Construction-defects reform legislation hit a snag as frustrated Democrats accused a group of business leaders and affordable housing advocates of throwing up roadblocks to a bipartisan bill that had been set for its first hearing Wednesday, but a spokesman for the coalition says they’re still at the table and are confident an agreement can be reached.

After learning that the Homeownership Opportunity Alliance’s policy committee had voted unanimously Tuesday night to oppose House Bill 1279 – sponsored by Assistant House Majority Leader Alec Garnett, D-Denver, and House Minority Whip Lori Saine, R-Dacono, and co-sponsored by Assistant House Minority Leader Cole Wist, R-Centennial – Democrats pushed back the bill’s scheduled hearing before the House State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee by a week to next Wednesday, although an HOA spokesman stressed that the organization has yet to take a formal position on the legislation.

The bill would require a majority of the members of a homeowners’ association to approve filing a complaint over defective construction in a condominium project and also mandate certain disclosures about the cost and other aspects of pursuing a claim. Backers hope it will help spur condo construction across the state by making it harder to file multi-million dollar class action lawsuits against condo builders, who say the likelihood of such lawsuits has led to the market segment’s demise in Colorado.

“I’m frustrated that the folks who seem to care most about this issue continue to move the goal posts,” Garnett told reporters at a media briefing. “I’m just frustrated that we got to that point and there’s unanimous opposition from this huge coalition that represents everyone who wants to work in this space,” he added.

The HOA, allied with the 40-member Metro Mayors Caucus, has pushed hard without success in recent years for legislation to rewrite the rules governing how homeowners can pursue complaints against condominium builders for construction defects. Earlier this session, the groups backed a Republican-sponsored Senate bill that would have set many of the same steps as House Bill 1279 while also requiring homeowners to submit to binding arbitration or mediation before filing a lawsuit, a provision Democrats reject, saying it denies homeowners the right to pursue claims in court.

The two sides hit an impasse over whether the statute of limitations on filing a complaint should pause during the 120-day period the bill’s sponsors establish for homeowners to take care of the required notifications and hold an election, a dispute Garnett called a “de minimus” point not worth sinking the bill over.

“You don’t get everything you want in the legislative process,” Garnett said. “And to expect that you’re going to get every single word in every bill in this legislative process is unrealistic. To think that we’ve come this far and there is unanimous opposition.” He added that he’d recently looked up the definition of “mission creep” and wondered if that’s what was happening as lawmakers and various interests neared their goal.

“They’re pushing to a point where I’m not sure they actually want something done,” he said.

Garnett made clear that the sponsors were simply delaying initial consideration of the bill, not spiking it.

“It’s important for Colorado voters to know that we have a bipartisan working group, we’re going to keep moving forward, and we’re going to get something done, but the folks that say they want to solve the problem right now are getting locked down on a non-issue,” he said. “It is a non-issue.”

“If it’s not a big issue, then it’s not a big issue,” said HOA spokesman Mike Kopp, president of the business advocacy group Colorado Concern and a former Senate minority leader. “So, clearly there’s an issue around it for both sides of this. That’s why it is a sticking point for the coalition.”

He noted that the HOA has yet to adopt an official position on the bill but added that the coalition can’t say they’re fully behind it until some matters are resolved, including issues surrounding the duration of an election and whether or not the statute of limitation keeps ticking.

Kopp questioned whether homeowners’ associations really need 120 days to conduct an election, noting that the bill also includes a separate 90-day notice period that starts all over again once a complaint wins approval – potentially adding seven months to the period condo owners can wait before suing.

“Pretty soon, you’ve added a year of exposure to the builders, and that’s contrary to what we’re trying to accomplish in the first place,” he said. “We’re trying to reduce exposure, not extend it.”

The rhetoric on both sides peaked late in the afternoon, with Democratic legislators and Kopp’s group each raising questions about the other’s motives.

“All we have seen throughout this process is the goal posts continue to change over and over again,” said House Speaker Crisanta Duran, D-Denver, at the press briefing. She called it “truly unfortunate and disappointing” that lawmakers have been engaged in regular dialogue with Kopp’s group, doing “exactly what we were asked to do in terms of policy by introducing these bills, including policy requests in that legislation, and even though we have done all of that, it’s not enough. And it makes me wonder what this debate is really about. Because if this debate is about gutting consumer rights and taking away a person’s right to be able to go to court, that is quite, quite troubling.”

Garnett said he was questioning whether the HOA group might have other demands before getting behind House Bill 1279, including possibly raising the threshold for approving a complaint above a simple majority or injecting a requirement for arbitration into it.

“I think everyone’s been pretty clear that it’s a great step forward to have a strong informed-consent bill,” he said. “If it’s because the percentage isn’t high enough or alternative dispute resolution isn’t there or they just want a chaotic marketplace, I’m going to have to say that it’s been this mission-creep. You can’t honestly be telling me that you’re willing to not get a good bill across because of 120 days. I don’t get it. I’m lost. And we’re close.”

In a statement issued before speaking with The Colorado Statesman, Kopp sounded equally skeptical that the issues on the table were the real issues at stake.

“It’s too bad legislative leaders are suggesting that it’s time to call off the dialogue with our group,” he said. “We have fundamental disagreements on a small number of issues that we remain hopeful can be resolved. When viewed against the backdrop of last year, however, and the year before that, one does have to wonder if the status quo is just too attractive for folks to let go of.”

Still, in an interview, Kopp stressed that there have been no ultimatums and that his group considers the lines of communication open.

“As far as it depends on us, it’s wide open,” he said. “We will come down any day, any time of day. In fact, as recently as this morning, Rep. Garnett was asking the coalition for the amendments it would like to see.”

– ernest@coloradostatesman.com