Case Summary
Issue:
Whether the condemnation of private property to be conveyed to a private developer in order to generate increased tax revenues constitutes “public use” under the Colorado Constitution?
Plaintiff:
Lochness Properties, Inc.
Defendant:
City of Sheridan, Colorado; Sheridan Redevelopment Agency; Mary L. Carter, Mayor, City of Sheridan, and Chair, Sheridan Redevelopment Agency, in her official capacities; and R. Landau de Laguna, Chanele Beacham, Cynthia Radke, Dallas Hall, Cliff Mueller, and Jose Tafoya, all City Council members and Commissioners of the Sheridan Redevelopment Agency, in their official capacities
Join the Fight
Since 1977, MSLF has fought to protect private property rights, individual liberties, and economic freedom. MSLF is a nonprofit public interest legal foundation. We represent clients pro bono and receive no government funding. Make your 100% tax deductible contribution today and join the fight.
Case History
In 1997, Sheridan lost certain tax revenue after a large retailer left its jurisdiction, and, unable to meet its bond obligations, the City lost its municipal building. In late 2002, it began discussions with a developer on an urban renewal project. In early 2003, the City generated a “citizen petition” urging itself to conduct a “blight” study of the area to be included in the project, even though 75 percent of the project area is not blighted.
In 2003, it completed the study, put a moratorium on building in the “blighted” area, created a redevelopment agency, and adopted a redevelopment plan. In June 2004, the City awarded the project to the developer it had met with in late 2002. In April 2005, the City approved a redevelopment plan and, on November 23, 2005, notified Lochness Properties of its intent to condemn Lochness’ property. Lochness argued the City’s acts violate the Colorado Constitution’s bar on “takings” for “private use” and its procedural requirements, the U.S. Constitution’s “Due Process Clause,” and various Colorado statutory requirements.
On December 8, 2005, Lochness Properties, Inc., filed its complaint to which the Defendants responded with a motion to dismiss. On February 6, 2006, Lochness filed its response to the motion to dismiss.
