Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101 (2026)

Legislative declaration - presumption of charitable purpose

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The general assembly recognizes that only the judiciary may make a final decision as to whether or not any given property is used for charitable purposes within the meaning of the Colorado constitution; nevertheless, in order to guide members of the public and public officials alike in the making of their day-to-day decisions and to assist in the avoidance of litigation, the general assembly hereby finds, declares, and determines that the uses of property that are set forth in this part 1 as uses for charitable purposes benefit the people of Colorado and lessen the burdens of government by performing services that government would otherwise be required to perform. Therefore, property used for such purposes shall be presumed to be used, or owned and used, as applicable, solely and exclusively for strictly charitable purposes and not for private gain or corporate profit, if applicable, and, consequently, property used for such purposes is entitled to be exempt from the levy and collection of property tax pursuant to the provisions of this part 1 and the Colorado constitution. This legislative finding, declaration, determination, and presumption shall not be questioned by the administrator and shall be entitled to great weight in any and every court.

Source: L. 89: Entire article R&RE, p. 1470, § 1, effective April 23. L. 2002: Entire section amended, p. 1032, § 66, effective June 1. L. 2022: Entire section amended, (HB 22- 1006), ch. 289, p. 2067, § 4, effective August 10.

Cross references: For the legislative declaration in HB 22-1006, see section 1 of chapter 289, Session Laws of Colorado 2022.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 27 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1975–2025 · leading case: Maurer v. Young Life, 779 P.2d 1317 (Colo. 1989).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Maurer v. Young Life, 779 P.2d 1317 (Colo. 1989). · cites it 19× “(1982) (all property is taxable unless expressly exempted); §§ 39-3-101 to 39-3-112 (outlining property uses which qualify for tax exemptions).”

West Brandt Found., Inc. v. Carper, 652 P.2d 564 (Colo. 1982). · cites it 5× “The basis for the property tax exemption West Brandt seeks is Article X, Section 5 of the Colorado Constitution, which provides: Property, real and personal, that is used solely and exclusively for religious worship, for schools or for strictly charitable purposes .”

West-Brandt Found., Inc. v. Carper, 608 P.2d 339 (Colo. 1980). · cites it 6× “” Section 39-3-101, C.R.S. 1973: “(1) The following shall be exempt from general taxation .”

United States Transmission Sys., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 715 P.2d 1249 (Colo. 1986). · cites it 4× “During a hearing held by the district court, the company argued further that its rights in the circuits owned by Mountain Bell, AT & T and MCI were, at most, intangible personal property and, as such, specifically exempted from property taxation by section 39-3-101(1)®, 16B…”

Denver Beechcraft, Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 681 P.2d 945 (Colo. 1984). · cites it 6× “Section 39-3-101(l)(d), 16B C.R.S. (Supp.”

Anderson Ranch Arts Found. v. Prop. Tax Adm'r, 729 P.2d 992 (Colo. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 10× “The version of the statute at issue here, § 39-3-101(1), C.R.S. (1982 Repl.Vol. 16B), states as follows: “(1) The following shall be exempt from general taxation under the provisions of articles 1 to 13 of this title: [[Image here]] (g)(1) Property, real and personal, that is…”

Inst. for Rsch. on Soc. Problems v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 748 P.2d 1346 (Colo. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 5× “In 1983, the Institute applied to the Board for a tax exemption pursuant to § 39-3-101(l)(g)(I), C.R.S. (1982 Repl. Vol.”

Am. Water Works Ass'n v. Bd. of Assess. App., 563 P.2d 359 (Colo. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 2× “V; § 39-3-101(1)(g)(I), C.R.S.1973. While tax exemption statutes are strictly construed, Young Life Campaign v.”

First Nat'l Bank v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 538 P.2d 427 (Colo. 1975). · cites it 4× “Now section 39-3-101 (I )(g), C.R.S. 1973.”

Gen. Conf. of Church of God - 7th Day v. Carper, 557 P.2d 832 (Colo. 1976). · cites it 2× “1 Now section 39-3-101 (1)(e)(I), C.R.S. 1973. 2 We note that the legislative classification of exemptions religious to property has been expanded since Young Life to include properties not then eligible for exemption.”

First Christian Church v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 711 P.2d 721 (Colo. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “The Board found that the east 450 feet of the property was not being used by the church and, accordingly, that portion of the property did not meet the requirements of § 39-3-101(l)(e), C.R.S. (1982 Repl.Vol. 10).”

W. Slavonic Ass'n v. Prop. Tax Adm'r, 835 P.2d 621 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 4× “On appeal, petitioner claims error only as to the Board’s denial of exemption for 1990, in light of § 39-3-101, et seq., C.R.S. (1991 Cum. Supp.”

Show all 27 citing cases →

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(1) — 4 cases

United States Transmission Sys., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 715 P.2d 1249 (Colo. 1986). “During a hearing held by the district court, the company argued further that its rights in the circuits owned by Mountain Bell, AT & T and MCI were, at most, intangible personal property and, as such, specifically exempted from property taxation by section 39-3-101(1)®, 16B…”

First Nat'l Bank v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 538 P.2d 427 (Colo. 1975). “Now section 39-3-101 (I )(g), C.R.S. 1973.”

Anderson Ranch Arts Found. v. Prop. Tax Adm'r, 729 P.2d 992 (Colo. Ct. App. 1986). “The version of the statute at issue here, § 39-3-101(1), C.R.S. (1982 Repl.Vol. 16B), states as follows: “(1) The following shall be exempt from general taxation under the provisions of articles 1 to 13 of this title: [[Image here]] (g)(1) Property, real and personal, that is…”

Maurer v. Denver Urban Econ. Dev. Corp., 781 P.2d 111 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989).

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(1)(e) — 1 case

St. Mark Coptic Orthodox Church v. Colorado State Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 762 P.2d 775 (Colo. Ct. App. 1988).

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(1)(g)(I) — 1 case

Am. Water Works Ass'n v. Bd. of Assess. App., 563 P.2d 359 (Colo. Ct. App. 1976). “V; § 39-3-101(1)(g)(I), C.R.S.1973. While tax exemption statutes are strictly construed, Young Life Campaign v.”

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(a) — 1 case

In Re Brent Explorations, Inc., 91 B.R. 104 (Bankr.D. Colo. 1988).

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(d) — 1 case

Citibank, N.A. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 826 P.2d 871 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992).

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(l) — 1 case

Maurer v. Denver Urban Econ. Dev. Corp., 781 P.2d 111 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989).

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(l)(c) — 1 case

Se. Colorado Water Conservancy Dist. v. Fort Lyon Canal Co., 720 P.2d 133 (Colo. 1986).

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(l)(d) — 1 case

Denver Beechcraft, Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 681 P.2d 945 (Colo. 1984). “Section 39-3-101(l)(d), 16B C.R.S. (Supp.”

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(l)(e) — 3 cases

Maurer v. Young Life, 779 P.2d 1317 (Colo. 1989). “(1982) (all property is taxable unless expressly exempted); §§ 39-3-101 to 39-3-112 (outlining property uses which qualify for tax exemptions).”

First Christian Church v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 711 P.2d 721 (Colo. Ct. App. 1985). “The Board found that the east 450 feet of the property was not being used by the church and, accordingly, that portion of the property did not meet the requirements of § 39-3-101(l)(e), C.R.S. (1982 Repl.Vol. 10).”

Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 696 P.2d 326 (Colo. 1985).

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(l)(g) — 2 cases

Maurer v. Denver Urban Econ. Dev. Corp., 781 P.2d 111 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989).

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(l)(g)(I) — 5 cases

Inst. for Rsch. on Soc. Problems v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 748 P.2d 1346 (Colo. Ct. App. 1987). “In 1983, the Institute applied to the Board for a tax exemption pursuant to § 39-3-101(l)(g)(I), C.R.S. (1982 Repl. Vol.”

AM/FM Int'l v. Huddleston, 920 P.2d 815 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995).

Maurer v. Denver Urban Econ. Dev. Corp., 781 P.2d 111 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989).

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(l)(g)(I)(A) — 3 cases

West Brandt Found., Inc. v. Carper, 652 P.2d 564 (Colo. 1982). “The basis for the property tax exemption West Brandt seeks is Article X, Section 5 of the Colorado Constitution, which provides: Property, real and personal, that is used solely and exclusively for religious worship, for schools or for strictly charitable purposes .”

Maurer v. Denver Urban Econ. Dev. Corp., 781 P.2d 111 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989).

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(l)(g)(I)(B) — 1 case

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(l)(g)(III) — 2 cases

AM/FM Int'l v. Huddleston, 920 P.2d 815 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995).

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(l)(i) — 1 case

Honeywell Info. Sys., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 654 P.2d 337 (Colo. Ct. App. 1982).

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-3-101(l)(p) — 1 case

Telluride Reg'l Airport Auth. v. Bd. of Equalization, 789 P.2d 201 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989).

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.