 p • M O N '
• F- N _ N • ON n r1 '.
Z ro 930743 32
❑I
I ' c O C r—
N r- m •
m
a 0 • M ' 1 N •
rn ON '
> u, -a' • in .
•
* • ' 02.. CN , .
8000 .Src as- oCO .OaO Oi"1�ON
N O ccn NON to en _ 2 .-1 ip 8 2 al O . • .
' ,--1 M n.. .-I cn r,O r- 00 uy all,:
F- G I - + C/l •
I -] !
ON 111 . Pa W Pa '
csi 8 !- p o Q p . i o O �p 0
S� � cQ'i88 3OS ON
..-.4,.§M. O.--I 00 M tuuuh"'111.�§ M .
Q Q rTNQ�M Cm u'1M N. NO I-•1.7 Iff-
N try. H
' • 1 1 1 1 +.+ I + I �- 1 i + ' ' I .
>..
al
111 p0 0 O .
09d d . co O fn,,,,Cr' a, O u)O O V)O
M N ' •
r`°�a�N 8 0.4 rnPa� vaaa�
< l- 2 0.,O+t!•. .1n N O dOON
O .
•
•
!� IL Z N Fw
W O S I]
—1 m co -' .-I ..N Z .• a
•C12 <c SE .8 • .. 8 .. ., QQ '. ..Cod .
I cr-iu I . r-1 I. V 1 p 1. Cr •
^ .H-I .-I. N ra •
N •
,�. N N N•
a. J _
o n
8 . � •
J V+ Ww
p a u]'
U r f'i x w . w
1
}W J
W G zq 0. O _<
J i- r VJ N ((�� V) N U) �. V] Qp AA�� 01 . J - m O
gr; Z al -) 1 r-- Fi 1 r•-• I NO !• tD Fy I O
< 0 • co } 7 .a r.r.4 rI r•-I G. .•-I r-I ON.
--I rs.4i .-I r+. f:.i. r-I r-I ON . ,,' O
U) a (7 . •
•
a.N i4pp p� S • �, S
d M ..O n C''1 8 N O 1�00 R N 'Q �Mp N us QC'^p1
co w w .d 00 •
T1 r-I ccn NJ rO-I N' -L1 r• .•1-I'-Y m) ,_.,- t'1 '
I3] DO • W .
55
_I
1
• i ' O .
W •
IL IL - Z l�)
U
0 cr
4 •
S at'
O 8 •�. _
U) N O •in
N .. In 0
11 l� • N uH•1 I 0000 u'1. CO .7 O, 0 0
Q ,C-1 r-1 O Z
E (4 i O
+� O. Wz, . i
' M - ! . Z9 O N p�pp CO VD cO •
��{rrr777 W ; 111
N 11 �7 u1 M M •O Val M fZ
.co 4 Q p r- • ,T.�7 `Q .^7• `°‘':' N 0 VD 01
01- N 00 1 '01 O . .
.-t N .--I • N N '
• •
til S ' .
W
n • •
•
930' 43 33
iil L- w N .‘13 Ln in `°
-' a I
> --- - , •• Q
811 . 8 .OCC� 8•�•u',� 0 •�N ' .
u'1 rl�p L cu 1n.�•t.O OD
v� �, trio,C4106 CP Q; • •
I` + rn { to x•11 to
li
u.1 1:c1-O
O O
N 2
O 1- p M OV . M N, rn c00 m'�F11
O .-I. ON
O .< O �•.INcn 1 dNNM r�
O - ¢ --i N ,--i N
O 1 + + + ++ I 1 1 + + ++ .
Q
U
•
0
w9 ono •
45
9 c� O 000cnoc' a' o^. • O- c—
•
ro m o oN I• $ N CP as o4; 'via CV. v na.�.
¢ `n .p N O l G1 O d .4 .0 ON
U O _.----'---^- L-'�_ -`���__ • to w
N H
• 1 ..
CI) • •
, ' • . § . - 1 K Q• 1. . - Na.
a
,a W QNl —`_r_• m � g .. $ O 1
2 i i N I . N N
. N '-1 N
CL 0 d • ��-!
o i 3 w �'
--�— �—� �- cry
•
(n N N y.+ • � 1mo
W N W J GA 1� N �p Q• Gd N Q�1 , O . F-{ 1—
nn ) m Q '• Qi I. T 4'' ,�. u'•�•+' (jy r+ w r, CIh,..,, a�i�,,i Q
w ¢ O --.------ .•
f..- - wa. Li .§p � • o � N. 0C $ ;
P
- w O ' Ni. '4 O ^_ N «� Ce' O te. ..4 rn cJ .-i co
•
�-11 N W t�Jl U ON
N 3
PW� Q lam— i
W O O i
•
•
H .O, ..
O t!1
2 •
u • l11 r+ Q
cr
Q um 0. in
N 1`if) N N c- o O
U) J i- r co In .a• r' ¢
• p S
O
1 •
M
Pi O to .D u� a �, ^
N urt
.a co Sa ^• ^ 1
n. � Q cs1• U �. O.O • •
. n000 O
• UI ^ • Hl N r- N
.�• . 930' 4,
wrr. Iu
u1
z In
m • -------- -- .-
C.R.S. § 39-1-102(1 . 1)
1 "Agricultural and livestock products" means plant or
2 animal products in a raw or unprocessed state which are
3 derived from the science and art of agriculture. "Agriculture" ,
4 for the purposes of this subsection (1. 1), means farming,
5 ranching, animal husbandry, and horticulture.
4. EXHIBIT
A1
F:\DATA\Wfl\CfHO119527.5 BigAt711�Qt�
July 22. 1997 ll:l1a
930743
C.R.S. § 39-1-102(3.5)
1 "Farm" means a parcel of land which is used to
2 produce agricultural products that originate from the land's
3 productivity for the primary purpose of obtaining a monetary
4 profit.
-2-
9:3074
C.R.S. § 39-1-102(1 .6)(a)
1 "Agricultural land" means either of the following:
2
3 (I) A parcel of land, whether located in an
4 incorporated or unincorporated area and regardless of the uses
5 for which such land is zoned, which was used the previous two
6 years and presently is used as a farm or ranch, as defined in
7 subsections (3.5) and (13.5) of this section, and the gross
8 income resulting from such use equals or exceeds one-third of
9 the total gross income resulting from all uses of the property
10 during any given property tax year, or which is in the process
11 of being restored through conservation practices. Such land
12 must have been classified or eligible for classification as
13 "agricultural land" , consistent with this subsection (1.6), during
14 the ten years preceding the year of assessment. Such land
15 must continue to have actual agricultural use. "Agricultural
16. land" under this subparagraph (I) includes land underlying any
17 residential improvement located on such agricultural land and
18 also includes the land underlying other improvements if such
19 improvements are an integral part of the farm or ranch and if
20 such other improvements and the land area dedicated to such
21 other improvements are typically used as an ancillary part of
22 the operation. The use of a portion of such land for hunting,
23 fishing, or other wildlife purposes, for monetary profit or
24 otherwise, shall not affect the classification of agricultural land.
25
26 (II) [Not applicable.]
-3-
93074,1
1991 AND 1992 INCOME
1991
Sale of crops (alfalfa, grass hay,
silage corn, corn): $ 18,669
Sale of pheasants and partridge: 72,805
Total income from agricultural uses: 91 ,474
Total income from the property: 265,670
Percentage of total income
from agricultural uses: 34.4 percent
1992
Sale of crops (alfalfa, grass hay,
wheat, corn): $ 22,856
Sale of pheasants and partridge: 82, 132
Total income from agricultural uses: 104,988
Total income from the property: 300,584
Percentage of total income
from agricultural uses: 34.9 percent
F:\DA.1993 1136ue ZI.I
h*A 1991 I I:J6w
930743
4 f`
MORNING FRESH FARMS v. BD. OF EQUALIZATION Colo.
her. The cue„794 P.2d 1073 Icaa.App. )ego) 1 73
one consecutive sentence is allowed. We be served concurrently is vacated, and the
as imper- disagree.
Assem- cause is remanded with directions to order
andatory On the date of the aggravated robberies, defendant's three life sentences are so be
August 19, 1987, § 16-11-309(1)(a) provid- served consecutively.
v. -Wont- ed for consecutive sentences of
There- a person
'latter of "convicted of two separate crimes of vio- METZGER and CRISWELL, JJ.,
:Live life fence. . . ." This provision was amended, concur.
effective July 1. 1989. to require consecu-
tive sentences of a person "convicted of
two or more separate crimes of vio- ° s"E`"°"a'xs"`r"
lence. . . ." (emphasis added) See
n if the § 16-11-309(1)(a), C.R.S. (1989 Cum.Supp.l.
.on of (51 Defendant argues that Colo. Sess.
include laws 1985, ch. 145. § 16-11-309(1)(a), must
aecu[ive be construed as limited to only two crimes MORNING FRESH FARMS. INC..
ed here I of violence since the General Assembly Petitioner—Appellant,
ce was meant to change existing law when it
v.
against amended the statute to add the words "or WELD COUNTY BOARD OF EQUAL!.
more." See Charnes v. Lobato, 743 P.2d
ZATION, County Assessor, and
6 Repl. 27 (Colo.1987). This presumption concern- Colorado Board of Assessment Appeals,
'In anyi ng an intent to change existing law, how-
with a
ever, is not absolute and it has less force Respondents—Appellees.
.en[ or when arguably more specific language is No. 89CA0457.
)paste added. See People v. Hale, 654 P.2d 849
(Colo.1982). Colorado C of Appeals.
)tion in Div.v. II.
endant [6] Here, the 1988 amendment adding
violent - the more specific language, "or more," is March 22, 1990.
consistent with the General Assembly's in- Rehearing Denied April 19, 1990.
lolot in- tent to punish multiple crimes of violence Certiorari Denied July 23, 1990.
t for more severely than individual crimes of
e that _ violence. See § 18-1-408(3). We find no
edam legislative history or reasoned suppon for Taxpayer appealed an order of the
re-
it un- defendant's interpretation that the General Board of Assessment Appeals denying usest for exemption of personal property
ficient I Assembly intended that only one consecu-
quate tive sentence be imposed when crimes of used on its farm. The Court of Appeals,
tot be I violence have been committed against mul- Hodges,J., sitting by assignment, held that
C tiple victims. Such an interpretation would that portion of fa rm devoted to egg produc-
1986) j not render the entirety of the statutes ef- tion met statutory definition of "farm"
to of ! fective and would not achieve a reasonable and, thus, egg handling equipment and
ie on intent as contemplated by the General As- items used in cleaning chicken houses and
sembl t from
vaccinating chickens were exempt
on of Y See § 2 4-201(1)(c), C.R.S. (1980 P
i Repl.Vol. 1B); People v. Hale, supra. Personal property tax.
•
Hence, it is our conclusion that the 1988 Reversed and remanded with di-
amendment was meant to clarify, not to rections.
change existing law. Rather, the legisla-
that, tive intent of § 16-11-309(1)(a), as original- Taxation x211
re- ly enacted, was to impose consecutive sen-
Lion tenses on each and every crime of violence That portion of taxpayer's farm devot-
ed to egg production met statutory defini-
. ch. of which a person is convicted.
only tion of "farm" and, thus, egg handling
EXHIBIT That part of the sentences imposed or- equipment and items used in cleaning
only ring defendant's three life sentences to chicken houses and vaccinating chickens
PI
•
1 9307431
. } 1
p
a
.w
1074 Cmu -91 P1C11'IC REPURTER. -_. -hRIES
. �.
�.vere exem-a� rte— ..e �na�. )fit: �. . . as _..
.," _ .,: e ;nee i
. i �, the eggs -��? r a�. 'an ma :roil _
I' "raw or unaroce:_ed nttte and were -.old -1-„ii.-- Iliad—A g; )rho fiction ,mk re
r for monetary profit as adricuiturai nron tscemen ..1r e pen, t --no :e ot for-i. ucts. C.RS .i9-:- 0't_-.. a: t:i.ser . d not fail pct h:n the etrnit)on
- 0. t-
,
See pubucauon Words and Phrases i '..arr. , o it ;n "
for other udtaai constructions and i 9!,9 nin itionp.i. The BAA c.nicluded
definitions. at: -'5151hts operation is entire is separate .
I 4' ;i j — from -tie )ta:nnif 1 farming )rcraf.nn.
°q ne ao it ductio❑ Jan(. replace-eggs an eplace- o
1 I� Stientjes ana Shaddock. Harlan C 00th Stientjes, Greeley, for petitioner appellant. ment -vying )ens are totally seif contained.
I I
Neither the p.)ilets nor laying hens ever
i Duane Woodard, Atty Gen , ( harles B.
nu,h tilt ground. .
: ' 1 I ji Howe, Chief Deputy Attv Gen . Richard H.
,v. tl Forman. Sol. Gen . Larry Williams First Plaintiff .contends that the BAA erred .n r
n' 1 �� Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for respondents- its conclusion that the portion of plaintiffs
it appellees Colorado Bd. of .assessment Ap- farm devoted to the production of eggs
peals. does not meet the definition of a farm
t i
t e
under § 39 1 102(3x). We agree. 1 k
,‘ Thomas O. David, Co. Atty., Jan Rundus,
e., I. I Asst. Co. Atty.. Greeley, for respondent-ao- Section A-1-10213.51 defines a farm as: ',
pellee Weld County Bd. of Equalization and "a parcel of land which is used to pro-
Weld County Assessor' duce agricultural products that originate
•
r
. from the land's productivity for the pri- gg
;. ! Opinion by Justice HODGES '. mary purpose of obtaining a monetary I
Plaintiff, yforning Fresh Farms. Inc., ap- profit."
n` pepalls the order of the Board of Assessment
q Plaintiff's chicken operation meets the
aa> A eels (BAA) denyin plaintiffs re uest
f for exemption of personal property used on statutory definition of a farm. The acre-
its farm. We reverse. age is a "parcel of Land" and is used to li
The facts in this case are undisputed. produce "agricultural products" as defined 4
under § 39-1-102(1.1), C.R.S. (1989 Cum. i 1i Plaintiff owns an 800-acre farm on which Stipp I Under § 39-1-102(1.1), ag n-
"`r corn, wheat, and alfalfa are grown on all cultural and livestock products are defined 1
40 acres. On those 40
but approximately as "plant or animal products in a raw or
acres, plaintiff has 25 buildings housing unprocessed state which are derived from •
' jiir
approximately 750,000 laying hens and the the science and art of agriculture. 'Agri- Si:
equipment necessary to gather, convey, culture', for the purposes of this subsection r,
wash, candle, weigh, sort, package, and (1.1), means farming, ranching, animal hus-
refrigerate the eggs (egg handling equip-
ment). A small percentage of the chicken bandry, and horticulture." There is no re-
quirement in the definition of a farm that
feed is produced on this farm. Plaintiff would exclude a portion of a farm which is
purchases the chicks to replace laying self-contained and within which the live- j r.
,Z7" hens, and the replaced laying hens and
chicken manure are sold. The laying hens
stock does not touch the ground.
eggs are an the
and the chicks are kept in structures and Here,
"animal product" S
i never touch the ground. in a "raw or unprocessed state." and they
Plaintiff applied for a personal property are sold for a monetary profit as an agri-
tax exemption for the egg handling equip- cultural product. Thus, the chicken opera-
. j•
1ment, and for the items used in cleaning tion falls under the statutory definition of a
j the chicken houses, and vaccinating the farm, and eggs, as agricultural products.
*Sitting by assignment of the Chief Justice under and § 2J-51-1105, C.R.S. (1988 RepLVo. I
0B).
provisions of the Colo.Const.,art. VI.Sec.5(3),
I
32;U' ' z
, b,
,r
l
l
COLORADO BD. OF MED. EXAMINERS v. RAEMER Colo. 1075
Cite as 794 P2d 1075 (Colo.App. 1990) 11
emanate from the productivity of this forming craniosacral manipulation without j i farm's land. medical license. Dentist filed counterclaim i Ili
Colo.Const. art. X, § 3(1)(c) provides: seeking judgment declaring that procedure ` #tl
"The following classes of personal prop- was within scope of his dentistry license. tj�
erty, as defined by law, shall be exempt The District Court, City and County of r'
from property taxation: . livestock: Denver, Warren O. Martin, J., entered per- k`:
t!1
agricultural and livestock products: and manent injunction and declaratory judg- ' f
agricultural equipment which is used on ment prohibiting dentist from performing , 1.+ '
the farm or ranch in the production of sacral manipulation. but allowing him to P, :
agricultural products." perform cranial manipulation. Dentist ap- -St
- Hence, this constitutional provision and the pealed, and Board cross-appealed. The
relevant statutes, when viewed as a whole, Court of Appeals. Kelly, C.J.. held that a'
property
ctaniosacral manipulation, when used to
clearly provide that the personal -`�
n issue here is "agricultural equipment treat temporomandibular joint dysfunction, i i"
constituted practice of "dentistry," and
which is used on a farm or ranch in the
thus was exempt from medical licensing S production of agricultural products." •
requirements. I
If, as here. the facts are not disputed. l '.
- but the law was erroneously applied to the Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and i
x facts, the order will not be upheld on re- remanded with directions. i
t view. See Raynor Door, Inc. v. Charncs, t
4- 765 P2d 650 (Colo.App.1988).
The order is reversed, and the cause is 1. Physicians and Surgeons a5(I)
` remanded with directions to enter an order Craniosacral manipulation is "osteo-
i..
1 exempting the subject personal property pathic procedure," and thus it constitutes
used in plaintiff's chicken operation. "practice of medicine" which ordinarily
must be performed by person holding medi- j
SMITH and MARQUEZ, JJ., concur. cal license, unless exemption from licen-
sure is applicable. C.R.S. 12-36-106(1)(a), I. F
w (2).
0 SFMpMsis SYSTEM
T See publication Words and Phrases }
FEY
for other judicial constructions and ii-
definitions.
2. Statutes X188 l ,,
' The COLORADO BOARD OF MEDICAL To discern intent of General Assembly ,
EXAMINERS, Plaintiff—Appellee and when construing statute, Court of Appeals {
Cross—Appellant, looks first to language of statute, giving 4 `:1
v. effect to ordinary meaning of words and '
W.M. RAEMER, D.D.S., Defendant-Ap- phrases used. I
pellant and Cross-Appellee. 3. Statutes X205, 206 1
No. 87CA1589- t
When construing statute, Court of Ap- ` `I
Colorado Court of Appeals, peals must consider statute as a whole and !
Div. IV. give meaning to every word. .r_.:
l.ii March 22, 1990. 4. Physicians and Surgeons a10 .;t
': Rehearing Denied April 19, 1990. Statute stating that dentist is person i 9
j.<0
' Certiorari Granted July 23, 1990. who treats pain or physical conditions of +
jaw and adjacent structures is not a limit • j
on possible methods of treatment, but in-
State Board of Medical Examiners stead limits structures to be affected by 1'c
I,
brought action to enjoin dentist from per- treatment. C.R.S. 12-35-110(1)(f). ;ii
- '
974333
AS0027
930743
FILE CONTAINS PHOTOS - SEE ORIGINAL FILE
1 s r r .s-:::-.4!44,
r
' _ R A ( II Y P.
13:iY.S. . . } 11•P :q �"'n' _ , ;. Ali«,'w
OM
114‘1441":'
i . , xk.} 7Z�C. r
r�e aY. � x I f h II ' 1m , h . .
si
- '.
J"_ mil. � ~ ' nc#4
h
.
s) � ' �
_ = m m
_--
—
i •
ii.
N: m
i N. ti
.R'1 4�M, a. L W
R'
2"I l F i � •
r - ..
rt
.,,� S
ti # 17;'�.c4- ' Ty TAY°M
F �7 y
4.
-
a i• Ws
tillaillWa. -----
rzle
IP
5 . � .
Air
•
i
930743
t `
t,
G i <a_
, .
. , r � '
• g
• k 4yi 41/4.4;,• •.�.i. 7i O0'.- 2 .-tt'
�� • I to t�- CI _ (o• 1
�,.
lk
l )
• , 9' Vie,,. t „:.
1
Y • •_ 1. h • Y
7
5.L-'''' k) !;
,' - - -
--
4 __ .K ..
r. } _ �� '. __
6, f µ
4
3
T
C
V
4.11
20
t. 4 '.
930743
Hello