Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 39
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-4-106 (2026)

Valuation of utilities - apportionment

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) Repealed.

(2) In the specific case of a telegraph company, the administrator shall:

(a) Determine, as of the last day of December of each year, the actual value of such company as a unit, or of its property and plant within this state, in the manner provided in section 39-4-102;

(b) Allocate to this state, if the actual value of such company is determined as a unit, that proportion of such actual value as in his judgment accurately represents the value of the property and plant of such company within this state, utilizing commonly recognized methods of allocation as in his judgment are just and equitable;

(c) Compute the valuation for assessment of such company in this state as provided in section 39-1-104;

(d) Apportion the valuation for assessment of such company in this state among the several counties of this state in such proportion as in his judgment will fairly represent the valuation for assessment within each such county, utilizing commonly recognized methods of apportioning as in his judgment are just and equitable.

(3) In the specific case of a telephone company, the administrator shall:

(a) Determine, as of the last day of December of each year, the actual value of such company as a unit, or of its property and plant within this state, in the manner provided in section 39-4-102;

(b) Allocate to this state, if the actual value of such company is determined as a unit, that proportion of such actual value as in his judgment accurately represents the value of the property and plant of such company within this state, utilizing commonly recognized methods of allocation as in his judgment are just and equitable;

(c) Compute the valuation for assessment of such company in this state as provided in section 39-1-104;

(d) Apportion the valuation for assessment of such company in this state among the several counties of this state in such proportion as in his judgment will fairly represent the valuation for assessment within each such county, utilizing commonly recognized methods of apportioning as in his judgment are just and equitable.

(4) Repealed.

(5) In the specific case of a pipeline company engaged in the transportation of gas, oil, or petroleum products or coal slurry or other coal products in pipelines through or in this state, the administrator shall:

(a) Determine, as of the last day of December of each year, the actual value of the property of such company within this state, either in the manner provided in section 39-4-102 or, with respect to its pipelines, on a diameter per inch per mile basis and its land, improvements, pump and compressor stations, and miscellaneous equipment, wherever situated, being valued separately in the same manner as all other real and personal property;

(b) Compute the valuation for assessment of such company in this state as provided in section 39-1-104;

(c) Apportion the valuation for assessment of such company in this state among the several counties of the state in such proportion as in his judgment will fairly represent the valuation for assessment within each such county, utilizing commonly recognized methods of apportioning as in his judgment shall be just and equitable.

(6) The administrator shall determine the actual value of all other public utilities doing business in this state in the manner provided in section 39-4-102 and shall apportion the valuation for assessment thereof, computed as provided in section 39-1-104, among the several counties of this state in which property of such public utilities is located in such proportion as in his judgment will fairly represent the valuation for assessment within each such county, utilizing commonly recognized methods of apportioning as in his judgment are just and equitable.

(7) (a) In the specific case of a railroad company, the administrator shall:

(I) Determine, as of the last day of December of each year, the actual value of such company as a unit or the actual value of its property and plant within this state, in the manner provided in section 39-4-102;

(II) Ascertain the total mileage of all railroad track of such company, wherever situated, if the actual value of such company is determined as a unit;

(III) Ascertain the total mileage of all railroad track of such company situated within this state and in the several counties thereof;

(IV) Ascertain the total mileage of all railroad main track of such company situated within this state and in the several counties thereof;

(V) Allocate to this state, if the actual value of such company is determined as a unit, that proportion of such actual value that the total mileage of all railroad track of such company situated within this state bears to the total mileage of all railroad track of such company, wherever situated;

(VI) Compute the valuation for assessment of such company in this state as provided in section 39-1-104;

(VII) Apportion the valuation for assessment of such company within this state among the several counties of this state in the proportion that the actual mileage of railroad main track within each such county bears to the total mileage of all railroad main track of such company within this state.

(b) This subsection (7) is effective January 1, 1987.

(8) (a) In the case of cars owned by a sleeping car company, a railroad express company, or a private car line company, the administrator shall:

(I) Ascertain the total railroad track miles made by all such cars within this state and in the several counties thereof during the preceding calendar year;

(II) Determine the actual value of all such cars, using commonly recognized methods of valuation;

(III) Compute the valuation for assessment of all such cars as provided in section 39-1- 104;

(IV) Apportion the valuation for assessment of all such cars among the several counties of the state in such proportion as in his judgment will fairly represent the valuation for assessment within each such county.

(b) This subsection (8) is effective January 1, 1987.

Source: L. 64: R&RE, p. 690, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 137-4-6. L. 70: p. 383, § 19. L. 76: IP(5) amended, p. 768, § 2, effective April 26. L. 81: (1) and (4) repealed, p. 1855, § 7, effective January 1, 1982; (7) and (8) added, p. 1854, § 5, effective January 1, 1987. L. 83: (7)(b) and

(8)(b) amended, p. 1497, § 5, effective April 28. L. 84: (7)(b) and (8)(b) amended, p. 990, § 4, effective February 23.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1984–2000 · leading case: United States Transmission Sys., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 715 P.2d 1249 (Colo. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States Transmission Sys., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 715 P.2d 1249 (Colo. 1986). · cites it 7× “§ 39-4-106, 16B C.R.S. (1982 & 1985 Supp.”
Transponder Corp. of Denver v. Prop. Tax Adm'r, 681 P.2d 499 (Colo. 1984). · cites it 3× “" Section 39-4-106(3)(a), C.R.S.1973 (1982 Repl.”
Colorado Interstate Gas Co. v. Prop. Tax Adm'r Mary Huddleston, 28 P.3d 954 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 6× “Section 39-4-106, C.R.S., 1999. Here, the PTA valued CIG's property as a unit at approximately $450 million.”
Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 696 P.2d 326 (Colo. 1985). “§ 39-4-106(3), 16B C.R.S. (1982). To assist the administrator in this valuation and apportionment, Mountain Bell files a property schedule with the administrator and must make its records available for inspection.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-4-106(2)(b) — 1 case
Colorado Interstate Gas Co. v. Prop. Tax Adm'r Mary Huddleston, 28 P.3d 954 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000). “Section 39-4-106, C.R.S., 1999. Here, the PTA valued CIG's property as a unit at approximately $450 million.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-4-106(3) — 1 case
Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 696 P.2d 326 (Colo. 1985). “§ 39-4-106(3), 16B C.R.S. (1982). To assist the administrator in this valuation and apportionment, Mountain Bell files a property schedule with the administrator and must make its records available for inspection.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-4-106(3)(a) — 2 cases
Transponder Corp. of Denver v. Prop. Tax Adm'r, 681 P.2d 499 (Colo. 1984). “" Section 39-4-106(3)(a), C.R.S.1973 (1982 Repl.”
United States Transmission Sys., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 715 P.2d 1249 (Colo. 1986). “§ 39-4-106, 16B C.R.S. (1982 & 1985 Supp.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-4-106(3)(b) — 1 case
United States Transmission Sys., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 715 P.2d 1249 (Colo. 1986). “§ 39-4-106, 16B C.R.S. (1982 & 1985 Supp.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-4-106(3)(c) — 1 case
United States Transmission Sys., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 715 P.2d 1249 (Colo. 1986). “§ 39-4-106, 16B C.R.S. (1982 & 1985 Supp.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-4-106(3)(d) — 1 case
United States Transmission Sys., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 715 P.2d 1249 (Colo. 1986). “§ 39-4-106, 16B C.R.S. (1982 & 1985 Supp.”
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.