CO Code § 31-25-105.5 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 31 - Government - Municipal|Article 25 - Public Improvements|Part 1 - Urban Renewal|§ 31-25-105.5. Acquisition of Private Property by Eminent Domain by Authority for Subsequent Transfer to Private Party - Restrictions - Exceptions - Right of Civil Action - Damages - Definitions

  Except as provided in this subsection (1) or subsection (2) of this section, no private property acquired by eminent domain by an authority pursuant to section 31-25-105 (1)(e) after June 4, 2004, shall be subsequently transferred to a private party unless:   The owner of the property consents in writing to acquisition of the property by eminent domain by the authority;    The governing body of the authority determines that the property is no longer necessary for the purpose for which it was originally acquired, and the authority first offers to sell the property to the owner from whom it was acquired, if the owner can be located, at a price not more than that paid by the authority and the owner of the property declines to exercise such right of first refusal;    The property acquired by the authority has been abandoned; or    The owner of the property requests or pleads in an eminent domain action that the authority acquiring the property also acquire property that is not essential to the purpose of the acquisition on the basis that acquiring less property would leave the owner of the property holding an uneconomic remnant.         Where a proposed transfer of private property acquired by an authority by eminent domain does not satisfy one of the requirements specified in subsection (1) of this section, such property acquired by eminent domain by an authority after June 4, 2004, may be subsequently transferred to a private party only upon satisfaction of each of the following conditions:   The governing body has made a determination that the property is located in a blighted area or the property itself is blighted, and the urban renewal project for which the property is being acquired shall be commenced no later than seven years from the date the blight determination is made. For purposes of this section, the determination of whether a particular area or property is blighted shall be based upon reasonably current information obtained at the time the blight determination is made.    Not later than the commencement of the negotiation of an agreement for redevelopment or rehabilitation of property acquired or to be acquired by eminent domain, the authority provides notice and invites proposals for redevelopment or rehabilitation from all property owners, residents, and owners of business concerns located on the property acquired or to be acquired by eminent domain in the urban renewal area by mailing notice to their last known address of record. The authority may also at the same time invite proposals for redevelopment or rehabilitation from other interested persons who may not be property owners, owners of business concerns, or residents within the urban renewal area, and may provide public notice thereof by publication in a newspaper having a general circulation within the municipality in which the authority has been established.    In the case of a set of parcels to be acquired by the authority in connection with an urban renewal project, at least one of which is owned by an owner refusing or rejecting an agreement for the acquisition of the entire set of parcels, the authority makes a determination that the redevelopment or rehabilitation of the remaining parcels is not viable under the urban renewal plan without the parcel at issue.       Any owner of property located within the urban renewal area may challenge the determination of blight made by the governing body pursuant to subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of this subsection (2) by filing, not later than thirty days after the date the determination of blight is made, a civil action in district court for the county in which the property is located pursuant to C.R.C.P. 106 (a)(4) for judicial review of the exercise of discretion on the part of the governing body in making the determination of blight. Any such action shall be governed in accordance with the procedures and other requirements specified in the rule; except that the governing body shall have the burden of proving that, in making its determination of blight, it has neither exceeded its jurisdiction nor abused its discretion.    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any determination made by the governing body pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subsection (2) shall be deemed a legislative determination and shall not be deemed a quasi-judicial determination.    Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, no transfer that satisfies the requirements of subsection (1) of this section shall be subject to the provisions of this subsection (2), subsection (3) or (4), or paragraph (a) of subsection (5) of this section.       Any authority seeking to acquire property by eminent domain in accordance with the requirements of subsection (2) of this section shall reimburse the owner of the property for reasonable attorney fees incurred by the owner in connection with the acquisition where the owner is the prevailing party on a challenge brought under paragraph (b) of subsection (2) of this section.      Any authority that exercises the power of eminent domain to transfer acquired property to another private party as authorized in accordance with the requirements of this section shall adopt relocation assistance and land acquisition policies to benefit displaced persons that are consistent with those set forth in article 56 of title 24, C.R.S., to the extent applicable to the facts of each specific property, and, at the time of the relocation of the owner or the occupant, shall provide compensation or other forms of assistance to any displaced person in accordance with such policies. In addition, in the case of a business concern displaced by the acquisition of property by eminent domain, the authority shall make a business interruption payment to the business concern not to exceed the lesser of ten thousand dollars or one-fourth of the average annual taxable income shown on the three most recent federal income tax returns of the business concern.    In any case where the acquisition of property by eminent domain by an authority displaces individuals, families, or business concerns, the authority shall make reasonable efforts to relocate such individuals, families, or business concerns within the urban renewal area, where such relocation is consistent with the uses provided in the urban renewal plan, or in areas within reasonable proximity of, or comparable to, the original location of such individuals, families, or business concerns.       For purposes of this section, unless the context otherwise requires:   “Blighted area” shall have the same meaning as set forth in section 31-25-103 (2); except that, for purposes of this section only, “blighted area” means an area that, in its present condition and use and, by reason of the presence of at least five of the factors specified in section (a) to (2)(l), substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of the municipality, retards the provision of housing accommodations, or constitutes an economic or social liability, and is a menace to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare.    “Private property” or “property” means, as applied to real property, only a fee ownership interest.        History. Source: L. 2004: Entire section added, p. 1742, § 1, effective June 4.    ANNOTATION   No clear indication in section of an urban renewal authority's powers to place the decision to condemn in the hands of a private party. The Urban Renewal Law mentions many conventional matters that urban renewal authorities could effectuate only though contracts with private parties. No provision, however, suggests that urban renewal authorities may, through contract, delegate to private parties the prerogative of taking property by eminent domain. Purpose of this section is to restrict eminent domain when used to acquire private property for transfer to another private party. Grants of power to exercise the sovereign right of eminent domain, in derogation of the common private rights of individuals, are generally strictly construed. Cornerstone Group XXII v. Wheat Ridge Urban Renewal Auth., 151 P.3d 601 (Colo. App. 2006), rev'd on other grounds, 176 P.3d 737 (Colo. 2007).   Because district court lacked authority to order the specific performance of a contractual obligation to exercise the core governmental power of eminent domain and urban renewal authority could not be estopped from abandoning its condemnation petitions, judgment of the court of appeals is reversed. However, because authority's agreement to acquire specific properties by condemnation, if necessary, does not render the contract void under reserved powers doctrine, case is remanded and district court directed to consider respondent's remaining claims, including breach of contract. Wheat Ridge Urban Renewal Auth. v. Cornerstone Group XXII, 176 P.3d 737 (Colo. 2007).