The neighbors filed an appeal of the District Court’s decision with the Colorado Court of Appeals. This is also an appeal by right.
The appeal was based on five issues: (1) incompatibility with surrounding uses; (2) this was a de facto “spot rezoning” to heavy industrial, because it was done for the benefit of one landowner; (3) there was no evidence that any effort had been made to preserve PRIME farmland; (4) MMM’s own evidence demonstrated that they would not be able to meet the noise limits that were imposed; and (5) there was improper ex parte communication between MMM and Weld County during the process that precluded the plaintiffs from receiving fair consideration.
Notice of Appeal 2017CA463 (3/15/2017)
CO Court of Appeals Appellants’ Opening Brief 2017CA463 (5/26/2017)
Weld County Answer Brief 2017CA463 (6/29/2017)
MMM Answer Brief 2017CA463 (6/30/2017)
Gerrard Answer Brief 2017CA463 (6/30/2017)
The Colorado Court of Appeals ruled that the approval of MMM’s USR by Weld County was arbitrary and capricious based on issue (4) above (lack of evidence that MMM could meet the noise limits). Because the Court of Appeals considered this issue “dispository,” they specifically declined to consider the four other issues.
CO Court of Appeals Opinion 2017CA463 (11/22/2017)
MMM petitioned the CO Court of Appeals to rehear the case. Their petition was denied.
MMM’s Petition for Rehearing 2017CA463 (12/6/2017)
Response in Opposition to Petition for Rehearing 2017CA463 (1/23/2018)
CO Court of Appeals Order of the Court 2017CA463 (3/15/2018)
The Colorado Court of Appeals issued a mandate to the Weld County District Court to “reverse” its previous decision to uphold the BOCC approval of MMM’s USR. This was followed by a District Court Order to the BOCC to deny the USR application.
CO Court of Appeals Mandate 2017CA463 (4/30/2018)
Order Entering Judgment in Favor of the Plaintiffs 2015CV30776 (5/1/2018)
The neighbors then filed a Motion asking the District Court to also require MMM to vacate the site, since they no longer had a valid permit. MMM filed a Motion asking the District Court to reverse the order to deny the application and to instead remand it back to the BOCC for consideration of how to respond to the Court of Appeals mandate. Judge Todd Taylor denied the neighbors’ motion and allowed the MMM motion.
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Amended Final Judgment & exhibits 2015V30776 (5/2/2018)
MMM’s Motion to Amend and for Stay of Judgment 2015CV30776 (5/4/2018)
Response to Motion for Amended Judgment and Stay 2015CV30776 (5/17/2018)
MMM’s Response Opposing Plaintiffs’ Motion for Amended Final Judgment 2015CV30776 (5/22/2018)
Response to Motion for Amended Final Judgment 2015CV30776 (5/23/2018)
Response in Opposition to MMM Motion to Amend for Stay of Judgment 2015CV30776 (5/25/2018)
Plaintiffs’ Combined Reply in Support of Motion for Amended Final Judgment 2015CV30776 (5/29/2018)
Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Amended Judgment 2015CV30776 (6/4/2018)
Order Granting Defendant MMM Motion to Amend Judgment 2015CV30776 (6/4/2018)
Read about the neighbors’ second appeal to the CO Court of Appeals