Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 31-12-119 (2024)

Disconnection of territory because of failure to serve

✓ C.R.S. 2024: the 2025 and 2026 sessions are not included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The landowners of any tract or contiguous tracts of land aggregating five acres or more located on a boundary of the municipality at the time of the disconnection action may, three or more years after annexation, petition for disconnection from the municipality if such municipality does not, upon demand, provide the same municipal services on the same general terms and conditions as the rest of the municipality receives. The procedure for such disconnection shall be as set forth in parts 6 and 7 of this article, insofar as consistent with this section. To the extent that such parts are inconsistent with this section, the provisions of this section shall prevail when the action is based on failure of the municipality to serve an annexed area.

Source: L. 75: Entire title R&RE, p. 1091, § 1, effective July 1.

Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 31-8-119 as it existed prior to 1975.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1980–2016 · leading case: Radcliff Props. Ltd. P'ship, LLLP v. City of Sheridan, 2012 COA 82, 296 P.3d 310.
Radcliff Props. Ltd. P'ship, LLLP v. City of Sheridan, 2012 COA 82, 296 P.3d 310. · cites it 30× “T3 On July 6, 2010, plaintiffs filed a petition seeking to disconnect certain of their properties from Sheridan pursuant to section 31-12-119, C.R.8.2011. That statute permits qualifying landowners to disconnect their property from a municipality when the municipality has failed…”
GERALNES BV v. City of Greenwood Vill., Colo., 583 F. Supp. 830 (D. Colo. 1984). · cites it 16× “§ 31-12-119 Defendant claims plaintiffs have not met the requirements for disconnection under Colo.Rev.Stat. § 31-12-119 and thus are now precluded from seeking such relief.”
Golden Run Estates, LLC v. Town of Erie, 2016 COA 145, 401 P.3d 87. · cites it 5× “in accordance with” section 31-12-119 C.R.S. 2016; Id. at 838 .”
Morgan v. Town of Palmer Lake, 608 P.2d 852 (Colo. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 9× “Subsequently, plaintiffs brought this action asserting, inter alia, that by virtue of the Town’s failure to provide water to the subdivision, on the same basis that water was supplied to other areas of the town, they were entitled to disconnection under § 31-12-119, C.R.S. 1973…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.