Opinion ID: 2520528
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Colorado Constitution Article X, Section 3(1)(b)

Text: The controlling provision of the Colorado Constitution applicable to this case is article X, section 3(1)(b), which provides that the valuation of a producing oil or gas leasehold for taxation purposes is based upon the value of the unprocessed material. [T]he valuation for assessment for ... lands or leaseholds producing oil or gas, as defined by law, shall be a portion of the actual annual or actual average annual production therefrom, based upon the value of the unprocessed material, according to procedures prescribed by law for different types of minerals. Colo. Const. art. X, § 3(1)(b) (emphasis added). [5] The Colorado electorate adopted this provision in 1982 by referendum as part of a more general overhaul of the constitution's valuation and assessment provisions for property taxation. [6] The court's duty in interpreting a constitutional amendment is to give effect to the will of people. In re Interrogatories Relating to the Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund, 913 P.2d 533, 538 (Colo.1996). The Legislative Council's analysis of measures for the 1982 election contains the brief and plain statement that, if the voters approved the General Assembly's referred measure, the valuation for assessment of producing mines and of lands or leaseholds producing oil or gas would be a portion of the value of the actual annual or average annual production of the unprocessed material. Legislative Council of the Colo. Gen. Assembly, An Analysis of 1982 Ballot Proposals 2 (Research Publ'n No. 269, 1982) (Blue Book). The arguments listed by the Legislative Council for the overall amendment emphasize: (1) providing stability and uniformity in the level of valuations across Colorado's counties; (2) limiting the authority of the General Assembly to adjust the level of assessment of various classes of property; (3) protecting the tax base of local governments; and (4) assuring residential, commercial, industrial, public utility, and agricultural property owners that the basic valuation for assessment would not change dramatically without a change in the state constitution. Id. at 6-7. The arguments for the overall amendment do not contain a specific reference to its provision for basing mineral property taxation on the value of the unprocessed material. However, the arguments against the amendment criticize it on the basis that the unprocessed material has little value. Id. at 9.