Commissioners approve DRFR LLC abatement; grant partial tax reduction for contested Montezuma County parcel

Montezuma County commissioners approved two tax adjustments during their May 26 meeting, voting to grant an abatement tied to a conservation easement and a separate, limited reduction after a contested hearing over land use and valuation.

At the start of the Board of Equalization session, an assessor’s office representative explained that DRFR LLC’s Dolores River parcel had been misclassified after county records omitted documentation showing a conservation easement. The assessor’s recalculation placed the parcel’s assessed value at $5,158, producing a 2025 tax bill of $390.60; the office recommended an abatement totaling $70,628.88. “My recommendation is not to deny this abatement, just to let it go through,” the assessor’s representative said. Commissioner (speaker 4) moved to approve the abatement and the motion carried.

The board then heard a lengthy, contested abatement request involving two contiguous parcels. A property representative seeking relief asked the board to restore agricultural classification for 2024 and 2025, saying restoration and CDOT permitting interrupted grazing and that a speculative listing had been used to set a high valuation. The property representative said the owners purchased the land in November 2021, completed restoration and CDOT permitting in 2025–26, and expected modest property taxes; instead they found a bill of more than $70,000.

Assessor staff and Leslie Bug responded that the county had performed three field inspections (2023, June 2024, and March 2026) and found no evidence of cattle, inadequate fences and no water on the parcels during the 2024–25 assessment period. Bug said the office had adjusted the per‑acre value used for the parcels from 3.49592 to 1.52479 under county valuation rules but declined to retroactively return the parcels to agricultural classification for 2024–25 because the record showed no grazing activity in those years. “We will be checking that property for 26 and 27 so that it can be reinstated for 28,” Bug said.

After discussion, the board accepted the assessor’s proposed reductions: a $32,640.61 tax reduction for parcel R5744 and no abatement for parcel R13794 (tax amount $2,782.84). Commissioner (speaker 4) made the motion; it was seconded and carried by the commissioners present. The chair advised the property owners they retained appeal rights and instructed them to preserve documentation of agreements with ranchers if they wished to pursue further review.

The hearing record does not show the county concluding any change to future classification; the assessor said the owners could reapply for agricultural classification if grazing is reestablished and verified in subsequent assessment years.