Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Chaffee County filed for an enjoined summary judgment on May 2 in District 11 court with plaintiffs Chris Vely and Laura Barton against Alison Brown on their C.R.C.P. 6(h) motion. It requests the court provide the meaning of the words “tract,” “lot” and “parcel” in the definition of “kennel.”

The documents were filed by Chaffee County attorneys on behalf of the Chaffee County Board of Review, Chaffee County Planning Manager Jon Roorda and Chaffee County Commissioners. It seeks clarification of terms contained in Article 15.2 of the current Chaffee County Land Use Code. “The meaning of ‘parcel’ as it is applied through the CCLUC definition of ‘kennel’ is a legal question for (t)his court to determine,” according to the filing.

Changes made to Article 15 of the CCLUC and adopted as a resolution last December specify that residents are entitled to no more than seven dogs without filing for a permit. Permitted pet shops or veterinary hospitals are exempt. Ranchers, farmers and other county property owners are not.

The plaintiff’s contention is that Brown’s two 40-acre contiguous parcels, purchased separately, constitute one 80-acre parcel, and therefore she is entitled to no more than seven dogs on the combined 80-acre area.

The document goes on to state that the county enforcement of the kennel definition “interprets ‘parcel’ to include pieces of real property, whether described as lots or otherwise, sharing contiguous boundaries and common ownership or control. Accordingly, (Brown) may have no more than seven dogs on the two adjoining properties she owns.”

Seven of Brown’s original American Foxhound hunting dogs remain on the 40-acre parcel at 11600 Antelope Road, which she bought in 2014. The seven dogs she shifted to the 40-acre parcel at 11555 Antelope Road, purchased in 2017, are no longer on the property.

“Do people not realize what they are doing here?” asked Brown. “This county interpretation could affect all mobile home parks and camp sites where folks stay longer than two weeks with dogs. It would mean that property owners would have to go through special review with the county as a kennel if the court upholds the county’s argument.”

The summary judgment request follows Chaffee County Commissioners request for a permanent injunction and penalties against Brown, related to its contention that she is running an outfitting facility.

In an April 30 ruling allowing the motion for the enjoined summary judgement, Magistrate Amanda Hunter, who has been hearing the case, wrote, “To enjoin a zoning violation, a county must prove both the adoption and violation of a particular regulation.” (Board of County Com’rs v. Rohrbach, 226 P.3d 1184, 1186 Colo. App 2009).