As to the following issues:

Whether the district court erred in concluding, as a matter of law, that the COVID-19 pandemic was not a detrimental act of nature as contemplated by C.R.S. § 39-1-104(11)(b)(I) and therefore not an "unusual condition" thereunder.

Whether the district court erred in concluding, as a matter of law, that the various regulations imposed by the Governor and Public Health authorities in response to the pandemic were not regulations restricting or increasing the use of land as contemplated by C.R.S. § 39-1104(11)(b)(I) and therefore not an "unusual condition" thereunder.

Whether the district court erred in dismissing Taxpayers complaint on the basis of factual assumptions and speculation.

1