Colorado cities and counties would be able to wrest control of dilapidated apartment complexes from their owners temporarily under new legislation inspired by several notoriously troubled buildings in Aurora and Denver.
Senate Bill 20 was introduced last week on the first day of the state legislature’s 2025 session. Backed by Aurora and Denver Democrats, the measure would allow local officials or the Colorado Attorney General’s Office to ask a judge to place apartment complexes with unfixed problems under the temporary authority of a court-appointed caretaker for at least six months.
The caretaker would then use rental payments to fix problems at the property before turning it back over to the owner.
The measure, which will be opposed vehemently by the Colorado Apartment Association, comes as local officials in metro Denver have struggled — and increasingly lost patience — with landlords and property owners that have slow-rolled or outright refused to fix longstanding problems with their properties. Lately, much of their public focus has been on CBZ Management.
The company, which owns several properties in Denver and Aurora, has drawn international notoriety in recent months for the chronically unsafe conditions of its properties and the more recent emergence of crime and gang activity there.
All four of CBZ’s Aurora properties either have closed, will soon close or have been turned over to a court-appointed caretaker. Its three Denver properties remain open, though local officials are pursuing legal action because CBZ and its associated company haven’t addressed conditions at its Uptown building.
The conditions at its properties in Denver and Aurora — including persistent black mold, pest infestations, sagging infrastructure and chronically absent heat and hot water — have lingered for years, frustrating tenants and prompting dozens of complaints, fines and investigations, according to records and reporting by The Denver Post. Before Aurora began closing CBZ’s buildings several months ago, the city repeatedly sought to negotiate and reach plea deals, which were then ignored, to bring the company’s properties up to code.
“Frankly, the lack of an adequate remedy for a really, really bad situation like (CBZ) is very much part of what inspired this bill,” said Sen. Mike Weissman, a Democrat who represents parts of Aurora that are home to CBZ’s buildings. He said conditions in other properties nearby were concerning, too.
SB-20 is also sponsored by Denver Democrats Rep. Javier Mabrey and Julie Gonzales as well as Aurora Democratic Rep. Mandy Lindsay.
Bud Slatkin, a lawyer who represents CBZ’s owners and its constituent companies, did not return an email seeking comment. A municipal judge in Aurora ordered the closure of CBZ’s Edge of Lowry complex on Monday because of crime and housing concerns.
Weissman’s bill would not create new regulations, but it would expand the authority of cities, counties and the attorney general’s office to bring criminal or civil actions to enforce a gamut of existing housing laws. Current law often places the onus of enforcing those laws on individual tenants or advocates, by filing lawsuits.
Drew Hamrick, the vice president of the apartment association, blasted the bill as government overreach and legislation that his organization “hates.”
“It takes the entirety of a landlord-tenant statute … everything that the statute says a landlord should do, and then gives the Attorney General’s Office, as well as every county and every municipality, the ability to pursue that as a criminal or public civil cause of action,” he said. “It’s just huge overreach.”
Last year, the legislature passed a bill allowing the attorney general to investigate violations of the state’s safe-housing laws, more formally known as the warranty of habitability. That law change was inspired partially by CBZ as well as repeated issues at another Denver complex. The AG’s office has since opened an investigation into CBZ, in part because of the conditions of its properties.
Though unsafe conditions at some properties — like CBZ’s — have persisted for years, local authorities at times have hesitated to order their closures out of fear of losing housing stock and displacing residents. Allowing a caretaker to step in, Weissman argued, would provide a middle ground between allowing unsafe conditions and closing down housing in a state that’s desperate for it.
“I don’t believe (local officials) want to close down buildings — where are people going to go?” he said. “When it’s 100 degrees in the summer, it’s one kind of problem. When it’s 15 degrees in the winter, it’s a different kind of problem. At best, it’s an inconvenience; more likely, it’s a threat to health and worse.
“So the point of a receivership is to try to bring the building up to code and not close it down.”
Under the bill, officials could petition for a property to be placed with a receiver if a violation of local public health ordinances isn’t fixed within 30 days or if there’s a second violation within a year. A judge would have to approve the request and then oversee the process. The property owner would retake control of the property after the caretaker’s work was finished.
Two of CBZ’s Aurora properties have already been placed under the control of a receiver, albeit one sought by a creditor that had gone unpaid by CBZ’s owners. A handful of other states, including Massachusetts, have similar policies to the one Weissman is pitching.
Hamrick, of the apartment association, said the caretaker component amounted to government seizure — even if temporarily — of private property.
Weissman argued that the majority of landlords provide safe housing and are responsive to problems. His bill is aimed at “landlords (who) are irresponsible, and irresponsible for a long time,” he said.
An Aurora City Council committee has voted in support of the measure, according to city spokesman Ryan Luby. Representatives of Denver’s Department of Public Health and Environment, which oversees housing inspections, didn’t return a message seeking comment.
Kevin Bommer, the executive director of the Colorado Municipal League, said his organization was still examining the bill and might have minor tweaks to suggest. But he said CML had no general objections and could ultimately support it.
Because the legislature is still in the early days of its 2025 session, the measure has not been assigned an initial committee hearing date yet.
Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.
Originally Published:
