Narrative Opinion Summary
The Colorado Court of Appeals upheld a summary judgment in favor of the Town of Johnstown in an annexation dispute with the Town of Berthoud. Berthoud contested Johnstown's annexation of five parcels, claiming standing under the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965, specifically § 31-12-116(1)(a). The trial court found Berthoud lacked standing as its boundary was not within one mile of the annexed area at the effective time of annexation. Additionally, Berthoud's annexation exceeded the statutory three-mile limit in one year, violating § 31-12-105(1)(e). Berthoud unsuccessfully argued for standing under Colorado Constitution Article II, § 30, which grants standing to landowners in the annexed area, not neighboring municipalities. The court distinguished the standing requirements for zoning versus annexation cases. Berthoud also challenged the trial court's cost award to Johnstown, but the court upheld it under C.R.C.P. 121, 1-22, allowing late-filed cost bills if reviewed by the court. The judgment was affirmed, and costs were awarded to Johnstown, with the concurrence of Judges Ney and Ruland.
Legal Issues Addressed
Annexation Boundary Limitationssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: A municipality's annexation extending its boundary more than three miles in one year violates section 31-12-105(1)(e).
Reasoning: Additionally, the court found that Berthoud's annexations violated section 31-12-105(1)(e) by extending its boundary more than three miles in one year.
Awarding Costs under C.R.C.P. 121, 1-22subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: A bill of costs can be considered by the court even if filed after the fifteen-day window, provided that the court reviews it.
Reasoning: Johnstown's costs bill was considered by the trial court despite being filed late and was uncontested by Berthoud, leading to the award being upheld.
Standing Based on Colorado Constitution Article II, § 30subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Only landowners within the annexed area, not neighboring municipalities, have standing to contest annexations unless they own land in the annexed area.
Reasoning: This provision allows landowners within the proposed annexation area the right to contest annexations, but does not extend this right to neighboring municipalities unless they own land in the annexed area.
Standing in Zoning vs. Annexation Casessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Standards for standing in rezoning cases differ from those in annexation cases, as established by relevant case law.
Reasoning: Berthoud's analogy to adjacent landowners challenging rezoning was rejected, emphasizing that the standards for standing in zoning cases differ fundamentally from those in annexation cases.
Standing under Municipal Annexation Act of 1965subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that a municipality must have its boundary within one mile of the contested annexation area to have standing under § 31-12-116(1)(a).
Reasoning: The trial court ruled that Berthoud lacked standing because its boundary was not within one mile of the contested area at the time Johnstown's annexation became effective, as required by the statute.