Blog
By Jen Hall, Keystone Denver
Am I the only one who gets an eye roll or cringe from someone when I tell them I work in the HOA industry? Especially as a management company, telling someone this is usually met with a long story about how their management company did something awful, you know, like sending letters for trash cans that have not moved, a delinquency letter that went out, per their Collection Policy, or the dues increasing, either to help maintain the property or to cover much needed work…you know what I mean.
I will admit, I get a little choosy on who I share this with, as I have been at too many dinners, or hair appointments, that are flooded with the stories of annoyance to the HOA or management company when I share what I do for work.
Please do not get me wrong, I love what I do and would not change my profession but there is one easy way for our industry to take a stand and make a change with the attitude and that is with transparency.
All too often we are met with blame from residents, stating there is never enough communication or people are not kept in the loop but imagine a world where emails are read, minutes are checked and questions are asked and answered! Transparency is not just “nice to have”, it is often one of the most effective tools we can use to reduce conflicts, build trust and avoid costly legal disputes!
We have all seen the decisions made by the board while on a community walk with a vendor, or the boards who have less than the required quorum and make decisions on behalf of the board because “they would agree if they responded.” However, situations like this, executive sessions that have gone rogue, or the lack of involvement from the community are all actions that make a board more susceptible to lawsuits, and the management company more prone to scrutiny.
Unfortunately, when this happens, residents need someone to be mad at. They come to meetings with pitchforks, they email harsh words from the comfort of their keyboards, and they take to social media. All of these actions foster animosity and distrust in the community, often pitting the board against the owners.
So, new year - new ways, what better time to make a change. And while we cannot teach all boards new ways, this is the chance to demonstrate good faith and communication with residents, which will in turn give us happier neighbors, reduce rumors and misinformation and if done right (in an open, on the agenda, comments welcome meeting) it will create a documented record of thoughtful decision making!
A few practices to help set the foundation of transparency would be: sharing agendas in advance, providing clear and concise meeting minutes, explaining (and re-explaining!) major decisions in newsletters, open meetings and emails. And just using plain language, keeping it away from legal and industry jargon!
Another suggestion is keeping up to date on community websites and portals and sharing all information owners have the right to and making sure they have the information and direction needed to access the documents.
Transparency is not optional, and not just good governance, it is good protection to our boards, communities and ourselves! It should be our goal to keep everyone informed, engaged and respected, which will lead to a reduction in legal exposure, save money for the community, and foster a healthier community!
Jen Hall, Director of Business Development, Keystone Denver. Jen has been in the HOA industry for over a decade and is a tenured manager who now focuses her attention on Business Development for Keystone. She is also on the CAI-RMC Board of Directors and a member of CLAC, as she believes in the industry and the future and wants to commit the time and energy to continuously improve it.
By Alyssa Chirlin, Smith Jadin Johnson, PLLC
Community associations often call attorneys when something has already gone wrong—a foreclosure is stalled by a procedural technicality, or an insurance claim is denied due to a documentation gap. In practice, though, the strongest legal position is built well before any dispute arises. It starts with preparation, clarity, and diligence.
As we head into 2026, Colorado community associations are operating in a changed legal environment. Recent legislation has raised the bar for compliance in several critical areas, including collections, foreclosures, and construction defect actions. “Strict compliance” is, in many cases, no longer simply a best practice; it is the baseline requirement for enforcing a community’s rights. With new laws reshaping foreclosure procedures and construction defect claims, the early part of the year is the ideal time for boards to take stock and strengthen their operational foundations.
To that end, here is a practical 12-week plan designed to move your association from reactive problem-solving to proactive risk management.
THE 12-WEEK ROADMAP FOR A STRONGER 2026
Weeks 1–4: Collections & Foreclosure Readiness
Focus: Perfecting procedures to protect an association’s lien rights.
House Bill 25-1043 introduced new "Owner Equity Protection" regulations that alter assessment collections and foreclosure. Collections notices must now include more detailed information about a delinquent owners’ rights, the collections process includes more steps, and, once the foreclosure process has begun, delinquent owners have a greater ability to pause foreclosure proceedings if an association cannot demonstrate strict compliance with every statutory requirement.
Key steps for boards to take:
Weeks 5–8: Risk Management and Insurance Check-In
Focus: Closing coverage gaps before a loss occurs.
Insurance challenges continue to grow as premiums rise and coverage terms tighten. While some disputes stem from carriers’ bad faith, disputes can also stem from misalignment between governing documents, insurance policies, and homeowner expectations.
Board should focus on:
Weeks 9–12: Litigation Strategy in a New Legal Landscape
Focus: Planning for longer litigation timelines and higher thresholds.
Recent legislative changes have altered expectations around both collections and litigation. Including:
A little planning at the start of the year can prevent significant frustration—and expense—down the road. By taking a structured, proactive approach in early 2026, Colorado HOAs can protect their communities, strengthen their financial footing, and reduce the likelihood of unpleasant surprises later on.
Manager’s Tear-Sheet: Summary for Boards
(Cut and paste this section for your Board packets)
If You Only Do 5 Things This Year…
Alyssa Chirlin a partner at Smith Jadin Johnson, PLLC, which focuses on representing community associations in Colorado. The firm provides comprehensive legal services to HOAs, including routine governance, collections, covenant enforcement, developer transition, litigation and general counsel support.
By Justin Bayer, Knott Laboratory
When a homeowners association undertakes a major construction or rehabilitation project, such as repairs to balcony or stairs, retaining walls, parking structures, or building envelope upgrades/repairs, the focus is often on selecting the right contractor and securing competitive pricing. Less visible, equally as important, is the role of Construction Administration (CA) services performed by the engineering firm that designed the project.
Speaking from the perspective of a structural engineering firm, Construction Administration is not an “extra” or a formality. CA is the final phase of design; the phase that ensures that what was thoroughly engineered on paper is correctly built in the field. For HOAs, CA services help protect the community’s financial investment, minimize risk and liability, and ensure the long-term performance of the repair or improvement. For contractors, CA services provide clarity, efficiency, and a reliable technical partner throughout construction to assist in oversight and collaboration. The collaboration portion is especially key as by working together, the engineer and contractor can create opportunities for value engineering, aka, cost savings for the community to truly maximize their dollars.
What Is Construction Administration?
Construction Administration includes a range of services provided by the design engineer during construction. These services typically include reviewing contractor submittals, responding to Requests for Information (RFIs), performing periodic site observations, addressing unforeseen conditions, reviewing change requests, and verifying that the work generally conforms to the approved construction documents.
In simple terms, CA services bridge the gap between design intent and real-world construction. There are plenty of things in the field that can change in a moment, and by working together, these unforeseen circumstances can be handled smoothly and help to avoid major project delays.
Benefits to the Community
Engineers performing CA can identify deviations from the plans early, before they become costly mistakes or long-term maintenance issues. This oversight helps ensure that materials, connections, and construction methods meet the codes and requirements necessary for durability, longevity, and safety.
Without CA services, these issues may be addressed solely by the contractor under time and budget pressure, potentially resulting in fixes that solve the immediate issue but, in some cases, could compromise long-term performance. Contractors typically prefer that engineers take on the liability in designing repairs for these unforeseen existing conditions.
For HOA boards and community managers, this added layer of professional oversight provides peace of mind and demonstrates due diligence to the community.
Benefits to the Contractor
Clear and Timely Technical Guidance Construction documents cannot anticipate every condition encountered in the field. When questions arise, contractors benefit from direct access to the engineer who understands the project’s design assumptions and constraints. Quick, consistent responses to RFIs keep work moving and reduce costly delays and additional strains on the community.
What Can Go Wrong Without Construction Administration?
When the engineering firm is not retained for CA services, several risks increase significantly:
Field decisions may be made without a full understanding of the original design intent. Contractors, even highly experienced ones, may substitute materials or alter details to address constructability challenges, not realizing the potential structural implications. Over time, these changes can lead to premature deterioration, moisture intrusion, or liability/safety concerns.
Additionally, unresolved questions can result in delays, inconsistent interpretations of the drawings, or disputes between the HOA and contractor. In the worst cases, deficiencies may not become apparent until years later, long after warranties have expired and the project budget has been spent.
From a risk management standpoint, the absence of engineering CA services can also blur lines of responsibility. When no engineer is observing and documenting construction, it becomes harder to determine whether issues stem from design, construction, or maintenance.
A Collaborative Approach to Successful Projects
Construction Administration is most effective when viewed as a collaborative effort. The engineer, contractor, HOA board, and community manager all play vital roles. When the engineering firm that designed the project remains involved through construction, communication improves, problems are solved faster, and the project is more likely to meet its technical, financial, and performance goals.
For HOAs undertaking significant civil or structural work, hiring the design engineer for CA services is an investment in quality, accountability, and long-term value. It helps ensure that the community receives not just a completed project, but a well-built one that serves residents safely and reliably for years to come.
Justin Bayer is the Vice President of Business Development for Knott Laboratory, a forensic engineering firm. He is an active and involved member of CAI in multiple states, including the past president and a current member of the Executive Board for CAI-Rocky Mountain Chapter.
By Jeff Kerrane, Kerrane Storz, PC
Across the United States, families are being priced out of homeownership. Rents have spiked, mortgage rates have risen, and inventory is at record lows not simply in Colorado, but nationwide. Zillow estimates a 4.5-million-unit gap in affordable housing, a shortage built over decades rather than caused by any single law or lawsuit. Restrictive zoning, high material and insurance costs, and slow permitting cycles have driven today’s crisis. Colorado’s shortfall in affordable housing is at least 100,000 homes—a small fraction of the national shortage.
For years, developers and insurance companies have pushed a narrative that if Colorado weakens construction defect and consumer protection laws, condominium construction will return and affordability will follow. But that premise was always too simplistic. Condominium and affordable housing shortages are a national trend. And Colorado already had some of the most developer-friendly construction defect laws in the country, long before condominium construction plummeted.
HB25-1272: What It Does and Why HOAs Should Pay Attention
In May 2025, Colorado enacted HB25-1272, branded the Colorado American Dream Act, creating a voluntary framework where multifamily builders can receive limited legal protections if they provide third-party inspections and limited warranty coverage. The bill was marketed as a way to revive for-sale condominium construction, which historically has offered a critical entry point for first-time buyers, young professionals, and aging homeowners looking to downsize.
The new law requires developers who choose to participate in the program to submit their projects to third-party inspections in addition to those normally conducted by the municipal building departments. The law also requires builders opting in to provide a limited warranty (1 year workmanship, 2 years “systems,” 6 years major structural).
Builders who participate in the program receive legal protections, such as more detailed pre-filing requirements for claims against architects and engineers, additional limitations on claims, a rebuttable presumption that construction defects do not exist, and enhanced affirmative defenses.
Additionally, the bill increases the homeowner vote required to file a construction defect case from a simple majority to 65% and requires HOAs to spend lawsuit recoveries on making repairs.
Perhaps the most significant aspect of the program that could actually reduce litigation is the possibility of having attorneys’ fees awarded against any party who is deemed to have acted unreasonably in the pre-litigation notice of claim process.
Several Front Range Cities Just Proved that Construction Defect Reform Was Never About Affordability
For nearly a decade, Front Range cities pushed the narrative that construction-defect reform was necessary to bring back condominium development and expand affordable housing. HOAs were told that weaker consumer protections were necessary to achieve affordability, and that homebuyers would ultimately benefit.
But when the bill finally passed, municipal behavior told a very different story.
In 2025, as HB25-1272 was being celebrated as an affordability solution, Denver cut $18 million from its affordable housing program—nearly a quarter of its proposed funding. If affordability was truly the driving force behind construction defect reform, this is where cities should have doubled down, not pulled back.
Even worse, the cities of Arvada, Aurora, Glendale, Greenwood Village, Lafayette, and Westminster banded together to sue the State over zoning reforms designed to increase density, eliminate mandatory parking minimums, and allow more affordable housing near transit. If their stated goal was more attainable ownership, this lawsuit does the opposite.
Governor Polis’ office said it plainly: “It’s clear this lawsuit is about preventing more housing from being built that Coloradans can afford.”
As the National Low Income Housing Coalition points out, NIMBYism (Not in My Back Yard) frequently blocks affordable developments, particularly in high-opportunity areas. “Experts overwhelmingly agree that relaxing zoning laws is one of the best ways to improve affordability. … Even adding a modest amount of density in the country's biggest markets could create millions of new homes.”
If cities genuinely cared about affordability, they wouldn't slash housing budgets or fight zoning reform while cheering for legal protections for builders. They would be funding affordable projects, embracing density, and supporting smart growth policy, not litigating against it.
Even with HB25-1272 in effect, local governments are not satisfied and are pushing even more restrictions on homeowner rights. On November 18, 2025, Douglas County introduced an ordinance that would limit HOA’s ability to amend their governing documents to remove one-sided arbitration provisions, and would give developers the unilateral right to enter a homeowner’s property to make repairs (even over a homeowner’s objection to the repair scope or methodology), and limit breach of contract and warranty claims.
New condos and more affordable housing will come from zoning reform and public investment, not from restricting homeowners’ legal rights. If cities want affordability, they must prove it with budgets and policy.
What HB25-1272 Does
What HB25-1272 Does Not Do
Gives builders enhanced affirmative legal defenses
Construction defect claims are time-sensitive and governed by specific legal deadlines. If your new community is experiencing construction concerns, consulting with a reputable construction defect attorney can help you understand your rights, the applicable statutes of limitation and repose, and how timing may affect your ability to pursue claims and hold the developer or builder accountable.
Jeff Kerrane is a shareholder with the law firm Kerrane Storz, PC, which represents property owners and community associations in construction defect litigation. He brings more than 30 years of experience representing property owners and community associations in construction defect cases. He is a dedicated advocate for homeowners and community associations in Colorado and Texas.
By Patrick O’Hayer, Hammersmith/RealManage and Kiki Hennigan, East West Urban Management
Serving on a homeowners association (HOA) Board is both an honor and a significant responsibility that comes with minimal appreciation and very little benefit beyond knowing that they are making their community a better place. Board members must navigate legal requirements, financial decision-making, vendor management, community standards, neighbor disputes, and long-term planning—often while learning on the job. The most effective Boards recognize that success requires more than good intentions. It also requires ongoing training and learning, support from management companies, professional vendors, and organizations like CAI, as well as a clear understanding of how groups develop and evolve.
When these elements are in place, Boards operate more efficiently, communicate more clearly, and govern in ways that strengthen the entire community. This is especially important here in Colorado, where the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (CCIOA) sets forth detailed requirements for operations, disclosures, records, enforcement processes, and fiduciary duties. Directors must understand their association’s governing documents, CCIOA requirements, financial reports, reserve studies, enforcement standards, and the basics of parliamentary procedure in an ever-changing legislative landscape. Well-trained Boards not only meet these obligations, they are better equipped to serve their communities with confidence, ease, and honesty.
Training provides the essential foundation for consistent, compliant, and productive leadership of communities. This ensures that meetings are purposeful, records are properly maintained, decisions are documented, and long-term planning remains a priority. Comprehensive training equips Board members to:
Without proper training, even well-intentioned Boards may inadvertently expose the association to liability or create unnecessary conflict, just ask any community association attorney!
One of the main struggles with HOA Boards is the turnover of Board Members at Annual Meetings. New Board Members do not always come equipped with training and knowledge right when they volunteer for the Board.
A Board of Directors is a team and like any team, it evolves through predictable stages. Bruce Tuckman’s (American psychologist and educational researcher) model—Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing—provides an insightful approach for understanding how Boards operate, especially following annual elections. Because of this turnover at annual meetings, they repeatedly cycle through these stages:
Forming: The New Beginning
After elections, new and returning Board members enter the Forming stage. Individuals are eager to contribute but may be unfamiliar with governance procedures, legal responsibilities, or ongoing projects. This is where structured onboarding—reviewing CCIOA requirements, governing documents, past meeting minutes, budgets, and pending issues—is critical.
Storming: Navigating Differences
As Board members begin collaborating differing viewpoints, communication styles, or interpretations of rules can create friction. Without guidance, this phase can lead to confusion or conflict. Training in communication, meeting management, and role clarity helps Boards navigate this phase productively.
Norming: Establishing Alignment
With clarity and support, Boards develop shared expectations and consistent processes. Members grow more comfortable with the work, understand how to collaborate, and begin operating more cohesively.
Performing: High-Functioning Governance
A Board that reaches the Performing stage conducts efficient meetings, makes well-reasoned decisions, plans strategically, and communicates effectively with homeowners. This stage allows the Board to operate with stability, confidence, and foresight.
Training accelerates progression through these stages, helping Boards reach the Performing level sooner—and stay there longer.
Because Board membership can change annually, retraining after each election is not optional—it's essential. New members may lack a foundational understanding of CCIOA, the association’s governing documents, financial position, or past decisions. Even returning members benefit from refreshers, especially as laws, community needs, and industry best practices evolve.
Constant training ensures continuity, protects institutional knowledge, and keeps the Board aligned on expectations and responsibilities. It also helps minimize the “reset effect” that often accompanies Board turnover, allowing the group to move more quickly from the Forming stage into cohesive, high-functioning governance.
The Role of CAI Rocky Mountain Chapter in Board Education
The Community Associations Institute Rocky Mountain Chapter (CAI-RMC) plays an invaluable role in supporting HOA Boards throughout Colorado. CAI-RMC offers educational programs, workshops, publications, and leadership resources designed specifically for Board members and owners alike. The Homeowner Leaders Committee, which I am chair of, is one of the best examples of these offerings. Every year, we offer two intensive programs based on industry hot topics, budgets, legal matters, etc. and it is believed that the more education and training we provide the better and longer lasting relationships can be!
These resources help directors understand CCIOA’s legal requirements, stay informed about legislative updates, and learn practical skills ranging from financial oversight to conflict resolution. Participation in CAI courses and chapter events strengthens a Board’s competency and helps ensure that directors remain equipped to govern effectively.
HOA Boards that invest in ongoing education, utilize professional support, and understand their own group development dynamics are consistently more successful. They navigate challenges more effectively, communicate more transparently, make more informed decisions, and build trust within the community.
In Colorado, we believe training is not merely helpful, it is vital. When combined with the valuable resources provided by CAI-RMC and a commitment to continual development, Boards position themselves and their communities for long-term success.
About the Authors:
Kiki Hennigan is a high-rise condominium onsite manager in Denver Colorado working for East West Urban Management. She joined the homeowner leader committee in 2022 and the CAI-RMC Board in 2025. She enjoys helping people learn and grow in this industry.
Patrick O’Hayer is the Director of Market Development for Hammersmith/RealManage covering the state of Colorado. He has been in the HOA space for 10 years serving previously as an onsite general manager and Vice President of Management. He joined the homeowner leader committee in 2020. He is a firm believer that education for owners and board members makes for a more successful management partnership.
By Marcus T. Wile, Orten Cavanagh Holmes & Hunt, LLC
Involvement in the management or governance of a community association inevitably involves interacting with individuals whose conduct, communication style, or circumstances create challenges and frustration. These personalities can be abrasive, difficult, rude and can trigger certain instincts in people to handwave away these people to help preserve the peace. It is an understandable reflex but it is not always the right approach and can make things worse rather than better.
Types of Difficult Personalities:
General Strategies:
Communication: Clear, consistent, and transparent communication is one of the most effective tools for preventing conflict. Much tumult in communities comes from owners who feel they are in the dark or believe that the association is making secret decisions. Open meetings with genuine encouragement for community involvement helps to foster trust and reduce speculation and conspiracy theories. Enacting – and ensuring that members are aware of – a code of conduct regarding participation in meetings helps to set expectations in advance, particularly regarding meeting decorum, allows boards to limit disruptions while remaining fair and consistent. Additionally, association websites, newsletters, and email blasts – even when notice may not be legally required – can be a powerful tool to help keep homeowners informed and reduce misinformation.
Listen: Just because people may behave in difficult ways does not always mean they are wrong. The messenger may be flawed but they may be delivering an important message that is, in fact, in the best interest of the community. Even if the opinion is misplaced, listening genuinely and compassionately does not mean that the community needs to agree but it does demonstrate that the association respects and cares for its members. Often, owners simply want to be heard. Providing space for expression can diffuse tension before it hardens into hostility.
Compassion: Compassion is not weakness. It is the most effective form of de-escalation.
De-Escalation Tips:
Listen actively without interrupting or becoming defensive.
When people feel involved, respected, and understood, they are far more likely to accept outcomes they may not have been in favor of or prefer.
When Compassion is Not Enough:
Sometimes compassion is not enough, and the association must result to legal action. Prior to filing a lawsuit against a homeowner, carefully review and consult with counsel regarding any prerequisites or limitations on legal action. Common claims may include seeking temporary restraining orders (TROs) and injunctive relief, nuisance claims, collection and foreclosure, or even eviction (if a tenant and if authority is expressly provided in the governing documents).
There is no one-size-fits-all approach to dealing with difficult personalities. Serving on a board of directors or being employed as a community manager does not mean that you have volunteered to endure abuse or be put in danger. Certain behaviors require immediate and strict responses. However, much of the time the expression of a difficult personality is a misguided protection mechanism covering for something else. Compassion, care, and communication help to uncover what is really going on and get to the heart of the issue. Successful community governance requires flexibility, patients, and judgment – balancing empathy with enforcement and compassion with the rule of law.
Marcus T. Wile is an attorney with Orten Cavanagh Holmes & Hunt, LLC where he focuses on all manner of litigation matters in addition to general counsel representation of common interest communities. Marcus is a frequent speaker at educational events for community association boards of directors and managers and is a member of the CAI-RMC Editorial Committee.
By Kerry Wallace, Goodman and Wallace, P.C.
Across Colorado’s resort communities, from Summit County and Aspen to Vail and Crested Butte, short-term rental (STR) demand has reshaped how many common interest communities (CICs) operate. While STRs can provide income opportunities for owners and support tourism-driven local economies, high concentrations of transient use create significant governance, financial, and legal challenges for CICs. If not monitored, residential condominiums risk becoming de facto “condo-hotels” without the infrastructure, approvals, or protections that purpose-built lodging developments typically have. Condo-hotels (part condominium - part hotel), are typically designed with professional management, appropriate zoning, commercial insurance, and clear expectations regarding transient occupancy. The risk for CICs arises when a residential condominium gradually begins operating like a hotel through unchecked STR activity rather than intentional planning. In many Colorado resort towns, STR saturation has triggered regulatory intervention, insurance challenges, governance disputes, and even questions about whether a building still qualifies as residential, as condo-hotels are treated as commercial lodging facilities.
Colorado law does not define “condo-hotel” at the state level. Instead, classification depends on how a property is used and regulated locally. Common indicators of uses that can lead to treatment as a “condo-hotel” include frequent guest turnover, hotel-style marketing on booking platforms, centralized cleaning or check-in services, elevated noise and security incidents, and commercial-level wear on common amenities. Once condo-hotel uses and conditions arise, the distinction between residential condominium use and lodging use begins to blur drawing scrutiny from municipalities, lenders, insurers, and full-time residents alike. Lenders increasingly classify STR-dominant buildings as non-warrantable, limiting buyer financing options and negatively affecting resale values across the community. Insurance coverage and tax treatment may be implicated. Further, such use may run afoul of governmental regulations.
STR regulation in Colorado is almost entirely local, and enforcement has grown increasingly complex. Resort jurisdictions and lenders are focusing less on how a property is titled and more on how it operates day to day. Property owners typically must obtain local STR licenses and comply with municipal or county codes, as well as applicable sales and lodging tax requirements. Summit County, for example, uses zoning overlay districts to distinguish between resort areas where STRs are encouraged and neighborhood areas where STRs are capped or prohibited. Aspen adopted an STR moratorium and a permit system that differentiates between residential STRs and purpose-built lodging or condo-hotel properties. Vail requires annual STR registration and a designated local contact to respond to complaints.
In addition to regulatory, insurance, and lender impacts, STR density that pushes a building toward hotel-like operation places burdens on the association. Boards must devote increasing time to addressing transient conduct, enforcing community rules against short-term occupants unfamiliar with those rules, and responding to higher volumes of resident complaints. At the same time, STR-heavy buildings commonly experience accelerated wear on common elements, heightened security needs, and escalating insurance costs. Without STR-specific fees or cost-allocation mechanisms, these expenses are typically borne by all owners, meaning resident owners may investor-driven rental activity.
Analysis of how STRs are treated at the local government level needs to occur to ensure current and future compliance by the CIC with those regulations. Likewise, it is critical to align CIC governance with lender treatment of what is considered condo-hotel. In conjunction with these evaluations, an analysis of governing documents should occur to ascertain if changes are needed to clearly define, regulate, or restrict STRs based upon regulations, lender requirements, insurance concerns, and CIC specific impacts such as parking, rule compliance, and wear and tear. The CIC should then monitor STR density considering these various aspects.
Colorado’s experience offers a cautionary lesson. Short-term rentals can quietly convert residential condominiums into hotel-like properties, which reshapes governance structures, financial stability, and community character. While STRs are not inherently incompatible with condominium living, inaction creates systemic risk. For boards and managers, the objective is not to eliminate STRs but to manage them deliberately and transparently. In a regulatory environment increasingly focused on operational reality rather than formal labels, proactive governance may be the most effective risk management tool available to CICs.
Kerry Wallace is a Partner at Goodman and Wallace, P.C. in Eagle County, CO with a law practice focused upon guiding resort-based common interest communities through the ever-changing legal landscape. Kerry is a current Business Partner of CAI-RMC, and has been a speaker and panel member at numerous CAI Colorado - Rocky Mountain conferences. Kerry can be reached at 970-926-4447 or Kerry@goodmanwallace.com.
HB25-1272: this bill does a number of things including imposing a six-year deadline (statute of limitation) on Construction Defect actions and setting forth Affirmative Defenses that a Construction Professional may raise against a claim, including that the defect was caused by weather, failure to follow maintenance recommendations, human-caused event (such as vandalism) or ordinary wear and tear. It also increases the owner voting threshold to pursue a construction defect claim from a simple majority to a 65% vote.
As we head into 2026, Colorado community associations are operating in a changed legal environment. Recent legislation has raised the bar for compliance in several critical areas, including LIST. “Strict compliance” is, in many cases, no longer simply a best practice; it is the baseline requirement for enforcing a community’s rights. With new laws reshaping foreclosure procedures and construction defect claims, the early part of the year is the ideal time for boards to take stock and strengthen their foundations.
By Jenny Shamoon, Altitude Community Law, P.C.
As communities face rising costs and aging infrastructure, many associations are exploring creative ways to manage or monetize their common elements. A significant trend involves shifting responsibility for certain portions of the community from the association to individual owners. Others are reclassifying amenities, repurposing them, or even selling portions of the common elements to generate revenue. These strategies can offer financial relief, but they come with meaningful trade-offs boards must consider carefully.
Shifting Maintenance Responsibility to Owners
In many townhome communities, associations are amending their declarations to require owners to maintain the entirety of their residence, including exterior surfaces and landscaping. Many pre-CCIOA condominium communities have also adopted a similar approach, requiring owners to insure and maintain the entirety of their residences.
Pros: Transferring responsibility to owners can substantially reduce operating costs. Associations may benefit from lower insurance premiums, lower reserve contributions, and the ability to maintain lower monthly assessments. For communities already operating with tight budgets, shifting maintenance obligations can relieve financial pressure and help the association avoid special assessments.
Cons: This change does not eliminate the costs of repair; it simply transfers them to homeowners. In today’s legal environment, an association’s ability to compel owners to properly insure or maintain these components is more restrictive and limited than years past. Shifting responsibility to owners as means that the association loses control over consistency, quality, and timing. One neglected roof or exterior wall can affect attached units, property values, and community appearance.
Additionally, individual owners often cannot obtain pricing as favorable as the association could by contracting for repairs in bulk. When owners are left to handle major structural or exterior components on their own, they lose the benefit of the association’s ability to negotiate volume discounts or enter into comprehensive service agreements covering multiple units. This can result in higher out-of-pocket expenses and inconsistent repair standards across the community.
Reclassifying or Repurposing Amenities
Another trend involves modifying the use of existing common elements. Rather than maintaining high-cost amenities that owners are unwilling to fund, associations are removing specific references in the declaration or plat map (such as “tennis court,” “pool,” or “playground”) and instead categorizing these areas simply as “common elements.” This provides flexibility to repurpose the space without violating the governing documents.
For example, a deteriorated tennis court can be converted into open green space, which is significantly cheaper to maintain. Some communities have even gone further by subdividing portions of the common elements into buildable lots and selling them to generate revenue.
Should Associations “Remove” Common Elements from the Declaration?
Boards often ask whether they should amend the declaration to remove certain common elements altogether. This answer depends on what “remove” means. If the association owns the property, or the property is owned in common by the unit owners, it is a common element, regardless of whether the declaration mentions it. However, removing specific amenity references can be beneficial because it gives the association greater discretion to repurpose the space without violating the governing documents.
But this raises the question: how does reassigning or removing common element responsibilities affect the association’s reserves? While changing maintenance obligations may reduce future reserve needs, it does not alter the status of existing reserve funds. Money already collected for long-term repairs remains the property of the association and must be preserved for future community expenses. Even if the association no longer maintains a particular component, those funds cannot be returned to owners, as the current owners may not be those who originally contributed to the reserves, and refunding those amounts could create an improper benefit to such owners. In most cases, financially strained associations will still need those reserves for other capital needs within the community.
Some associations also consider conveying property to the local municipality. While this can reduce association expenses, it raises significant concerns. Community associations were originally created because cities lacked the resources to maintain neighborhood-level amenities to the standard owners expected. Turning maintenance back over to the city may result in reduced upkeep, infrequent repairs, and declining property values, particularly for roads or large open spaces.
Key Questions for Boards
Before shifting responsibilities or revising common element designations, boards should consider:
Shifting responsibilities or reimagining common elements can reduce costs and offer flexibility, but these approaches also carry risks. Boards should weight the long-term impacts on property values, maintenance consistency, owner expectations, and community cohesion. Creative solutions can benefit associations so long as the trade-offs are fully understood and carefully planned.
Jenny Shamoon is an associate attorney in the Transactional Department at Altitude Community Law, P.C., where she advises Colorado community associations on governing documents, compliance, and general operations. Her work focuses on helping associations navigate CCIOA and implement practical, legally sound solutions.
By Heidi Scanlan
Most HOA boards don’t run out of ideas they run into too many of them. Meeting agendas get packed, budgets keep carrying old “zombie” line items, and discussions circle around without much getting finished. The fix isn’t more meetings, it’s a simple system that takes a community’s wish list and turns it into a funded, 90-day action plan.
Here’s a 5-step framework any HOA can use, with tips on using common HOA specific industry software to make it practical in conjunction with your Community Management Team.
1) One Door for New Ideas
Owners, committees, and vendors all have ideas. Without a single way to collect them, the loudest voice wins.
How to fix it:
Why it works: Everyone gets equal access, and the board sees better, more complete requests.
2) Rank Requests with Clear Criteria
Debates shrink when everyone agrees on how to judge projects.
Score each request on things like:
Top-scoring projects go into the next 90-day work cycle.
3) Work in 90-Day “Sprints”
Annual budgets set a big picture. Real progress happens in quarters.
4) Tie the Budget to Real Goals
A budget shouldn’t just be a list of expenses, it should show what the community is trying to achieve.
Now when an owner asks, “Where’s my money going?” you can say:
5) Report What Matters, Drop the Rest
Skip long reports. Use three simple tools:
Zombie test for line items:
Saying “no” without burning bridges is possible when the process is framed as fair and consistent. For example, if a project scores below the quarterly cut-off, it isn’t rejected outright—it stays in the backlog for review at the next cycle. If an item lacks an owner, scope, or clear goal, it can be closed with the option to resubmit if circumstances change. This way, the decision feels process-driven, not personal.
To make sure good ideas aren’t lost, “nice-to-haves” can be placed in a parking lot. These items are reviewed quarterly rather than monthly, creating space for higher-priority work. If an idea sits untouched for a year, it is automatically retired unless re-submitted. This keeps the list fresh while preserving opportunities for future consideration.
At its core, the HOA budget is the community’s financial plan. It balances day-to-day operation such as landscaping, utilities, insurance, and management with reserves set aside for long-term repairs like roofs, siding, or elevators. Best practices include taking a conservative approach to expect cost surprises, aligning the one-year budget with three- and five-year plans, gathering owner input through short surveys, and staying compliant with governing documents and state law.
Strong governance requires clear guardrails. Boards must act in the best interest of the entire community, ensuring that financials and approved budgets are shared on time. Major budget decisions must be approved by the whole board, not by individual directors acting alone.
With this approach, several positive changes take place. Owners gain clarity on where their money goes, projects move forward within 90 days instead of lingering for years, and every idea is reviewed under the same criteria. The community also becomes more resilient, with the ability to address emergencies without chaos. Ultimately, budgets stop being seen as spreadsheets and instead become the community’s roadmap. Every dollar tells a story, and this method ensures it moves from wish list to visible results.
Awaiting bio & headshot: By Heidi Scanlan for Common Interest (CAI-RMC)
