Colorado § 31-25-105 - Powers of an authority.

§ 31-25-105. Powers of an authority.

(1) Every authority has all the powers necessary or convenient to carry out and effectuate the purposes and provisions of this part 1, including, but not limited to, the following powers in addition to others granted in this part 1:

(a) To sue and to be sued; to adopt and have a seal and to alter the same at pleasure; to have perpetual succession; to make, and from time to time amend and repeal, bylaws, orders, rules, and regulations to effectuate the provisions of this part 1;

(b) To undertake urban renewal projects and to make and execute any and all contracts and other instruments which it may deem necessary or convenient to the exercise of its powers under this part 1, including, but not limited to, contracts for advances, loans, grants, and contributions from the federal government or any other source;

(c) To arrange for the furnishing or repair by any person or public body of services, privileges, works, streets, roads, public utilities, or educational or other facilities for or in connection with a project of the authority; to dedicate property acquired or held by it for public works, improvements, facilities, utilities, and purposes; and to agree, in connection with any of its contracts, to any conditions that it deems reasonable and appropriate under this part 1, including, but not limited to, conditions attached to federal financial assistance, and to include in any contract made or let in connection with any project of the authority provisions to fulfill such of said conditions as it may deem reasonable and appropriate;

(d) To arrange with the municipality or other public body to plan, replan, zone, or rezone any part of the area of the municipality or of such other public body, as the case may be, in connection with any project proposed or being undertaken by the authority under this part 1;

(e) To enter, with the consent of the owner, upon any building or property in order to make surveys or appraisals and to obtain an order for this purpose from a court of competent jurisdiction in the event entry is denied or resisted; to acquire any property by purchase, lease, option, gift, grant, bequest, devise, or otherwise to acquire any interest in property by condemnation, including a fee simple absolute title thereto, in the manner provided by the laws of this state for the exercise of the power of eminent domain by any other public body (and property already devoted to a public use may be acquired in a like manner except that no property belonging to the federal government or to a public body may be acquired without its consent); except that any acquisition of any interest in property by condemnation by an authority must be approved as part of an urban renewal plan or substantial modification thereof, as provided in section 31-25-107, by a majority vote of the governing body of the municipality in which such property is located, and the acquisition of property by condemnation by an authority shall also satisfy the requirements of section 31-25-105.5; to hold, improve, clear, or prepare for redevelopment any such property; to mortgage, pledge, hypothecate, or otherwise encumber or dispose of its property; and to insure or provide for the insurance of any property or operations of the authority against any risks or hazards; except that no provision of any other law with respect to the planning or undertaking of projects or the acquisition, clearance, or disposition of property by public bodies shall restrict an authority exercising powers under this part 1 in the exercise of such functions with respect to a project of such authority unless the general assembly specifically so states;

(f) (I) To invest any of its funds not required for immediate disbursement in property or in securities in which public bodies may legally invest funds subject to their control pursuant to part 6 of article 75 of title 24, C.R.S., and to redeem such bonds as it has issued at the redemption price established therein or to purchase such bonds at less than redemption price, all such bonds so redeemed or purchased to be canceled;

(II) To deposit any funds not required for immediate disbursement in any depository authorized in section 24-75-603, C.R.S. For the purpose of making such deposits, the authority may appoint, by written resolution, one or more persons to act as custodians of the funds of the authority. Such persons shall give surety bonds in such amounts and form and for such purposes as the authority requires.

(g) To borrow money and to apply for and accept advances, loans, grants, and contributions from the federal government or other source for any of the purposes of this part 1 and to give such security as may be required;

(h) To make such appropriations and expenditures of its funds and to set up, establish, and maintain such general, separate, or special funds and bank accounts or other accounts as it deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this part 1;

(i) To make or have made and to submit or resubmit to the governing body for appropriate action the authority's proposed plans and modifications thereof necessary to the carrying out of the purposes of this part 1, such plan shall include, but not be limited to:

(I) Plans to assist the municipality in the latter's preparation of a workable program for utilizing appropriate private and public resources to eliminate and prevent the development or spread of slum and blighted areas, to encourage needed urban rehabilitation, to provide for the redevelopment of slum and blighted areas, or to undertake such activities or other feasible municipal activities as may be suitably employed to achieve the objectives of such workable program, which program may include, without limitation, provision for: The prevention of the spread of blight into areas of the municipality which are free from blight through diligent enforcement of housing, zoning, and occupancy controls and standards; the rehabilitation or conservation of slum and blighted areas or portions thereof by replanning, removing congestion, providing public improvements, and encouraging rehabilitation and repair of deteriorated or deteriorating structures; and the clearance and redevelopment of slum and blighted areas or portions thereof;

(II) Urban renewal plans;

(III) Preliminary plans outlining proposed urban renewal activities for neighborhoods of the municipality to embrace two or more urban renewal areas;

(IV) Plans for the relocation of those individuals, families, and business concerns situated in the urban renewal area which will be displaced by the urban renewal project, which relocation plans, without limitation, may include appropriate data setting forth a feasible method for the temporary relocation of such individuals and families and showing that there will be provided, in the urban renewal area or in other areas not generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means of the individuals and families so displaced, decent, safe, and sanitary dwellings equal in number to the number of and available to such individuals and families and reasonably accessible to their places of employment;

(V) Plans for undertaking a program of voluntary repair and rehabilitation of buildings and improvements and for the enforcement of state and local laws, codes, and regulations relating to the use of land and the use and occupancy of buildings and improvements and to the repair, rehabilitation, demolition, or removal of buildings and improvements;

(VI) Financing plans, maps, plats, appraisals, title searches, surveys, studies, and other preliminary plans and work necessary or pertinent to any proposed plans or modifications;

(j) To make reasonable relocation payments to or with respect to individuals, families, and business concerns situated in an urban renewal area that will be displaced as provided in subparagraph (IV) of paragraph (i) of this subsection (1) for moving expenses and actual direct losses of property including, for business concerns, goodwill and lost profits that are reasonably related to relocation of the business, resulting from their displacement for which reimbursement or compensation is not otherwise made, including the making of such payments financed by the federal government;

(k) To develop, test, and report methods and techniques and to carry out demonstrations and other activities for the prevention and the elimination of slum and blighted areas within the municipality;

(l) To rent or to provide by any other means suitable quarters for the use of the authority or to accept the use of such quarters as may be furnished by the municipality or any other public body, and to equip such quarters with such furniture, furnishings, equipment, records, and supplies as the authority may deem necessary to enable it to exercise its powers under this part 1; and

(m) Pursuant to section 31-25-107 (9)(a)(II), to authorize the distribution of tax increment revenue to finance costs needed for one or more eligible projects sited in a renewable energy reinvestment area.

Source: L. 75: Entire title R&RE, p. 1163, § 1, effective July 1. L. 79: (1)(f) amended, p. 1619, § 21, effective June 8. L. 89: (1)(f)(I) amended, p. 1115, § 27, effective July 1. L. 90: (1)(e) amended, p. 1480, § 1, effective April 5. L. 99: (1)(j) amended, p. 530, § 2, effective May 3. L. 2004: (1)(e) amended, p. 1746, § 4, effective June 4. L. 2026: (1)(l) amended and (1)(m) added, (HB 26-1268), ch. 160, p. 957, § 4, effective August 12.

Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 31-25-105 as it existed prior to 1975.

ANNOTATION

Law reviews. For comment discussing church condemnation, see 46 U. Colo. L. Rev. 43 (1974). For article, "Economic Development Incentives for Colorado Municipalities", see 19 Colo. Law. 239 (1990).

No constitutional right to relocation benefits. Persons displaced by redevelopment project have no constitutional right to relocation benefits or assistance. Auraria Businessmen Against Confiscation, Inc. v. Denver Urban Renewal Auth., 183 Colo. 441, 517 P.2d 845 (1974).

Federal statutes not determinative of right to recovery. In a condemnation action under the statutes and constitution of Colorado, a landowner's right to compensation and the extent thereof must be determined by the applicable law of Colorado, so the right to recovery is not dependent upon nor limited by federal statutes. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Steiner Am. Corp., 31 Colo. App. 125, 500 P.2d 983 (1972).

No clear indication in subsection (1)(e) of an urban renewal authority's powers to place the decision to condemn in the hands of a private party. The Urban Renewal Law mentions many conventional matters that urban renewal authorities could effectuate only through contracts with private parties. No provision, however, suggests that urban renewal authorities may, through contract, delegate to private parties the prerogative of taking property by eminent domain. Subsection (1)(e) speaks of exercising the power of eminent domain "in the manner provided by the laws of this state", none of which authorizes the delegation of that power by contract to private entities. Grants of power to exercise the sovereign right of eminent domain, in derogation of the common private rights of individuals, are generally strictly construed. Cornerstone Group XXII v. Wheat Ridge Urban Renewal Auth., 151 P.3d 601 (Colo. App. 2006), rev'd on other grounds, 176 P.3d 737 (Colo. 2007).

Because district court lacked authority to order the specific performance of a contractual obligation to exercise the core governmental power of eminent domain and urban renewal authority could not be estopped from abandoning its condemnation petitions, judgment of the court of appeals is reversed. However, because authority's agreement to acquire specific properties by condemnation, if necessary, does not render the contract void under reserved powers doctrine, case is remanded and district court directed to consider respondent's remaining claims, including breach of contract. Wheat Ridge Urban Renewal Auth. v. Cornerstone Group XXII, 176 P.3d 737 (Colo. 2007).

Purpose of subsection (1)(j) is to provide supplemental assistance for particular losses incurred by reason of dislocation, in an effort to reduce the burden falling on the property owner whose property is condemned. Auraria Businessmen Against Confiscation, Inc. v. Denver Urban Renewal Auth., 183 Colo. 441, 517 P.2d 845 (1974).

Subsection (1)(j) does not create additional elements compensable under eminent domain laws. Auraria Businessmen Against Confiscation, Inc. v. Denver Urban Renewal Auth., 183 Colo. 441, 517 P.2d 845 (1974).

Small businessmen not denied equal protection. Subsection (1)(j) of this section and §§ 24-56-103, 24-56-104, and 24-56-105 do not create discriminatory and unjustified classifications which deny small businessmen equal protection of the law. Auraria Businessmen Against Confiscation, Inc. v. Denver Urban Renewal Auth., 183 Colo. 441, 517 P.2d 845 (1974).

Omission of supplemental payments for loss of goodwill and profit in subsection (1)(j) does not render it unconstitutional. Auraria Businessmen Against Confiscation, Inc. v. Denver Urban Renewal Auth., 183 Colo. 441, 517 P.2d 845 (1974).

Owner entitled to value of land and improvements. When land occupied for business purposes is taken, the owner is entitled to compensation only for the value of the land and improvements. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Cook, 186 Colo. 182, 526 P.2d 652 (1974).

But owner is not entitled to value of any business conducted on land that is taken. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Cook, 186 Colo. 182, 526 P.2d 652 (1974).

And evidence of business profits inadmissible. On the theory that profits derived from a business are more a function of the entrepreneurial skills of management than the value of the land, evidence of business profits is not admissible as a determinant of the fair market value of the condemned property. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Cook, 186 Colo. 182, 526 P.2d 652 (1974).

The business profit rule, long followed in Colorado, requires the exclusion of business profits generated by an enterprise on the property. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Berglund-Cherne Co., 193 Colo. 562, 568 P.2d 478 (1977).

Except to show use of property. Under the business profits rule, evidence of the character and volume of business conducted on condemned property is admissible only for the limited purpose of showing a use for which the property may be utilized. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Cook, 186 Colo. 182, 526 P.2d 652 (1974); Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Berglund-Cherne Co., 193 Colo. 562, 568 P.2d 478 (1977).

And evidence of gross sales falls within purview of the business profits rule and, therefore, is inadmissible as a determinant of a reasonable rental value. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Cook, 186 Colo. 182, 526 P.2d 652 (1974).

Because gross sales, like profits, are more inextricably tied to management and administration of a business than to the value of the property upon which the business is situated, and thus, the same reasons that cause the amount of profits to be an inappropriate measure of the value of the land are applicable to the use of gross sales figures, albeit to a lesser degree. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Cook, 186 Colo. 182, 526 P.2d 652 (1974).

Fixtures are a part of the realty for which compensation must be paid to the owner by the condemning authority. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Steiner Am. Corp., 31 Colo. App. 125, 500 P.2d 983 (1972).

The foundation for the business profits rule is that (1) the business itself is not being condemned and can be relocated, and (2) business profits are more a function of the entrepreneurial skills of management than of the value of the land. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Berglund-Cherne Co., 193 Colo. 562, 568 P.2d 478 (1977).

A crucial distinction must be made between "profits derived from a business conducted on the premises" and "profits derived from the land itself". Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Berglund-Cherne Co., 193 Colo. 562, 568 P.2d 478 (1977).

Only the first is inadmissible under the business profits rule. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Berglund-Cherne Co., 193 Colo. 562, 568 P.2d 478 (1977).

Evidence of farm and rental income is admissible as "profit derived from the land itself". Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Berglund-Cherne Co., 193 Colo. 562, 568 P.2d 478 (1977).

The fair economic rental value of commercial property is also evidence of "profit derived from the land itself" and is therefore admissible as a determinant of value in conjunction with the income approach. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Berglund-Cherne Co., 193 Colo. 562, 568 P.2d 478 (1977).

The capitalization of income approach may be used to determine the value of owner-occupied property. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Berglund-Cherne Co., 193 Colo. 562, 568 P.2d 478 (1977).

No purpose is served by limiting testimony to one approach or to the most appropriate method of attaining an opinion as to value. Recognition should be given to all relevant factors which tend to provide a means for arriving at a fair evaluation, and therefore, the better rule is to permit the use of capitalization of income method even if other methods are available. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Berglund-Cherne Co., 193 Colo. 562, 568 P.2d 478 (1977).

Payment of relocation benefits to persons displaced by urban renewal project does not constitute unconstitutional expenditure of public funds in the aid of private persons. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Byrne, 618 P.2d 1374 (Colo. 1980).

Applied in Interstate Trust Bldg. Co. v. Denver Urban Renewal Auth., 172 Colo. 427, 473 P.2d 978 (1970).