Hepp v Bloulder County Assessor

On review, the county contended, inter alia, that the trial court erred in classifying the subject parcels as agricultural land. The appellate court found that the past, pre-mining agricultural use and the intended future agricultural use of the subject parcels was and would be as a "ranch" for the grazing of livestock. However, the taxpayer failed to meet the criteria for establishing qualifying conservation practices under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-1-102(1.6)(a)(I) (2004).

There was nothing in the mining reclamation plan concerning restoration of the land for grazing or other agricultural use, and there was no evidence in the record indicating that the mining reclamation plan was approved by the appropriate conservation district. The appellate court concluded that the subject parcels did not qualify for classification as agricultural land for the tax year in question as a matter of law, and the trial court erred in ruling otherwise.

However, the trial court's finding that the property was used for mining purposes and that a substantial building was on one of the parcels supported its refusal to uphold the county's classification of the subject parcels as vacant land.