Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Eminent Domain topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Weld County votes to pursue eminent domain for High Plains Boulevard parcel after owner objects

Weld County Board of County Commissioners · February 4, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After extended discussion about appraisals and mitigation, the Weld County Board of County Commissioners voted Feb. 4 to authorize eminent domain to acquire a parcel needed for the High Plains Boulevard project. The county said its final voluntary offer totaled $205,820; the owner sought substantially higher compensation and mitigation.

WELD COUNTY — The Weld County Board of County Commissioners voted Feb. 4 to authorize the county attorney’s office to file eminent domain proceedings to acquire a parcel needed for the High Plains Boulevard corridor, after a lengthy presentation from county staff and testimony from the property owner.

Assistant County Attorney Adria Schiel opened the item, saying the request was to permit the county to pursue eminent domain under the cited Colorado statute to acquire property necessary for the corridor. Curtis Hall, director of public works, told the board High Plains Boulevard has been a county priority since a 2003 I‑25 parallel arterial study and was added to the Public Works capital plan; the corridor received funding in the county’s 2024 budget.

Cameron Parrott, project manager, said the current project segment spans from Weld County Road 32 to Weld County Road 34 and that the county planned to acquire the ultimate right of way even though only an interim west-half cross section is being built now. He said every property along the corridor has been acquired for this design except two parcels: the Getman property (expected to close in February) and the parcel at issue.

John Doty of Western States Land Services reviewed 15 months of negotiations and appraisals. Doty said the owner’s appraiser, Andre Suiza, produced a revised appraisal of $118,769 while the county’s appraiser, John Vaughn, reported $70,250; the county recorded a figure in the record of $118,007.69 and noted its incentive policy of adding 30% to the land value in some offers. “On Sept. 22, 2025, we made a final offer in the amount of $205,820,” Doty said, adding the county included the incentive and an estimate for a mitigation fence in that number.

The property owner, who introduced himself in the record as Steve Discrello, disputed the sufficiency of the county’s offer and described mitigation costs he had solicited. “I got quotes for [a berm] at about $425,000,” he told the board, and said a quoted sound wall “was $250,000.” Discrello said early conversations led him to believe the county would acquire the entire property, and that replacing his home and shop could approach $1,100,000; he also said he believed $500,000 would be adequate to address the county’s current needs and install mitigation.

Commissioners asked technical questions about the proximity of the proposed right of way and permanent easement to the owner’s structures, the height and placement of potential screening, and whether a 6‑foot privacy fence included in the county’s offer would address headlights and sound. Parrott described the planned fence included in the county’s offer as a 6‑foot privacy fence with a concrete facing; he said the 12‑foot wall reflected in the owner’s quote was substantially larger than the county’s mitigation plan.

Several commissioners expressed sympathy for the owner while emphasizing the public need for the corridor and careful consideration of taxpayer costs. Commissioner Scott James and others said staff had been diligent in negotiations; Commissioner Kevin Ross moved to proceed with eminent domain and Commissioner Jason Maxey seconded. After further comment the board voted by voice with all present saying “aye,” and the motion carried.

The board’s action authorizes county attorneys to begin filing eminent domain proceedings; the motion and vote record the board’s finding of public necessity for the project as described at the hearing. The record includes the county’s disclosed offer amount, the appraisals discussed, and contractors’ mitigation quotes provided by the owner. The board did not, in the hearing, adopt any additional new mitigation or an increased offer beyond the $205,820 figure disclosed during negotiations.

Next steps: the county attorney’s office will prepare and file the appropriate eminent domain documents under the statute referenced at the hearing. The county and the owner may continue settlement discussions even as the county takes the legal steps authorized by today’s vote.