Colo. Const. art. V § 35 Delegation of Power

• Library: Colorado Constitution
• Currency: Current through 11/8/2022 Election
• Citation: Colo. Const. art. V § 35

The general assembly shall not delegate to any special commission, private corporation or association, any power to make, supervise or interfere with any municipal improvement, money, property or effects, whether held in trust or otherwise, or to levy taxes or perform any municipal function whatever.

Cite as Colo. Const. art. V § 35

Source:

Entire article added, effective August 1, 1876, see L. 1877, p. 42.

ANNOTATION

Law reviews. For article, "Extraterritorial Service of Municipally Owned Water Works in Colorado", see 21 Rocky Mt. L. Rev. 56 (1948). For comment, "Water: Statewide or Local Concern? City of Thornton v. Farmers Reservoir & Irrigation Co., 194 Colo. 526, 575 P.2d 382 (1978)", see 56 Den. L.J. 625 (1979).

Design and purpose of this section is to prohibit the delegation to private corporations of the exercise of powers strictly governmental. In re House, 23 Colo. 87, 46 P. 117, 33 L.R.A. 832 (1896).

The purpose of this provision was to prevent any organization being authorized by law to control or interfere with municipal matters. Town of Holyoke v. Smith, 75 Colo. 286, 226 P. 158 (1924).

The purpose of this constitutional provision is to prevent the intrusion upon a municipality's domain of local self-government. Denver Urban Renewal Auth. v. Byrne, 618 P.2d 1374 (Colo. 1980); Reg'l Transp. Dist. v. Dept. of Labor, 830 P.2d 942 (Colo. 1992).

And section to be given broad meaning. In applying this provision, it should be given a broad and reasonable, rather than a technical meaning, so as to accomplish its evident purpose. Town of Holyoke v. Smith, 75 Colo. 286, 226 P. 158 (1924).

"Municipal", for purposes of this section, refers to counties and therefore the public utilities commission (PUC) may not regulate counties which are performing the "municipal function" of providing mass transit within county boundaries. City of Durango v. Durango Transp., 807 P.2d 1152 (Colo. 1991).

"Municipal", for purposes of this section, is not limited to cities and towns. Reg'l Transp. v. Dept. of Labor, 830 P.2d 942 (Colo. 1992).

Section protects local self-government functions. The subjects to which the protection of this section extends are such as properly fall within the domain of local self-government. If they are entitled to protection from an agency of the state exercising delegated powers of the kind enumerated, the right thus proposed to be protected would be violated as much by a general commission's doing the mentioned acts as by a special commission's doing the same things. Town of Holyoke v. Smith, 75 Colo. 286, 226 P. 158 (1924).

The purpose of this provision is to protect the right to local self-government over local services. City of Durango v. Durango Transp., 807 P.2d 1152 (Colo. 1991); Reg'l Transp. v. Dept. of Labor, 830 P.2d 942 (Colo. 1992).

"Functional approach" is used to determine whether a unit of government is a municipality and a particular service is a municipal service. City of Durango v. Durango Transp., 807 P.2d 1152 (Colo. 1991); Reg'l Transp. v. Dept. of Labor, 830 P.2d 942 (Colo. 1992).

Functional approach to nondelegation issues examines whether the function in question is truly local in the sense that, principally if not exclusively, it affects only those persons residing within the boundaries of the governmental unit in question and whether the political processes make those who perform the function responsive to the electorate within the affected area. Reg'l Transp. v. Dept. of Labor, 830 P.2d 942 (Colo. 1992).

The distinction between functions implicating the right to local self-goverment over local services and functions affecting matters of concern to citizens beyond the boundaries of the government engaged in the function cannot be made by any bright line rule, it is a matter of degree. Reg'l Transp. v. Dept. of Labor, 830 P.2d 942 (Colo. 1992).