Opinion
22SC799
11-14-2022
Educhildren v. County of Douglas Board of Equalization
As to the following issues:
Whether the district court erred in concluding, as a matter of law, that under C.R.S. Section 39-1-104(11)(b)(I) defendants had the discretion, but were not obligated to revalue taxpayers' properties for tax year 2020 based upon unusual conditions occurring in 2020.
Whether the district court erred in concluding, as a matter of law, that under C.R.S. Section 39-1-104(11)(b)(I) any unusual condition that requires revaluation would have to arise during the base period for which the level of value was determined for the tax year in question.
Whether the district court erred in concluding, as a matter of law, that taxpayers' were not entitled to the remedies they sought because: a. Douglas was not required to perform a duty under C.R.S. Section 39-1-104(11)(b)(I) therefore Rule 106(a) relief (mandamus) was not available; b. The district court was not authorized to remand the case to the Douglas County Assessor for revaluation under C.R.S. Section 39-8-108 (de novo relief); and c. The taxpayers did not state a plausible claim for relief justifying declaratory judgment relief.