The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About930742.tiff RESOLUTION RE: THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, 1993, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO PETITION OF: BANG-A-WAY 4620 WEST 38 DENVER, CO 80212 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: PIN: R 4716186 PARCEL: 120705000057 - 25473-D PT NW4 5 3 68 BEG SW COR NW4 S89D11'E 1803.23' N12DE 350' TO PT ON S & W ROW LN OF ISH DITCH N02D49'E 157.36' N11D45'E 145.08' N06DW 94.21' N50D07'W 42.96' N27D34'W 91.80' N12D07'W 140.36' N43D09'W 112.57' N78D15'W 59.30' THENCE 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: 930742 /2soo a7 Page 2 RE: BOE - BANG-A-WAY ORIGINAL Land $ 45, 792 Improvements OR Personal Property TOTAL ACTUAL VALUE $ 45, 792 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) OR 930742 Page 3 RE: BOE - BANG-A-WAY 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. 930742 Page 4 RE: BOE - BANG-A-WAY 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. -ILL `G2C BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: / A �j v /. WELD COUNTTY,, COLORADO te Weld County Clerk to the Board 411 �Cler�.te--)C% ) a-Zee/AYE) Constance L.arrbbe/�rt, Chairman ,�ma BY: �� Iii �J �6/ Jeitl Vg (AYE) Deputy Clerk to the oars W. Webster, Piro-TTem 1 o- APPROVED TO FORM: / (NAY) eo eBaxter � �`� 1 �Y ',^� D (NAY) C my `ctldrn yr `� Dale K. Ha11 /i5 C1L- / (AYE) Barbara J. Kirk eyer ✓ _ 930742 BOE DECISION SHEET PIN Ii: R 4716186 PARCEL #: 120705000057 BANG-A-WAY 4620 WEST 38 DENVER, CO 80212 e 14 'Oh-7 HEARING DATE: July 30, 1993 TIME: 4:00 P.M. `-I HEARING ATTENDED? (Y/N) NAME: 4,77i L./.2 Low) 4`t'Th AGENT NAME: ANDY LOW S 9� se_, u ` + )c r c W e Y APPRAISER NAME: }�- k y I f Ls Ue- I-0 Ja �/ DECISION: I / DECREASE IN VALUATION INCREASE IN VALUATION NO CHANGE IN VALUATION 54- ASSESSMENT RATIO ACTUAL VALUATION ORIGINAL ADJUSTED Land $ 45, 792 $ )1 47 Improvements OR Personal Property Total Actual Value $ 45, 792 $ '/c7 ,90-> COMMENTS: ?r_12," - I f MOTION BY 3 /2,/I TO �ylt(�ry�/e d ` vc_ pr la ≤c `C0tte_sT, SECONDED BY Q44 / Baxter -- (Ye v Hall -- (Y/ Failed to meet burden of proof Harbert -- N) Comparables inadequate Kirkmeyer - N) Other: Webster -- /N) RESOLUTION NO. 930742 1400 NORTH 17th AVE. GREELEY,COLORADO 80631 NOTICE OF DEN IAL PHONE (303) 353-3845, EXT. 3656 wagC. 25473-D PT NW4 5 3 68 BEG SW COR NW4 5890119E 1803.23' N1 213E 35O9 TO PT ON S S W ROW IN OF ISH COLORADO DITCH NO2D491E 157 ._36• N11D459E 145.089 Nu6OW 94.219 NS0D07'W 42 .96' N27034'W 91. 809 N12DO79W 140.36• N43D09' W 112 .579 N78015' W 59.30 ' THENCE OWNER BANG-A-WAY INC ANDY LOW PARCEL 1 .20 70 5000 057 PIN R 4716196 PO BOX 185 YEAR 1993 DENVER CO 80201 LOG 00004 05/03/1993 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): RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IS VALUED BY CONSIDERING THE MARKET APPROACH. 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 9Y 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 fora 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 DEEM 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 45. 792 45.792 IMPS TOTALS $ $ 5 $ 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. By: WARREN L. LASELL 06/25/93 VJELD COUNTY ASSESSOR DATE - 15-DPT AR 330742 form PR-207-87/93 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON REVERSE SIDE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO APP E771„ THE ASSESSOR'S ISEALSION The Sz timareliot [Equalization will sit to hear a p i beginning July "I.and continuing ',Arm:ph August 10 for real '° tia iu and buildings) and personal pr ,pt.my (furnishings, friaoninery, and "G a,Sf,.ro, _ ,.,. 39 `3-104 and 39,8i i (tyPltif r ,.1RES: , ,* ism Micinett fft, appeal the Assessor:As decision, mail. ar deliver aeliver o..e copy of o preserve your octet r appeal, Am<a at. !r r... ^r tip: iistiNA EQFt. RE.A.L POOM9R1N. CO PERSONAL, 015 100 r P.O. Beis 9 f1102I22017 T OF HEARING • lfsafin pit ,nr c a, of the lime and place che fearing o yo,r aPPe,::.,. "11., ear OF EC C;ALIATION'S DE'TERINAI"ION: iPie Loamy board of Equalization must make a decision on your appeal and mail you a rimier determinationte withi ii Jts minces Odes lee County Board must conclude their hearings by August 10. TAX �r FF: . ₹:f'"S FOR FURTHER APPEALS:' • Hact babelted with h the County, Board ;P Fri a i izationna decision, you i r.0 ft file' Nr "Thin thirtyhave,of , the r Bow,y .. ..ed 4`, t. f_£,1 aFP;3 (7 idiO El'c LV rit1'f3'7 de:'ius_ip with,ONE of-t by following:,. y A Board of Assessment Appeals (RAAB #.�{'.n the BAA at 1313 Sherman, Room _316. Denver, Colorado 80293 mop EBBibtizeip District Court: '3tfi Avenue a₹ r 9th Street, P.O, Box C Creamy, Colorado 80632 %-riephone (3Q3) 356-4000, Ext. 4520 Arbitration: WELD COUNTY BOARD Ofr EQUALIZATION 915 10th street, P.O. Box 758 Greeley, Colorado 80632 Leephone (303) 356-4000, Ext. 4225 It you do not receive a determination from the County Board of Equalization,you must the an appeal with the Board of A esesame ' Appeals by September 2)). 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 EQUALIZATION in the sMe space below, please explain why you disagree with the Assessor's valuation. IN. ACCORDANCE- WITH 39-E 1 0 ii,45 , C.RtS„ YOU MUST STATE YOUR OPINION OF VALUE IN TERMS OF A SPECIFIC DOLLAR AR AMOUNT Attach additional documents as necessary. (Cr 4'tf�. ktt et /1444,44 !Via,. t . _Nett br pitittrilkir P5 I193 t • 3307,42 Bang-Away Inc. 17629 Weld County Road 5 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 , ‘, Sandy ler, President Bang- y, Inc. 930742 DAVIS, GRAHAM & STUBBS • ATTORNEYS AT LAW WASHINGTON D.C. OFFICE SUITE 4700 LONDON OFFICE SUITE 500 370 SEVENTEENTH STREET _ 1200 NINETEENTH STREET, N W. DENVER, COLORADO 80202 I^ BROOK HOUSE WASHINGTON, 0 C. 20035-2402 _. 98/99 JERMYN STREET TELEPHONE 202-822-8680 MAILING ADDRESS - ONOON SWIM BEE FACSIMILE 202-293-4794 TELEPHONE 071-930-2308 POST OFFICE BOX 185 FACSIMILE 011-839-8550 DENVER, COLORADO 80201-OI85 TELEPHONE 303-892-9400 TELEX 413726 005 OVR VD FACSIMILE 303-893-1379 CABLE OAVGRAM, 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- W.y. 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) . etc.".?s, dfr? 930 '42 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 930742 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. 930742 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 e, ' and they are sold for a monetary profit as an 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. 930742 Weld County Board of Equalization July 8 , 1993 Page 5 CONCLUSION 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, 44111 Andrew M. Low for DAVIS, GRAHAM & STUBBS cc : Bruce T. Barker, Esq. Weld County Attorney Mr. Sandy Gurtler 930742 4 EXHIBIT 14 psreso r f,„..SIQ; 7,b„,.;}?/bi86; it70 Cs‘ ; y 71 sc5V`> BANG-A-WAY, INC. JULY 30, 1993 4:00 P.M. 4715886 4714886 4716086 4715086 4716186 4715786 930742 el t t i t f r : 4 fi. Y:+� iii y x�Yr�,�Q erv. ci J I Yn iy ¢.-e* i s I A I'1�r '' .h '+ jam"` t - �U /w'` T ° rk14. ks a41 itr� 1P i `�t ..”'s^ w :•.-3 e -r- 7tt�4`` fit-, •**-7. ..; kia^' t ` 'b u ' oJa e 14, i� C 4t v! `...• . .v. 1 ' _ . fi ;;:: i•••-..,�,V.-iy T i y?P3 �.Yh :, 4 ° I r Cr r r t 15141r0a : Aerial View - ''"Cl CA h VY I +i 007) s r Y`b ' r 1. .. • ��CC ! ... o5U �` F YI 1. ' 4' t„r>"i I P 1 ti I I \ / . 44 j+ J 5ttA a y N' C# x tY o59 . 4• t, Yti -- �. .. P` ric, �l`R^ 1. L\ ,.. • , 1 _.. '•• n at w xcwya• .40742 M^ +y . r 'i t 'llti ,t ..;fit �.rwr� ,. — 'a i ur' 1144 > -` Fs•14.1 ._! � •r#� '}•"gym' . * — df 3 Y 1R'.t 'ir1 ' - r ftit fy•_4-14? * 1 \ % ...... -I .Z if. l', 4 1 f r % V1' ` - rn j ;�� < t ' - - V t,:' lit 1 er, _ ` r . 1 ... f _ - - 1. � p rC�: - Y (P- 1 - , _ y li li a c it !. --..-4.:::: ;.}i 1.44.,, .• 'it1: din ��r1a ,L i V)� ', 4. r o. +` , h, t., Wi li i r "y -7 ry _ j ,j gs h I . �J 5 '? r Q -' ; ° R- • 4 `y :I 12 s If r ft S 930742 OFFICE OF WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR AO tit PHONE (3O3)3533845, EXT. 3656 WELD COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 1400 N. 17TH AVENUE GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 lige february 11, 1993 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 1O4O and 1O4OF 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. 369O Sincerely, Warren L. Lasell Weld County Assessor WLL/pan 2 930742 DEFYNITIONS. "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 regAest 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. 930742 3 DAVIS, GRAHAM & STUBBS ATTORNEYS AT LAW LONDON OFFICE WASHINGTON 0. OFFICE SUITE 700 370 SEVENTEENTH STREET BROOK HOUSE SUITE 500 OENVER, COLORADO 80202 98/99 JERMYN STREET p200 NINETEENTH NTX STREET. N 2 LONDON Swot 6EE WASHINGTON, J.C. 20036-2402 - MAILING ADDRESS TELEPHONE OJI-930.2308 TELEPHONE 202-82220 -8660 POST OFFICE 50% 935 FACSIMILE OJI-839.0550 FACSIMILE 202.293->J9A DENVER, COLORADO 80201-0185 TELEPHONE 303092-9400 TELEX 413726 005 OUR V0 FACSIMILE 303-893.1379 CABLE DAVGRAM, 0ENVER ANDREW M. LOW S*C4^? 892-7327 March 19 , 1993 WELD Contort ec! 0 v II MAR 2 2 1993 Mr. Warren L. Lasell GREELEY,CGLO. Weld County Assessor 1400 North 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Re: Schedules 011, 055 057 ; 4714886 , 4715086 , 4715886 and 4716186 N#s 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 land;and harvested in various ponds, roads and other non-arable nty res are d areas;3and 9 p acres are wetlands, roundcovers, but are not 64 acres are planted in grass and g 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 .9307x42 4 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, 16 tons of grass hay, 318 , 820 pounds of silage corn, and 39,890 pounds of corn. Sale of these crops totaled $18 ,669 . 49 . Sales 7 •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, the 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 of alfalfa, 47 tons of grass hay, 396 bushels of wheat, and 21,000 pounds of corn. Sale of these crops totaled„$22,855 .93 : ,. Sales of pheasants and "' partridge from hunting operations were $82, 132 , plus $12,064 in' 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 . 9 percent of total income, which satisfies the one-third of gross income test. 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 9307425 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 truly yours/ fl y — Andrew M. Low for DAVIS, GRAHAM & STUBBS cc: Mr. Sandy Gurtler Enclosures 930742 6 . .K s • ` L 3 . • R a. — W a vs P O • O r 9 Lu 9 5 ea 5 g N 0 a � � � N 3 W i at y u a ye r u i a • W .. ea • .. Es 6 B a i W L VVVx1111 N L ≤ a a 70 . G • . . • V Y a a a. 23 W . s C ' < pW W •L p to Lci a( r J ___ �� giu '4< Y • V = • WVp• O hi i • i • u Yi so Y Y L. Y Y L- V• ` • • • Y ` • • r r WWqui 004 J W V L Y Y L Y W W j O L L L . . . . . . 3 VW O - i 3 V O U a a N ` Y Y a 3 9Lq 6} 64 6�` yy L} y3 64 3 yy 3yy� 3 6 3 3 3 y ••3�� 3 3 ••3� 3 L a 3 3 3 an r O N U U 8 Y N N M �Np p N N N N pp. N N N N FY N m N in P J Y 0 N, r n n N •I ... .... .. ... E OO S N N PO O A a N IV N p M. A fa N J L n a nC ryp. .app n1 P▪ P p�y is did 0 as P N i a O I•, M n a .44 N a i i in Y- - E A VN1 < A < N W 1 p- r i G A ^ 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O „ „ 0 Ks „ n. 'O,, ^ 4. 0 \ i as w O Y A A I • p O O OE ru i N O 0 IA Ws y O .p O .. .4 N OO 7- a 0 0 I` a a0 O O P y • a a N O on n tl O O O O O O O NI in O O O O a s.co C J p 0000. ... ... 0040000_ • • Oi pO O e.p'p aaOaUwOa0 22 1.1 UUsU YU t ;- t !. i1I OYU 00yy� p�3yOy Vr piv < i ; uW8i uU• J ^ J i s v.r i IS < W f�� _ yCy N y_ 3 0 3 O 8123338 IA V .0 W N N a Y i a < O ... P W NW O O J W a a <' N a a 00 - N O _ _ _ O ha ', ..- 0 Y O W 7 J r- a N < N • p id N t 3 a i a .2Y < _ 7 in N V O 1•A1 es on JZ U -. N O A r < i ^ aa \ a yy nyy t p a i ya N N S aN "8 • . . . . . i0 Wpp ppV U W i a Un 3 A in < • S Y J L• Y1 J . . . . . •• O de r m a a s 0 dd N < < a h l a W O us N ea 28 •N p p a i 0 = i i < lL u i $ '< p ` W W C O N i• J v O t U s -� s is Ip a J 0 o u y J — pW as • i Z U Z O[ a' i W• V s i aaa " • ( - 3 z t .ii. J , ? 32u1 ; 2 S i J 2 g N i W i W_ • i Ws • a[ 2 ,[ _ s f C • spp _ 8 2 < y a i S S O D U y WI - Y is Z N n a i < i Y V r i ai 0 j V i i i 444. ..pp pp pp Z S pp Z P r a n PA a n a O •• J O < - a N O a p A r a N P 4 N • A i n J ni Si J n no s 6 a a N N s y in L U V Y y a. a.Y a U ` L Ld L > L N N O. 0 Y Y U U U Y a. U U V U Y U U U U Y U O P a • ; :L O Y g aaaw 333 J Y 5 555 555555555 9311342 • N IlL E °a pz pzo cn oz I E H ]W Pa E CT Cr) % N N 1 Cr) VD 1/40 H 5 M <r1 Lel Nri CO I 1 I I 1 1 I N ON CP% CT ON CT CT ON rr-I r-I r-I r-♦CT as ON al CT '"I cn 5 GI . Ntz WPq CT Ln,2 in u'1 N r--I N r p r • ^ I Cr) CA CT Cr; ,..1- O T QN O fZ H 930742 8 • 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 930742 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? IP 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 930742 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. 15-DPT-AS PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89 Revised 1-93 930742 11 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 ID 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 39-1-1O2(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 930742 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 the land, 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. Ego 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-DPT-AS PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89 Revised 1-93 930742 13 • 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 PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89 • Revised 1-93 930742 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 930742 15 Section. V, page 5.16 Application of the test for this requirement is as follows. 411 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 twoyears 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 930742 16 Section V, page 5.19 r 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-DPT-AS PUB ARL VOL 3 1-89 Revised 1-93 930742 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 t 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-OPT-AS PUB ARL V0L 3 1-89 Revised 1-93 930742 18 t \C. %ier OFFICE OF WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR PHONE(303) 353-3845, EXT. 3656 WELD COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES I1400 N. 17TH AVENUE GREEL EY, COLORADO 80631 WI COLORADO May 14, 1993 Colorado Department of Local Affairs Division of Property Taxation Mary E. Huddl eston 1313 Sherman Street, Rn 419 Denver, CO 80203 Dear Ms. Hvddleston: During the reappraisal process this year, the question arose concerning pheasants 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 partridges 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 from 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 killed 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, a--new.6 Phyllis A. Newby Weld County Land Appraiser 330742 19 • ue/�coZo Colorado Department of Local Affairs ADO 99O DIVISION OF PROPERTY TAXATION H ` o Mary E. Huddleston *� �' * Property Tax Administrator ' /876 WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR Roy Romeru C—n1((5)7 c,.- Ir \ji, i ; : June 21, 1993 —1- L‘ ,U% ' 'i.j Phyllis Newby, Land Appraiser .: N > 5 i5N5 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 possible agricultural 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, NVIVINA Mary E. Huddleston Property Tax Administrator wr cc: Warren Lasell Ma \ IAAD �wi 1313 Sherman Street, Room 419, Denver, CO 80203, (303) 866-2371 9�V�42 • TDD (303) 866-5300 FAX (303) 866-4000 '! 20 ts�/� fi y `. �. 5 fi... - v Y1133.11 .,,. x e M �ayi � a • ';/^141.:13 yr Sc 4 t . iF MORNING FRESH FARMS ED. OF EQUALIZATION Colo. 3O C, as 794 P:d 1073 1,1o.A l�i,) her. The °P 's''o� one Copse( t.:e sey ence s aiewe,l. We J 'tr e cmcurriintly as vacated, and the es imper- disagree cause 5 r e .once x in IlIrec-ions o sem- xcer andatory A On the date of the aggravated robberes, efenlian ithree e sentence s :ire are so be August 19, :987. 3 Lti-11—;u9iIiiai orovid- served consecutively_ V. ifo'nt ed for consecccre sentences if a person T .ere- ETZG { anti CR`S\\'LLL. JJ., "convicted of c..•) separate ernes of -no- latter of lence- . . ." :Give life � This provision was amended, concur. effective July 1. 1989. to require consecu- tive sentences of a person 'con':icted of two or more separate crimes of vio- C,____ rcweiv s,nr" lence. . . ." (emphasis added) See n if the § 16-11-309(1)(a), C.R.S. (1989 Cum.Supp.). .on of [51 Defendant argues that Colo. Sess. include Laws 1985, ch. 145, § 16—Ii-309(1)(a), must iecutive be construed as limited to only two crimes MORNING FRESH FARMS, INC., ed here , 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. Lobate, 743 P.2d ZATION, Weld County Assessor, and 27 (Colo.1987). This presumption concern- 6 Reoi. • Colorado Board of Assessment Appeals, 'In any ing an intent to change existing law, how- Respondents—Appellees. with a ever, is not absolute and it has less force et r when arguably more specific language is No. 89CA0457. -palate .4. added. See People v. Hale, 654 P.2d 849 Colorado Court of Appeals, don in (Colo.1982). Div. H. endart a [61 Here, the 1988 amendment adding March 22, 1990. 9' violent the more specific language, "or more," is „ consistent with the General Assembly's in- Rehearing Denied April 19, 1990. :ot n- tent to punish multiple crimes of violence Certiorar Denied .July 23, 1990. :nt for more severely than individual crimes of e that violence. See § 18-1-108(3). We find no coact legislative history or reasoned support for Taxpayer appealed pan e order of the it un- defendant's interpretation that the General Board of Assessment Appeals denying re- ficient Assembly intended that only one consecu- us quest for exemption of personal property -quote five sentence be imposed when crimes of used on its farm. The Court of Appeals, lot be violence have been committed against mul- Hodges,T., sitting by assignment, held that C tiple victims. Such an interpretation would that portion of farm devoted to egg - 1986 not render the entirety of the statutes ef- h "farm hoc met statutory definition of farm" fective and would not achieve a reasonable and, thus, egg handling equipment and to of items used in cleaning chicken houses and anon as contemplated by the General As- vaccinating chickens were exempt from sembly.of y. See § 1-_01(1)(c), C.R.S. (1980 Repl.Vol. 1B); People v. Hale, supra. Personal- property tax. Hence, it is our conclusion that the 1988 Reversed and remanded with di- -I amendment was meant to clarify, not to rections. change existing law. Rather, the legisla- that, 1 rive intent of § 16-11-309(1)(a), as original- Taxation cz211 ‘ re- ly enacted, was to impose consecutive sen- That portion of taxpayer's farm devot- sion tences on each and every crime of violence That u mersa de ini- - ci- of which a person is convicted. ed to egg arm" and,n thus,u statutory ndling tion of "farm" and, egg handling on, That part of the sentences imposed or- equipment and items used in cleaning inly dering defendant's three life sentences to chicken houses and vaccinating chickens 1 I 930'742 21 J �h'^1.h %.4::;,• P{' ;r (.A 4 ri- ,7I-4 r+ j,16 ^{ c t Z �'. r Y iy • r .+. { [,',.,;21,:,;,,...:::::;;"".�y ,fit C y1 R fr I ,. '�`i 4-4 r i' 1074 Coie. 791 PVCIFIC REPORTER, 'd ERiES , i I -:. p were xermst from personal "c r :ic tl rs. The 3 .3 ! I ' I E" fie e . s were t “ amm f (.cut q ! pct • '., ` r! r i -'raw or unprocessed state old that : r , . g ,rn t :at - * �i .,. for monear prof , as a_n u.._.aI rot:- plat -Went ir_ nee -- Ir : tt (..R:S .9 1U2( 3_-)I. tiu cr. !ha ppc tail ❑:ac,r ( it. II See puou- auon Word r- Ph-ase: of farm out .a y - I' for other udicat con:'n.c.lom ana - t "i I. (19S9 uu unp) The '3AA t t ec. .r, . dcrinurors Es 1° �-�� that `T ns operation ntreiseparate - ' -- — from the 'plaintiffs] 1m .lug x e -.:on '' !)' - - both the production of cgs arc place- '", . '] Stienq'es and Shaddock, Harlan C Stienties, Greeley, for petitioner-appellant. meat laying nens are totally self contained. 4; s I O i Neither the pullets nor laying nens ever Duane Woodard, Atty. Gen., Charles B. ,) ( I touch the ground. . . ." - : Howe, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen.. Richard H. :p, Forman, Sol. Gen., Larry Williams, First Plaintiff contends that the BAA erred :n 114_, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for respondents- its conclusion that the portion of plaintiff)); sn + ' '1 ;r , appellees Colorado Bd. of Assessment Au- farm devoted to the production of eggs - .1°!, I peals. does not meet the definition of a farm rx 1 1 ' Thomas 0. David, Co. Atty., Jan Rundus, under § 39-1-102(3.5). 'lye agree. `c- g t ,+t I- Asst. Co. Atty., Greeley, for respondent-au- Section 39-1-102(3.5) defines a farm as: <-. xY 'vi' ((( pellee Weld County Bd. of Equalization and �� Weld County assessor. "a parcel of land which Is used to pro- ° cef . ..( duce agricultural products that originate Opinion by Justice H0DGES '. from the land's productivity for the pr.-p many purpose of obtaining a monetary ` ' Plaintiff, Morning Fresh Farms, Inc., ap- profit" peals the order of the Board of Assessment } Appeals (BAA) denying plaintiffs request Plaintiff's chicken operation meets the 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 Plaintiff owns an 800—acre farm on which under § 39-1-102(1.1), C.R.S. (1989 Cum. corn, wheat, and alfalfa are grown on all Stipp-). Under § 39-1-102(1.1), ago- but approximately 40 acres. On those 40 cultural and livestock products are defined as "plant or animal products in a raw or1. I acres, plaintiff has 35 buildings housing unprocessed state which are derived from approximately 750,000 laying hens and the the science and art of agriculture. '.Agri- equipment necessary to gather, convey, - wash, candle, weigh, sort, package, and culture', for the purposes of this subsection refrigerate the eggs (egg handling equip- (1.1), means farming, ranching, animal hus- bandry, and horticulture.' There is no re- : ment). A small percentage of the chicken r feed is produced on this farm. Plaintiff 9uirement in the definition of a farm that il would exclude a portion of a farm which is r purchases day-old chicks to replace laying v�. hens, and the replaced laying hens and self-contained and within which the live- I 5 t-e chicken manure are sold. The laying hens stock does not touch the ground. 1 - and the chicks are kept in structures and Here, the eggs are an "animal product" 5`- 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- ' 3= �. tax exemption for the egg handling equip- cultural product. Thus, the chicken opera- ` 1 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, S •Sitting by assignment of the Chief Justice under and § 24-51-1105, C.R.S. (1988 Repl.Vol. 108). . provisions of the Colo.Conti.art. VI.Sec.5(3). 's'al. . rY ,! ICI"It Pal An 22 A- M - FiAtS; sa_. -r... .,. 4" COLORADO BD. OF MED. EXAMINERS v. RAEMER Colo. 1075h Cite as,93 P_Zd 10]5 feoloApp. 19901 l i ." emanate from `.he proe�c �itv of this forming craniosacrai manipulation •.vithout tld it farm's land_ medical license. Dentist flied counterclaim I, , } Colo.Const. art '{. § J(1)(c) provides: seeking judgment declarir._ that procedure was within scone of hs aentis cry license. f e e• •r' -The following classes of personal prop- 4' em as defined by law shad be exempt The District Court, City arc County' of - from orooerty taxation . livestock: Denver, Warren O. Marta:, J_, entered per- agricultural and livestock products; and manenc injunction and declaratory jud `:'� g- agricultural equipment .vnich is used on ment prohibiting dentist from performing y ' the farm or ranch in the production of sacral manipulation, but allowing him. to �F agricultural products." perform cranial manipulation. Dentist an I 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:. clearly provide that the personal property craniosacral manipulation, when used to treat temporomand ibular in issue here is "agricultural equipment roman ar joint dysfunction, _ u.- which is used on a farm or ranch in the constituted practice of "dentistry," and r" production of agricultural products." thus was exempt from medical licensing facts requirements. i �: =-. If, as here, the are not disputed, p .. 3' but the law was erroneously applied to the Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and t" t- facts, the order will not be upheld on re- remanded with directions. '' view. See Raynor Door, Inc. it Charnes, a 765 P.2d 650 (Colo.App.1988). '• - �., The order is reversed, and the cause is 1. Physicians and Surgeons ' 5(1) f,' remanded with directions to enter an order Craniosacral manipulation is "osteo- i:` exempting the subject personal property pathic procedure," and thus it constitutes used in plaintiffs chicken operation. I P "practice of medicine" which ordinarilyirtj i. must be performed by person holding medi- ( i SMITH and MARQI EZ, JJ., concur. cal license, unless exemption from licen- E, sure is applicable. C.R.S. 12-36-106(1)(a), l. w (2). O E KEYMuMii!SYSTEM T See publication Words and Phrases • for other judicial constructions and .i definitions. t 2. Statutes x188 The COLORADO BOARD OF MEDICAL To discern intent of General Assembly '` EXAMINERS, Plaintiff—Appellee and when construing statute, Court of Appeals .,t Cross—Appellant, looks first to language of statute, giving � i if v. effect to ordinary meaning of words and t W.M. RAEMER, D.D.S.. Defendant-Ap. phrases used. pellant and Cross-Appellee. 'i 3. Statutes +=205, 206 No. 87CA1589. When construing statute, Court of Ap- Colorado Court of Appeals, peals must consider statute as a whole and ' .- :a�' Div. IV. give meaning to every word. �) } March 22, 1990. 4. Physicians and Surgeons a10 t? Rehearing Denied April 19,. 1990. Statute stating that dentist is person -`;;: Certiorari Granted July 23, 1990. who treats pain or physical conditions of jaw and adjacent structures is not a limit , } on possible methods of treatment, but in- State Board of Medical Examiners stead limits structures to be affected by i brought action to enjoin dentist from per- treatment. C.R.S. 12-35-110(1)(f). 93U74a3 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 �4 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 930742 24 • PARC TP: 1-: F'ARCE:L.. INQUIRY ASS MT YID:: 1993 , IN: 4716186 PARC: 120705000057 LAST UPDATE., 07/06/1993 BANG---WAY INC ACTIVE ON: 09/16/1986 17629 WELD CO RD E ER THOUI) CO . 80513 TAX AREA :1.322 ..085556 1.7-92 DATE LAST ASSESS 04/19/1993 LAST ASSESS LAND 13280 LAST ASSESS BLDG a 0 TOTAL LAST ASSESS SS 1;3 20 2.1.2 13280 PRIOR YEAR ASSESS 4650 TOT LAND 13280 REC DT :10/06/21. DEED TP WI) NUMBER 9490 0127115 3WOL D{:ii:; FEE 0.00 25473-I) PT NW'4 5 3 6B BEG SW t:oR NWl S$'v:D:I.:!. 'E TOT ELDGS 0 1803.23 ' N12DE 350' TO PT ON S 6: W ROW I_.N OF ISH . TOTAL. VAL.LJE 132S0 PF 3 PROFILE F'F ,:L_1.=GAL F'F Y:NEXT PARCEL {::'F:':1.1. ..NENU PF4; OWNERS PF6 DOC HTSi PF1�`' pL.()( PE:: :1.2 REr,E._ MESSAGE M) a A c-0001 02/00? • • 93O742 25 A�SMT 'I R,' :I.993 ATIII1 )2'2 i�'rFt.C; TP: 4:i PARCEL �:Ik(::1.7:l:}��;`�• A{ UPDATE:. .. 07/06/1993 PIN: 4715786 PARC a 120705000047 LAST BANG--r"t--WAY INC ACTIVE ON: 09/16/1966 INACTIVE ON:: / / i"IA4'-'#y 17629 WELD CO RD BERTHOUD CO 80513 .y. . X AREA ,"•r .085556 1992 DATE LAST ASSESS 04/:i.9.':L993 LAST ASSESS LAND 1838380 LAST ASSESS BLDGS 0 1;'teS8'TOTAL LAST ASSESS 18880 2125 PRIOR YEAR ASSESS 18;) TOT LAND , 18880 REC DT i.1/:LO/75 DEEI) TP W:( NUMBER 7520 01674307 WOL. DOC FEE 3.50 25473..-C PT NW4 5 3 68 BEG ;:309D52 'E 1951 .24 ' FROM TOTAL c: i .VALUE 18820 ii 1 1.1 �... •''l.4. NW COR ;::�:.:�•; D •«:. 'E 690.82 ' . . "'f",:]: PROFILE i::•!::•0 }._!:::Gr•^•,L_::i }::' ;• �N}::.::•T' 1'•'Af<E:;f::.l... ENU P 4: OWNERS i::'!= f, I)O HIST�•T• !'I:":1.�;? !:'I...(:(' AL MESSAGE: 0-0001 01/016 H PARC TP R PARCEL INQUIRY :M T. YR 1993 ATIIN022 :I. :E. LAST UPDATE. PIN I' d:-':!.: ?E;:, F'�`�f�;t: ACTIVE ON 0 /16/J.98cs :(:,i'll�}C:;.._r,.._}Ir'I'7` INC :I:I•4AC'T:E:'V}:' ON:: % / C'Ir^si::'7 17629 WELD CO RD 5 BERTHOUD CO 80513 . TAX AREA 1322 .085556 1992 DATE LAST ASSESS 04/19/1993 LAST ASSESS LAND • 4680 LAST ASSESS BLDGS 0 4680 LAST ASSESS•s 4680 2120 TOTAL I_.r-1.:3T' i1,:"+�sl��..,',."s TOTLAND4680PRIOR YEAR ASSESS 40 REC DT • DEED TP NUMBER U.1(:1!... DOC FEE 0.00 7' 25473A.1 A PT N}1:11 5 3 68 BEG AT SE: COI: !'.!Wr.`.! Wt.::...._ TO TOT BLDG'S i PEG HELY 300 ' To IRON PEG ON W SIDE :i::::hi DITCH TOTAL VALUE 4680 :•AL S 'I:::%;NEXT PARCEL -r" MENU t�'1= ]: PROFILE 1='4"�1:�:.�I-•;s:.r•-Il... PF4: OWNERS 'r•'i'�fs:Doc HIST !_1::1O:f:'LOC: MESSAGE: G—o001 �11/�iic ��ti Aa 93O 742 26 • PARCEL INQUIRY r 1:3:31'!T YR : 1993- 'r•.r. I:NU2 :: 120705000056 i...('Ii)•I UPDATE:; 07/06/1993. IN: 4716086 PARC:BANG—A—WAY INC ;..1C::.TI .E O1 !,. 09/16/1906 :1.:-'c:?:;::`Y WELD CO RD 5 BERTHOUD CO 00513 TAX AREA 1322 .005556 1992 DATE LAST ASSESS 04/19/1993 LAST ASSESS LAND 1800 LAST ASSESS BLDGS • 370 TOTAL LAST ASSESS 2170 2125 ' 'spa PRIOR YEAR ASSESS 6940 TOT LAN:D 800 REC DT :L0/06/81. DEED T!:' WI) NUMBER►M ER 9490 0:1.871.:1...?.a WOL. DOC C F•E E_: 0.00 2225 370 25473—B PT HW4 5 3 60 BEG S,;D50 'W 934.83 ' FROM TOT BLDG:: 370 NW CCIF': 389009 'E 431 .18 ' 827041 'E 577.85 ' 30050 'W TOTAL VALUE 21.70 PF3: PROLE • : I::•E I.1 ::!"1E1'IU F• is:•E::''•`�::L..+.':(:+i1i...i:i i :!•••li:::):T l::i..11'�'(:'C:L s: i::. 1.0::F 1...t.tC ::'— 2: '�:EAL. i'f"�4:: OWNERS !�'!�c�)::I)Cl(.: 1—!.!.,.?•1 , MESSAGE:: MB a A o--o001 01/016 PARC TF':: !::: PARCEL INQUIRY ASSM T YR:: :1993 AT I 114022 PIN:: 47:1.5886 PARC:: :I.2.0705000{);;j;'°1 LAST UPDATE: 04/:1.4/1993 BANG--A--WAY INC ACTIVE ON: 09/16/1986 INACTIVE ON: / / MAPN:: 2314 17629 WELT) CO ICI) BE! THOUD CO 80513 TAX AREA 1322 .085556 5l"L 1992 DATE LAST ASSESS 04/:19./:1.993 '•,• ASSESS LAND 9560 LAST t: C r, SBLDGS 0 TOTAL LAST ASSESS 9560 2125 9560 PRIOR YEAR ASSESS :12'.6<) TOT LAND 9560 REC DT 1:1./21/84 I)EEI) TF' WI) I'It_II*IBEER 1005,) 0.!.98943/.4 WO!... :DOc FEE :1. 4..00 :: L , rt: 80050 'W TOT BLDG'S 0 ...,.�r�i..; PT h•11;l�� ..� ,:} •:.><::• BEG NW COR OF .}1::. .. i � 934.83 ' 6.8. . 8 . 82.1)4:1. 'E 577.85 ' E ioo.`.'�0 'E: TOTAL.. VALUE . .. :.7ca�yi){)s� �::. '•f.:,.I. .. .l.<:{ ,as:.;. 1.:F3: PROFILE 1~'F5::E...!:::Gr-iLS PF'7::E'1!::: •T PARCEL F'F11. ::MI":1•U r:,1::z:.;: )L:(,•, , !''I':'.1.C):1"'I."(-iC I"'1" .1.s:::x:1::.1^11... f:1..« :: OWNERS I. I I:I,.? 1 . MESSAGE: �)t,l MB a A o—o 01/016 a3074 27 PARCEL INQUIRY ASSMT YR: 1993 A•T]:Ih1D2 _' l='Al:;t; T h': RUPDATE: �)"/'lrJcy'f��'�S•':':i r �8 �'c"f}=C� 120 0500001/ LAST . 1••I� xr1�}C',�.6 ,.,...� LANG -A--WAY INC; ACTIVE Chi: 09/16/1 86 INACTIVE ON: / / IYIAP't 3.L4•17629 WELT) CO RD BERT HOUD CO 6051:3 TAX AREA 1322 .085556 1.992 DATE LAST ASSESS 04/19/1.993 LAST ASSESS L.ANI) 37830 �.]. "' _ ," `'' •Y• E /� 44450 .2 22 LAST 1 F�•1i�.:)G;:?i? I;{L...1f�:J:1 +'5.1 �'}r..s ,;j�(:}�.i� 172220 d. 4 2 TOTAL LAST ASSESS 0 TOT LAND 37830 PRIORPRIORYLc-"YEARASSESSASSESS ..�;'.�:.2'1:4 REC DT DEED TI:: NUMBER , wol...DOG FEE 2444024440r 1:x:.1.2 D.DJ A—.25 20010 25468 NE4 5 3 68 EXC F:<i:::o NW CDR i'•li_:t:T E1943. 1 ' TO T.i::O.1. :F:;1_..OOS 04450 � ••' :D42'W :1 70 ' c::c:,8:01 a 'W :1.1 VALUE 82.25.) �t1L..''i SIDE OF IRR DITCH ::�,.:••�.� 4,�:• .. .. F'F "L_E~C ILS I�'I' 7.4�ILX••1' i:: fF��.: li'4... f:,!:::L:1. i E JU I��'i��' >� PROFILEy 1='Fa.:;_'�REAL. f:�i::•4: OWNERS PF6:DOC HI ST' PF 10:PLUG MESSAGE: 0-0001 01/016 • • 930742 28 w ,• ��" 9$9 •. 'dam'. 1rs mw � a I a IM I• • .m.;;Piall"2" raillasser&A*‘s . -- -. row . O _ (ifs,. ca._ an - .- - 1:: -c3.-, Meg MIS 1 ail I e'tss bi:tr. T.4N. • III _ I.:, , ••� _ �'• V_ isitara A e .• Ks .., ro ..y a, : 1 \ ii.„...._imilitis. : . ..m. morn ..4. ..:,} . wvit : I� �®object ��i� J� �°�' ®'�••• . `"',Q� • - . e© OEM1J� ;� •ti:t !1WU5iJ Ill ' ' ,I .1 .:..M V 111-Witjlias . ' - -.) • ''. •:4-.\ ettlaillilltiMitillteliDaili„, _ 32 •• T,3 N. d �.. ``, f 3, •N. • -e.....,.,it. . . - . . JO all .r40:201- uz;:°)." '''' 1" . i i . 4 rm .. : , .: e4i 1....m... ,. - - ... - NNI -I v I�,_ ? ••I , f• Sus( ....4....4.42 -C - - -- __—___— __--1 uti _ .kiik z • s . ..... izt,23). .. en , . lc . . ._ Gs i ; __ N> -y 1. •,ua - I 'i&lallatO`t } IT t._.--• ._ _ - 7.1 r IT Il 4 (:)_,‘' -ailinum .... O •IC TI !P . Y \._ T •„ i I I I „ ��• • -- r VI I it � ,' C`/4 ai_ !�i2 -to ,,_s'i .1•)' r aflig• _:' %, t-.. {;1 '.i, , r N • �^• `y tt. ; r Y�:%t11ii ' • •• T"1• _'' C oNri Intl X r _`.': �iii : rte' '. N_.. J. ii 71 ,? 1• n • , 1., J •i.� , V4- -ii ,rCJ { , j'fie tM . 4. ql •Q4 - - . f... I. i , .�~ 'car • ,,. 1` E I - Tit ,' I m R ' .,• ' " W'�( ��.yt4$ lif d , `1• •+L.a Akktlrl° •• LINE. 1 . ors ..,. • a t . %.- .w dr %w i , " \ -1 .�,, a R ( § ( _ ; \ ® ® ` U \ \ \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ e _ en e cv • § § . ) \ E G \t on \ § m . H 0 0 \ 2 0in / 1/40 \ lil / / CO / • \ \ CV z \ co § w L i r , a / » 2 » • 1/40 , R / \ � . § k » / . Q / co .. \ / \ § _ / . $ CV� � \ N 1/40 � \CO \ § G \ § I� / A R4 \ Q < g J w : . 942 30 Cil56 J 1 I :, \ 11 s I v 4 AB C.. /\ • IrI U '2 0.361 rR 3 — / 42 z i '. . .v, Y F�I5 •. • 1.j•• . 1 ' IJ • ! e n .:.r��nBt3, \ I .. 1 • t • •f •:1• • y • ,' 7Al • ,3•77 `, I • 780 Hoy 66 r �' •4 .. O ltl l��1 C 6..r ! •P � � I 113631CLmoRPRD ,_ u::,o3,V': r.. _ .. .ri1 ( i • NN . a t.yU,- 1 \y1��— I4 •. _ .I i' Ir s. �. J''• j 4 i•p J _ i6. _gypp'•` i \I .. ` I , - fir• N 86 - 1 ,.�r,C11 r:yl 1tl1..;.. h '�r I C I 7 ��5 .lY•. • •✓< X1 ;:r:' • 10 • a , 1,, ? ,• 1:, 1I Ii • 1 ��.. .• ` I .. ) H /' •' I I ,/ 11 I I, •:' • ' 31 r . N N ' O CO a • Q d N J p • O 'M -N° ,l^^ 8M Q+O,Op BAY�O SO�+ • In at� 8` -�M�I� O��IIp.JN.N V1N1 O��O U Irl at sY r d' CO�O�S p c-1I LO.D�j In 'i 1 vl z S to I U) '-I W o + CO I Rd I in I o E o O O O D IM �i'ppp-1' tflCcopN �SS� pSO O 'AO c?'O 10OI11Or4 r N 0 Q HE b. NN �'-iN : d.t1 -7 CO �r-IND`� Sri V1 _ • - H I + + + + I t I . 1 j I + I I • I ! + .1 I I +•+ I I CC t�yy NN�� eF�- r� �Yy r cq� O5: c� "pa -u�c� . - a5 c� °�` pa S W • • O Z N flu . pNI�• COo_ O 0 •h NOO� .7Q 1.1 - 2 Li Q p �• N Q �W N ¢ tYi 'S N ! 0 p •W 7 • ' . . CC 8 O O O ' Q O N. `atY '� �JJ Q o J • W S _J 0 V Ln U 9. w pN0a Cl) R z a W „a W J r N N N p . • N M n •. C1/41 ..y = IS O III } mJ 3 Fpf .I �. s I �O O cr I r' 11 1 • QQ N 7 •�-1 - W ,I CO rl rJ W •-1 ,-1 Ir+ -i rl w r-I .-1 H.. Q (/�/� d VJ 2 O O . • S • o 0 M O I� •p Y1 O �D W tz N N N O N Or n�'1 N n M S O ON N O d N ko O1 O n. p, (J "i co W ri M W .-1 �D W CO W .4el W .4 cry N fn• •1 •F.1 . Z . . W O . n Z • p • .1n '' , oN .tn M .3 Z III U a u W i N `. • - .r- I N vii i CO p O J In CO In m 4- °o ,� 6 N ¢ • , • N • Z En W ZU ~ O O (/) 1/40 `� - m m r I Z 7 (Y - WI •D N en en mo o r `O r I r NG N - O p nncO en I- r _ N N r en m - - 932 32 z 3• 0 II1 1I in j o m N > I rn v I i J cl I tit S.. ! . f �; NO a1 lO -M cv ON d' • 1 If% . r- , • • • Seim • oONT• � o OQCA N • O M �d N I'� .-I ulM _ • .-I M n M n O I- 0O in N CP M 00 M . t in .1n • I--rl 1/4O Is, is. I • • H L.' Cn Cn V) . N U + P11 CO CO I W S o O O • o • 8r§� agcM g8 C -c O K .-I cal CT CM. ON t c�1' ill , No+.+ I + 1 } 1 1 + I I I O _ N.b8 • Dig 161 pegs • 8 z — �i t 0 c.tl (7 0 3 6 0 apOtoO� o co 0 OcnO OtoO z ^ei•FAN Ln coo N CA WO dPgN0 • ON 0 mi-• •In N 0 `.t O ON • CO • U. E po cn Q m K CC m4 m '8 • 8 QOO g Q I • N I .. N I.• 8 I •O I 8 Q. C 4 1 • �. �' • N 1S T ul k. L*. /1� O - t i l N • coo 0. Q .-1 . W cu J �n 1p�� v� CV pFGj cn• •. m o ; : ; ; : ; ; 'fr .-I fs, Oo.• 0 .p NO cQ�+^pp1 ' • N (n .d W a) .••1 oN M tiV O N •.0 .-I .t ',II M • . • • W fit • . 8 H 8 8 • •8 •• Q • O o H 1p .-a. as • • ui to I- w 7 a a �: N .I ..crN W Z En N • Z5 ,n ?S o.' g , g 1- X 111 • N - N ,.a _ (n O �y Q JQ .N•1 ..-I n v1. 0'�O �' coN Q z VI • •• C (o Q 1 Li A • W I • < co in c0 ILI aQo �° a M I • I- O M � .3 'M'c N N . • I • O3 . +�a�X42 33___ N l7 l- N. N vO to "° \.p • JON ON I .. •_r S 31 . p ,o g"�u,Q' QQ .o o�o 8d 8��p ON O' In CU Q11.1!�kJ) CO , t!'1�1 ,,,o I o e, •a ao COON m am ILn r^-I s O9` aD I ^ I In, • • • + + En I (/) + cn N W • O O W O e 8 ,- o AsSS pCQ�,n � c�o ��ooMo O O �N NNt'f d•N�NM ,fl 1-435 o: _— a • o + + + + I + + + + + I I. I + + -►• + ri) co CC u1 . CL• � N oo N • S 88(2 000° �; • §00n0 Q 2 pp N�0N•i ko-C Q N �O fq a' �.- N v1 N O1 O d U O • • lU lil•N M I . . �Q{ It j • g • n p • - .. 0 •- . [[rr...� § Rx §Q 21 1 • ,� I N .1 N N N M R in ct? N J �N-' w }-' Fr• vJ co cocv o-..ry', `n. "' '^ , . J 2 Q' 0 J N ip-�{ t �p H I Q� F- " 3 m Q .1. KG I w sss�GCC �' Gy �I F c, - N 7 r-I .-1 frr • a - to O '. N N O N u1 ,,, le ^I M N ipp( a. a. u) C�J • -* @1 N CJON • C�J • M C .¢ • t 5 2 , g as z `V p. N .. r-t g .+d .. g i 2 Q i l—p INl1t (n N in N • - N ri i .N -i O W J l� N- W in co °o' p Z (A N .N _ Q • i •• : . ' 'i Z . hD h 4 O ft co on IT- a O I` N (•••tinn • 0 c`1 ' m0 d ai 1 N Q f- O e0 ON i • • I- rI II; ll 930742 34 Z -) In 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. EXHIBIT A F:\DATA\W 1\CTHO\89527.3 B14145-1045, /1 WQ, July 28, 1993 II:llam it • 830742 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- 930742 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- 930742 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 P:DATAMPPCTH0%4z7 I 1J,A 19➢3 11:36:. 930742 . MORNING FRESH FARMS v. BD. OF EQUALIZATION Colo. 1073 Clte as 794 P.2d 1073 IColo.App. 1990) her. The one consecutive sentence is allowed. We be served concurrently is vacated, and the s imper- disagree. cause is remanded with directions to order Assem- On the date of the aggravated robberies, defendant's three life sentences are so be andatory August 19, 1987. § 16-11-309(11(a) provid- served consecutively. P. Mont- ed for consecutive sentences of a person There- "convicted of two separate crimes of vio- METZGER and CRISWELL. II., latter of lence. . . ." This provision was amended, concur. :rive life effective July 1, 1989, to require consecu- tive sentences of a person "convicted of w O E Kt?VUMett SYSRM two or more separate crimes of vio- r lence. . . ." (emphasis added) See § 16-11-309(1)(a), C.R.S. (1989 Cum.Supp.). •n if the .on of [5] Defendant argues that Colo. Sess. include Laws 1985, ch. 145, § 16-11-309(1)(a), must secucive be construed as limited to only two crimes MORNING FRESH FARMS. INC.. ed se here 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 EQUALI- more." See Char-nes 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 ing an intent to change existing law, how- Respondents—Appellees. ever, is not absolute and it has less force with a No. 89CA0457. when arguably more specific language is .ent or added. See People v. Hale, 654 P.2d 849 Colorado Court of Appeals, ttpion araa (Colo.1982). Div. II. endant [6] 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 Certiorari Denied July 23, 1990. lot in- more severely than individual crimes of int for violence. See § 18-1-408(3). We find no e that legislative history or reasoned support for Taxpayer appealed an order of the mdant Board of Assessment Appeals denying re- defendant's un- defendant's interpretation that the General Assembly intended that only one consecu- quest for exemption of personal property ficient used on its farm. The Court of Appeals, Live sentence be imposed when crimes of •quate violence have been committed against mul- Hodges,J., sitting by assignment, held that lot be I tiple victims. Such an interpretation would that portion of farm devoted to egg produc- Cf not render the entirety of the statutes ef- don met statutory definition of "farm" 1986) I festive and would not achieve a reasonable and, thus, egg handling equipment and ie of items used in cleaning chicken houses and intent as contemplated by the General As- ation I sembly. See § 2-4-201(1)(c), C.R.S. were exempt from 3n of personal property tax. • Repl.Vol. 1B); People v. Hale, supra. it is our conclusion that the 1988 Reversed and remanded with di- Hence, 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 4=211 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- . ch. of which a person is convicted. tion of "farm" and, thus, egg handling only E X H 1 e 1 T That part of the sentences imposed or- equipment and items used in cleaning only �l ring defendant's three life sentences to chicken houses and vaccinating chickens a 1 rhos.hp 4 _A.- , • 930742 a �i 10 4osem o1 PVCII l( i{EPU RTC R }.I FS i I e 1 s as or urprnt es < tic w v‘ere ,old :r...• . 'egg rrot c .or. r sir • f or none J O t a r r'} Va. 11 � rOn- i L heR ma a �n0 a e 07 .e^- Pi. CaR I acts. C.R. 9 _).. 1.•: tiaLer 'ti not _ail 4:thin me gefinition See pnoiic:l on `.\! a.m. Phrase, o it :n in-!- 'f2 hI • Ball ` • I for other uuic:ai .onstruct.ons anti )xu :ant.iupp.l. Thy'. B�A opt udetl 't: [ '+A• definitions- •19 ,hat: '[T,hi operation .s entire separate n. J. tram the plaintiff sl farming aueratton. porn the odc.ctro❑ of eggs inc epiace- Stientjes- tna Shaudock. Harlan C I Stientjes, t_ reeteo for petitioner appellant. inept laving 'hens are totally s m e-t -ontaed. • I i Neither ne pullets nor laving ens ever [ t r ' I Woodard.oodard. Atty. Gen . Charles B. ouch the %round. . . . I I Howe. Chief Deputy atty. Gen., Richard H. (i Forman, Sol Gen., Larry Williams,WilliamsFirst Plaintiff contends that the Bea erred is • 1 I I Asst. Atty. Gen.. Denver. for respondents- its conclusion that the portion of plaintiff's I appellees Colorado Bd. of assessment ap- farm devoted to the production of eggs I Pic,.. peals. does not meet the definition of a farm et' t Thomas O. David. Co. Atty., Jan Rundus• under § 39-1-10213.51. We agree. Asst. Co. Atty., Greeiey, for respondent-ap- Section .39-1-102(3.5) defines a farm as: I ,t < pellee Weld County Bd. of Equalization and ..a parcel of land which is used to pro- :7,-, l ' Weld County .assessor. duce agnculturai products that originate from the land's productivity for the on- 'r Opinion 6y Justice HODGES • mary purpose of obtaining a monetary �g I Plaintiff, Morning Fresh Farms, Inc., ap- profit." if peals the order of the Board of Assessment Plaintiff's chicken operation meets the • Appeals (BAA) denying plaintiffs request for exemption of personal property used on statutory definition of a farm. The acre- 4 its farm. We reverse. age is a "parcel of land" and is used to 1 produce "agricultural products" as defined 14 The facts in this case are undisputed. under § 39-1-102(1.1), C.R.S. (1989 Cum. I Plaintiff owns an 800-acre farm on which Under § 39-1-102(1.1), agri- Stipp.). corn, wheat, and alfalfa are grown oen all cultural and livestock products are defined k but approximately 40 acres. On those 40 as "plant or animal products in a raw orb ",:e": ". acres, plaintiff has 25 buildings housing unprocessed state which are derived from a approximately 750,000 laying hens and the p the science and art of agriculture. 'Agri- ; iii:+k" equipment necessary to gather, convey, culture', for the purposes of this subsection t r washii , candle, weigh, sort, package, and (1.1), means farming, ranching, animal hus- ?ithandlin a ui refrigerate the eggs (egg g q bandry, and horticulture." There is no re- it , • meat). A small percentage of the chicken '4 t feed is produced on this farm. Plaintiff quirement in the definition of a farm that ,,, purchases day-old chicks to replace laying would exclude a portion. of a farm which is hens, and the replaced laying hens and self-contained and within which the live- 11, �1ir 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" .: i never touch the ground. in a "raw or unprocessed state," and they P --f- { 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- - . i P 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. Sitting by assignment of the Chief Justice under and § 24—S1-1105, C.R.S. (1988 RepLVol. 10 B). provisions of the Colo.Cons[.,art. VI.Sec.5(3), h ij . 93°742 ' 1'. ik , COLORADO BD. OF MED. EXAMINERS v. RAEMER Colo. ii I 5 Cite we 794 P.2d 1075 (Coio.App. 19901 i i emanate from the productivity of this forming craniosacral manipulation without ) It farm's land- + medical license. Dentist filed counterclaim 1 ,10 Colo.Const. art. X, § 3(1)(c) provides: seeking judgment declaring that procedure Pi; "The following classes of personal prop- was within scope of his dentistry license. • Ii, erty, as defined by law, shall be exempt The District Court, City and County of - 1; from property taxation: livestock: Denver. Warren 0. Martin, J., entered per- E Kl.; agricultural and livestock products: and manent injunction and declaratory judg- R-1! agricultural equipment which is used on ment prohibiting dentist from performing , i•'' • the farm or ranch in the production of sacral manipulation. but allowing him to hi; agricultural products." perform cranial manipulation. Dentist ap- '`'t Hence. this constitutional provision and the Pealed, and Board cross-appealed. The 9 Court of Appeals, Kelly, C.J., held that relevant statutes, when viewed as a whole, 'i craniosacral manipulation, when used to • clearly provide that the personal property .`� in issue here is "agricultural equipment treat temporomandibular joint dysfunction. i which is used on a farm or ranch in the constituted practice of "dentistry," and S.- l: production of agricultural products." thus was exempt from medical licensing } i If, as here. the facts are not disputed, requirements. but the law was erroneously applied to the Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and r facts, the order will not be upheld on re- remanded with directions. i ' view. See Raynor Door, Inc. v. Charnes, 765 P.2d 650 (Colo.App.1988). ' The order is reversed, and the cause is I. Physicians and Surgeons p5(1) ` remanded with directions to enter an order cii4t Craniosacral manipulation is "osteo- ¶„- exempting the subject personal property pathic procedure,” and thus it constitutes I • used in plaintiffs chicken operation. "practice of medicine" which ordinarily - • must be performed by person holding medi- SMITH ! and MARQUEZ, JJ., concur. cal license, unless exemption from licen- , sure is applicable. C.R.S. 12-36-106(1)(a), d • " 2 . O SF[1 MIIMlf II SY5ifM (2). ) ! '.I T See publication Words and Phrases } for other judicial constructions and definitions. ! ,' 2. Statutes c,5188 ' The COLORADO BOARD OF MEDICAL ! I. EXAMINERS, Plaintiff—Appellee To discern intent of General Assembly ' , ppellee and when construing statute, Court of Appeals gd ' S. Cross—Appellant, 4 looks first to language of statute, giving V. effect to ordinary meaning of words and • W.M. RAEMER, D.D.S., Defendant-Ap. phrases used. pellant and Cross-Appellee. - ' iiI 3. Statutes X205, 206 1 No. 87CA15$e, 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. March 22, 1990. 4. Physicians and Surgeons a10 Rehearing Denied April 19, 1990. I Statute stating that dentist is person i Certiorari Granted July 23, 1990. who treats pain or physical conditions of jaw and adjacent structures is not a limitIV on possible methods of treatment, but in- Ii ..- State Board of Medical Examiners stead limits structures to be affected by a" • h brought action to enjoin dentist from per- treatment. C.R.S. 12-35-110(1)(f). 920742 L AS0027 930742 FILE CONTAINS PHOTOS - SEE ORIGINAL FILE _ - 1ff 't '` E r: €y Yid 1- 4 - - , ._ 01 ...it, " ' LM 1r 1. • _ #• ' t.im 1 r{ • -.r s, 9 ,� : :t�• y • L.i ' .1 .t. , .‘. y a r ! n q tr 1 Y ej. V 1 1. EAv -, 474 ...ter.-- lg •-a • siliu 1,a t : en ti _ r • _— M' re v,ii l" • • I ' h - Y , J .--t_•yam P - y'.' ±, ' '�\4r- allialk A �. P � PrZ2 4'r;•S,t1 y R it a • �` 8 •. �r.Y r I w it.. 1": a — a' t Al f. rb.. 4 t:,:.., _ • e i ; T >G. _ I L 11,,k' ; t " ~ f k, yy,, ,1 A , I _ Y 4 - • ' 4.\ • _ r tfat • fi ..t. x "_ti � b } try Y• i � , s .=...7 .Y' s. . • t i L fig. FxnT 4� t • bA iy { .S Ii, t . it 20 0 ,- 930'742 Hello