NIMBYs score win in Vail property dispute

A victory for the NIMBYs: A Colorado judge sided with the town of Vail in a longstanding legal battle against Vail Resorts, allowing the town to take possession of the site.

Eagle County District Court Chief Judge Paul Dunkelman ruled that the town had the authority to condemn the 23-acre site, which Vail Resorts had planned to develop for workplace housing, Vail Daily reported.

But the town expressed concerns about the land’s significance as a winter habitat for the local bighorn sheep herd. 

Last May, the town voted to condemn the site, citing the need to protect wildlife. Unable to reach an agreement or purchase the property, the town filed a motion for immediate possession in October.

Dunkelman’s order granted the town’s motion, acknowledging its authority to condemn the site and the necessity of acquiring the property for a public use. 

Vail Resorts, while respecting the court’s decision, said it is “disappointed in this outcome and that the Town of Vail chose to take this action, to condemn our private land, and eliminate an approved affordable workforce housing project after collaborating with our company for years to get this project approved,” according to the outlet.

During the three-day immediate possession hearing in May, the town sought to prove its authority to condemn the land, emphasizing the importance of preserving the bighorn sheep’s habitat. Vail Resorts argued that the town acted in bad faith and had ulterior motives for acquiring the land.

The court’s 27-page order acknowledged the town’s legal authority to condemn the land and the unsuccessful negotiations between the two parties regarding compensation. The judge also recognized the town’s intent to acquire the land for wildlife preservation and that no ulterior motive — namely blocking development — was behind the effort.

Vail Resorts raised concerns about the town’s negotiation tactics in offering to buy the property for $12 million and pointed to prior agreements involving the Triumph Development company as evidence of bad faith. However, the court concluded that the town’s decision prioritizing wildlife habitat over workforce housing was a policy choice within its authority.

“The Town should never have attempted to coerce Vail Resorts as part of the process to obtain the Subject Property. The condemning power is significant and so is the responsibility,” the judge wrote, according to the outlet. “However, this action does not lead to a finding of pretextual conduct. Rather, it actually supports the urgency that the Town gave to the acquisition of the Subject Property and the protection of the herd.”

The nation is dealing with a housing crunch, with there simply being not enough of it. While most states acknowledge the need for more housing, the effort has faced significant backlash from localities that balk at having more development out of concern over the potential drag on the values of existing properties.

— Ted Glanzer