Landmark Towers Case Clouds Future Of Colorado Development

Yesterday Bisnow attended the latest in the NAIOP Building a Better CO Series: Part 1: Financing Infrastructure After Landmark Court Case. The Landmark Towers v. UMB Bank decision overturned the way metro district elections had been handled for decades. Now the development industry is scrambling to find ways to comply with the decision.

The event featured a panel of experts to explain the decision, detail how it impacts real estate development and lay out strategies for a post-Landmark world: Tom DeVine, of counsel, Holland & Hart; Boulder Creek Neighborhoods CIO and equity principal Steve Erickson; Butler Snow attorney (public finance, tax incentives and credit markets group) Dee Wisor; Spencer Fane attorney at law Rick Kron; and D.A. Davidson Cos managing director, public finance Sam Sharp.

The speakers agreed the ruling sent shockwaves throughout the industry, since it upset decades of qualifying elections. The case involved the sordid tale of Landmark condo owners who said the Marin Metropolitan District was created by ineligible electors and legitimate property owners didn't get to vote in the election creating the special district, even though they would pay taxes into it. The Court of Appeals sided with the condo owners.

That district was apparently created with dishonest intent, but most of the state’s metro districts were created for honest purposes using the same method to qualify eligible electors. The ruling has clouded the status of these metro districts. Some say perhaps special districts don’t need to be saved, but the speakers disagreed. They said developers know metro districts are very useful across all industry types, and the state needs to sort out the confusion.