Colorado § 38-6-202 - Petition.

§ 38-6-202. Petition.

(1) The attorney for any municipality, in the name of said municipality, shall apply to the district court of the district in which the municipality is situated, by petition, which petition shall set forth the general nature of the improvement proposed to be established or made, a correct description of the water right required, the name of the owner of the water right, and those persons who may be damaged by the acquisition of the water right. Said petition shall pray for the appointment of three disinterested commissioners appointed by the court of jurisdiction, freeholders of real estate in Colorado, one to be a resident from the area affected by the proposed action, one to be a resident of the municipality bringing the action, and one to be a party who has no interest in the controversy, to determine the issue of the necessity of exercising eminent domain as proposed in the petition and, if the condemnation is to be allowed, to appraise and award the damages that each person damaged may sustain by reason of the appropriation and condemnation of the water right by the municipality and to perform such other duties as are in this part 2 enumerated.

(2) No municipality shall be allowed to condemn water rights, as provided in section 38-6-207, for any anticipated or future needs in excess of fifteen years, nor shall any municipality be allowed to condemn water rights that are appropriated to a prior public use.

Source: L. 75: Entire part added, p. 1408, § 1, effective July 1.

ANNOTATION

Law reviews. For comment, "Water: Statewide or Local Concern? City of Thornton v. Farmers Reservoir & Irrigation Co., 194 Colo. 526, 575 P.2d 382 (1978)", appearing below, see 56 Den. L. J. 625 (1979).

Provisions held unconstitutional. The provisions of this part, subsection (1) of this section, and §§ 38-6-203, 38-6-207 (1), (3), and (4), and 38-6-210, relating to the appointment, action, and effect of a commission to determine the issue of necessity of exercising eminent domain, are in conflict with the express grant of eminent domain powers to home rule cities by § 1 of art. XX, Colo. Const. City of Thornton v. Farmers Reservoir & Irrigation Co., 194 Colo. 526, 575 P.2d 382 (1978).

The 15-year provision of subsection (2), as applied to home-rule municipalities, is unconstitutional. City of Thornton v. Farmers Reservoir & Irrigation Co., 194 Colo. 526, 575 P.2d 382 (1978).