## Facts

- The City of Northglenn, a home-rule municipality, enacted Ordinance 1248 redefining “family” to exclude any household containing more than one person required to register as a sex offender, effectively barring multiple registrants from living in a single-family residence.
- Juliana Ibarra was a state-certified foster parent who provided specialized care in her single-family home for foster children involved in sexual-offense conduct.
- Under the Colorado Children’s Code, the State placed three unrelated foster children in Ibarra’s home; each had delinquency adjudications requiring juvenile sex-offender registration.
- The City notified the Ibarras to comply within five days or face prosecution, then charged Ibarra in municipal court for violating Ordinance 1248.
- Ibarra was convicted in municipal court and fined $750.
- On appeal, the district court reversed the conviction and invalidated the ordinance, relying on the Fair Housing Act and constitutional grounds.
- The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed the judgment but resolved the case on state-law preemption, without deciding the federal statutory or constitutional claims.

## Issues

1. Whether a home-rule municipality may enforce a zoning/occupancy ordinance that restricts where adjudicated delinquent juveniles required to register as sex offenders may live when the State places and supervises them in foster care under the Colorado Children’s Code.
2. Whether state law preempts Ordinance 1248 as applied to adjudicated delinquent children placed and supervised by the State in foster care homes.

## Decision

- The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s judgment reversing Ibarra’s conviction and invalidating Ordinance 1248 as applied.
- The Court held state law preempted Ordinance 1248 insofar as it applied to adjudicated delinquent children whom the State places and supervises in state-created foster care families.
- The Court concluded neither the Colorado Constitution nor state statutes granted Northglenn authority to regulate this matter of statewide concern.
- The Court did not reach the Fair Housing Act or constitutional claims because the case was resolved on preemption grounds.
- The holding was limited to the ordinance’s application to state-placed, adjudicated delinquent juveniles in foster care.

## Legal Principles

- Home-rule municipalities may legislate on local matters, but they may not regulate inconsistently with state law on matters of statewide concern or on mixed matters where the state interest predominates.
- State law preempts a municipal ordinance when the ordinance conflicts with, or materially impedes, a comprehensive state statutory scheme.
- The placement and supervision of adjudicated delinquent juveniles in foster care under the Colorado Children’s Code is a matter of statewide concern requiring uniform administration, which can override conflicting local land-use regulations.
- Courts may avoid federal statutory and constitutional questions when a case can be decided on state-law grounds.

## Conclusion

The Colorado Supreme Court held that Northglenn could not use Ordinance 1248 to block the State’s placement of adjudicated delinquent juveniles who must register as sex offenders in a certified foster home, because the Children’s Code creates a statewide scheme that preempts conflicting local regulation; Ibarra’s conviction therefore remained reversed on preemption grounds.


City of Northglenn v. Ibarra, 62 P.3d 151 (Colo. 2003)