As we anticipated a bill attempting to clean up manager licensing was introduced into the House. HB 15-1040 was introduced by Representative Dan Thurlow (R-Grand Junction) to narrow the number of individuals that are required to be licensed as community association managers. As initially introduced, the bill limits the types of communities that a manager must be licensed to manage. As introduced, the bill removes from the definition of Common Interest Community:
• Communities with less than 200 units;
• Communities that are reserved for exclusively nonresidential use; and
• Communities that contain only timeshares.
The next section of the bill further restricts what type of person is defined as a manager. The current law provides that any person performing one or more of certain defined management functions is deemed to be a community association manager. HB 15-1040 changes the requirement from one or more to “no less than three”.
Finally, the Bill provides that if two managers manage a single community, only one needs to get a license for that community.
Having spoken to a large number of people on the western slope, both owners and managers, there was wide spread concern that the manager licensing statute was geared towards large Denver area communities, and that the smaller communities on the western slope were just being caught up in Denver politics. It is clear that the manager licensing law needs to be cleaned up and tweaked. It is also clear that, while the original law was written based upon concerns from the Denver metro area, HB 15-1040 seems to try and make the existing law more suitable for smaller communities because it may be very burdensome on them whether in the metro area or on the western slope.
While this bill may not have much of a chance in passing as written, it is a reminder that the citizens on the western slope continue to believe they are not being heard or considered in the legislature when bills are introduced and passed with a one size fits all attitude. What works in a major metropolitan area, may not be the correct solution for smaller communities with limited populations.