Colorado § 37-41-120 - Fiscal year - directors to fix levy.

§ 37-41-120. Fiscal year - directors to fix levy.

(1) The fiscal year of each irrigation district in this state shall commence on January 1 in each year. It is the duty of the board of directors on or before October 15 in each year to determine the amount of money required to meet the maintenance, operating, and current expenses for the ensuing fiscal year and to certify by resolution to the board of county commissioners of the county in which the office of the district is located said amount, together with any additional amount which may be necessary to meet any deficiency in the payment of said expenses theretofore incurred. The board of directors may fix the amount payable for any tract containing one acre or less and, if so, similarly shall certify this amount to the board of county commissioners. The board of directors shall also fix the amount payable by each tract within any district with which the United States has made a contract and shall certify the same to the board of county commissioners, and the amount so fixed shall be in accordance with the federal reclamation laws and the public notices, orders, and regulations issued thereunder and shall be in compliance with any contracts made by the United States with any owners of said lands and in compliance further with the contracts between the district and the United States. The obligation of every irrigation district contracting with the United States shall be deemed a district debt. Said resolution shall be termed the annual appropriation resolution for the next fiscal year, and no expenditure to be paid out of such fund shall exceed in any one year the amounts fixed for such expenses in the annual appropriation resolution, except as provided in section 37-41-129.

(2) The annual appropriation resolution described in subsection (1) of this section must include the amount of money needed to meet loan obligations and all amounts payable by landowners to the irrigation district in accordance with loans issued to the landowners pursuant to section 37-41-113 (9) and shall indicate the amount payable by each tract within the irrigation district for which a landowner has received a loan.

Source: L. 05: p. 259, § 18. R.S. 08: § 3457. L. 13: p. 384, § 1. L. 15: p. 302, § 1. L. 17: p. 302, § 8. C.L. § 1994. CSA: C. 90, § 394. CRS 53: § 149-1-18. L. 63: p. 1000, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 150-1-18. L. 2022: Entire section amended, (HB 22-1092), ch. 84, p. 407, § 5, effective August 10.

ANNOTATION

The power given under the act was to assess special improvement taxes only; therefore it is constitutional. Interstate Trust Co. v. Montezuma Valley Irrigation Dist., 66 Colo. 219, 181 P. 123 (1919).

Section provides for local improvements or special assessments. In no sense can it be said that, under the act in question, the assessments to pay the bonds are to be levied or collected in order that one may take another's property for his own exclusive use. Nor does it follow that the method must be assimilated to and follow exactly the mode provided in the constitution for the assessment and collection of taxes for general state purposes. The nature of the assessments is not for local improvements, which, however, eventuate in the advancement of the public good, and such assessments and collections can be lawfully made. Interstate Trust Co. v. Montezuma Valley Irrigation Dist., 66 Colo. 219, 181 P. 123 (1919).

Irrigation district bonds, bond interest, and warrant liens are special assessment liens and not blanket liens, and cumulative tax levies for the purpose of paying such irrigation district indebtedness cannot be made or enforced. Alpha Corp. v. Denver-Greeley Valley Irrigation Dist., 110 Colo. 179, 132 P.2d 448 (1942).

The additional amount which may be levied under this section is not for the purpose of paying current warrants, and has nothing to do with it, and the warrants issued in payment of the current expense would be no more entitled to be paid out of this fund than would the previous warrants out of the levy for current expense. Eberhart v. Canon, 61 Colo. 340, 157 P. 189 (1916).

District cannot add to the yearly expenses an amount sufficient to pay warrants of preceding years. The phrase, "deficiency in the payment of said expenses theretofore incurred", does not empower, and does not purport to empower, the district to add to the yearly expenses, by cumulative levies, an amount sufficient to cover unpaid warrants for the expenses of preceding years. To strain the intent of the statute to this construction would be to compel only a portion of the landowners, perhaps but one of them, to bear the whole burden of the district. This is not only inconsistent with and contrary to the theory of special assessments, which is that assessments shall be in proportion to the benefits conferred, but amounts to confiscation in the guise of taxes for local improvements. Interstate Trust Co. v. Montezuma Valley Irrigation Dist., 66 Colo. 219, 181 P. 123 (1919).

Section requires that the directors anticipate and certify the amounts necessary but, appreciating the uncertainties that might arise from determining these questions in advance, the general assembly attempted to meet them by the latter portion of this section in providing that, upon the following year, such additional amount might be raised as is necessary to meet any deficiency in the payment of the expenses theretofore incurred. Eberhart v. Canon, 61 Colo. 340, 157 P. 189 (1916); Henrylyn Irrigation Dist. v. Thomas, 66 Colo. 296, 181 P. 979 (1919).

Writ compelling directors to certify amount to the commissioners must show prior demand and refusal. Where it is sought to compel the directors of an irrigating district to certify to the county commissioners the amount necessary to pay interest on outstanding bonds of such district, the writ must show prior demand and refusal. Henrylyn Irrigation Dist. v. Thomas, 66 Colo. 296, 181 P. 979 (1919).

The owner of a minority of the bonds of an irrigation district is entitled to mandamus to compel the directors of the district to determine the amount of money required to discharge his holdings, and certify the same to the county commissioners. He is entitled to satisfaction of the bonds which he holds and is not required to go further. Henrylyn Irrigation Dist. v. Thomas, 66 Colo. 300, 181 P. 980 (1919).

If action appears injurious to other holders, they must complain. If, when mandamus is awarded, the action of the board appears injurious to the holders of other bonds outstanding, it is for these holders to complain. Henrylyn Irrigation Dist. v. Thomas, 66 Colo. 300, 181 P. 980 (1919).

Holders of unpaid warrants of preceding years may take land at tax sale in lieu of warrants. When all assessments required by law have been levied, the district is not empowered to add to the yearly expense by a cumulative levy, to cover warrants issued for the expenses of preceding years. The holders of warrants issued in preceding years, and which remain unpaid, by reason of the defaults of the taxpayers, may take the land itself at the tax sale, in lieu of the warrant. Interstate Trust Co. v. Montezuma Valley Irrigation Dist., 66 Colo. 219, 181 P. 123 (1919).