TELLURIDE – The Colorado Supreme Court handed the Town of Telluride a decisive victory in its fight to condemn 572 acres located outside its boundaries for preservation as open space in a 6-1 decision released to the public yesterday.

The ruling, awaited by the town for more than 16 uncertainty-filled months as the state’s highest court considered its decision, finally puts to rest its long struggle to use the power of eminent domain to guarantee the San Miguel Valley Corporation-owned Valley Floor property remains undeveloped in perpetuity.

“The Court made it very clear that a home rule municipality has a very broad constitutional right of eminent domain that cannot be abridged by a state statute,” said Leslie Field, Telluride’s lead attorney in the lawsuit.

“It was a very strong message that the court delivered,” she said.

“The Valley Floor is unique to Telluride, and an integral and irreplaceable part of the town’s cherished scenic beauty, as well as its heritage,” Richard Moe, president of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which listed the Valley Floor as one of the 11 Most Endangered Places in 2001, said today in a prepared statement. “Today’s ruling means that the people of Telluride will have the final word in protecting this extraordinary resource in perpetuity, as well they should.”

The decision hinged first upon the court’s interpretation of article XX of the Colorado Constitution, which establishes the scope of eminent domain power granted to home rule municipalities. Next, the court considered the constitutionality of subsection 4(b) of a law passed by the Legislature in 2004, stated the 35-page opinion.

That subsection, the so-called “Telluride Amendment” to HB1203, stated that home rule municipalities could neither acquire by condemnation, nor provide any funding to a third party to acquire by condemnation, property located outside their boundaries, except in the case of public utilities or public works.

While Telluride argued that the amendment was unconstitutional, the SMVC argued that the subsection was not only constitutional, but was “carefully tailored not to interfere with the powers granted by article XX,” read the opinion.

Both parties agreed, however, that the General Assembly could not enact a law that denied a right specifically granted by the Constitution.

“This means so much to so many people,” said Mayor Stu Fraser at a press conference called Monday morning, where he speculated that Field’s strategy to sit alone in the courtroom when she presented her argument had succeeded in reminding the seven justices of the David and Goliath-like nature of the case.

“This was about a small group of people going up against a larger group,” he said.

Former Mayor John Pryor, who held office during the majority of the condemnation struggle, said that although the decision did not wholly surprise him, he planned to savor the town’s victory.

“It’s a great day for conservation and a great day for Telluride,” he said.

“This is a good news day for a community of thoughtful citizens who chose to dream,” said Jane Hickcox of the Valley Floor Preservation Partners.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments last year after SMVC appealed an earlier lower court ruling that found the Telluride Amendment to be unconstitutional, thereby giving the town the authority to condemn the Valley Floor.

“Because the General Assembly cannot deny home rule municipalities the eminent domain power conferred to them in the constitution, the court holds that subsection 4(b) is unconstitutional with respect to home rule municipalities. The court thus concludes that Telluride’s condemnation of the property was lawful and affirms the judgment of the trial court,” it reads.

“We appreciate the court’s recognition that the land use policy rule in Colorado has traditionally been one that local government has taken,” said attorney Gilbert F. McNeish, who filed an amicus brief on behalf of his client, the American Planning Association Colorado Chapter.

“This opinion firmly supports this,” he said, adding that the decision had so pleased him that he briefly contemplated flying to Telluride to join in celebrating with the town on Monday afternoon in Elks Park.

“We think it was a great decision for Telluride and a great decision for all home rule municipalities,” said Colorado Municipal League attorney Erin E. Goff. The CML filed an amicus brief in support of the town.

“The court's decision really just solidifies what we already thought to be the law.”

Justice Allison Eid, the court’s sole dissenter, wrote in a separate opinion that, “The majority holds that a home rule municipality has the constitutional authority to condemn property outside of its boundaries essentially for any valid purpose – a broad standard indeed,” with which she disagreed.

Eid stated that while she recognized open space as a vital resource worthy of protection, she did not believe the state Constitution conveys exclusive extraterritorial condemnation authority to home rule municipalities. As a result, Eid upheld the constitutionality of the so-called Telluride Amendment.

SMVC has 14 days to file a petition for rehearing. If it does not, on the fifteenth day the Supreme Court will issue the Mandate, which affirms the District Court’s decision and transfers jurisdiction over the case back to it. The District Court must then issue the Rule and Order, which recognizes the legality of the condemnation and serves, essentially, as the deed to the property, said Town Attorney Kevin Geiger.

Should SMVC file a petition for rehearing, the decision will be stayed until the matter is decided.

“I suppose they could do that,” said Field, but “I’m just enjoying the victory we have today.”

Attorneys representing the SMVC did not return phone calls requesting comment on the decision.

The full text of the Supreme Court’s ruling can be found here.

To view a timeline that lead up to Monday's Colorado Supreme Court decision on the Valley Floor click here.