Rita M. Connerly (303) 894-4411 [email protected]

February 15, 2016 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Ms. JoAnn Groff Property Tax Administrator 1313 Sherman Street, Room 419 Denver, CO 80203 VIA EMAIL ([email protected]) RE:

Second Draft of Proposed Revisions to the Assessor’s Reference Library

Dear Ms. Groff: This firm represents a number of property owners and developers completing urban renewal projects. On their behalf, we respectfully object to the changes proposed by the Division to provide new restrictions on the timing of tax increment revenues not contemplated by current statutes. This issue is being litigated in District Court and no rules prematurely adjudicating legal questions should be added to the Assessor’s Reference Library (“ARL”) while litigation is pending. The division has opted not to propose amendments to the ARL regarding “urban level development” due the pendency of that matter in court and the Division should similarly refrain from revising the ARL to define the timing of the TIF. We also object to the new procedures for identifying and calculating base/increment values and, without repeating what many others have said, support and concur with the comments submitted by Mr. Benedetti in his letter dated August 26, 2015. We submit that the manner and methods by which the tax increment provisions are to be administered should not be written, as currently proposed, to create policy directly adverse to the legislative intent of the Urban Renewal Law by adding more of the tax increment to the base value. Urban renewal plans become controlling upon approval by the governing body. The proposed changes to the ARL appear to directly challenge the legislative powers of municipalities adopting urban renewal plans and circumvent the judicial review procedures available to contest such plans. The proposed changes to the ARL in regard to the reallocation of tax increment to the base value and the new restrictions on the timing of tax increment revenues, arguably are outside the administrative scope of the Property Tax Administrator’s authority, disregard the separation of powers doctrine and adversely threaten urban renewal projects and vested rights throughout the state.

1801 California Street  Suite 2600  Denver, Colorado 80202 t (303) 830-2400  f (303) 830-1033  www.fwlaw.com

Ms. Groff February 15, 2016 Page 2 We respectfully request your consideration of these comments and look forward to a revised draft of the ARL that supports the spirit, intent and literal meaning of the Urban Renewal Law.

Sincerely,

Rita M. Connerly FAIRFIELD AND WOODS, P.C.