Farncomb v. City and County of Denver

Background

A group of property owners sued to stop Denver from enforcing an ordinance that apportioned costs to lots for park improvements, boulevards, and streets. The city charter (sections 298, 299, 300, and 328) requires the Board of Local Improvements to prepare a cost statement, the clerk to publish notice, and owners to file written complaints within sixty days. The Board of Supervisors, sitting as a board of equalization, must hear objections and may recommend changes to the board that originally made the apportionment, which then may confirm or modify the assessment before the council enacts it.

Reasoning

The central question was whether that procedure gave property owners a meaningful chance to be heard under the Fourteenth Amendment. The owners argued the board could only recommend changes and thus could not actually correct invalid assessments. The Colorado Supreme Court had construed the charter to mean the hearing before the board of equalization is a full hearing on validity and amount. This Court accepted the state court’s construction (as it did in Londoner v. Denver), found the charter process satisfied due process, and noted the owners had not used the hearing provided but sued after the assessment ordinance was passed.

Real world impact

The Court affirmed the Colorado judgment, allowing Denver’s special assessments to stand. The ruling makes clear that affected property owners must use the local hearing process under the charter before raising constitutional objections in court. Because the owners declined the hearing and then sued, their challenge was barred and similar late challenges will be harder to maintain.