Colorado HOA Clothesline and Energy Device Protections

" Subsection (1)(b) defines that term narrowly: a device or structure that cuts fossil-fuel energy use at a residence or business, "further limited to include only" six categories: an awning, shutter, trellis, ramada, or other shade structure marketed for reducing energy consumption; a garage or attic fan and its vents or louvers; an evaporative cooler; energy-efficient outdoor lighting (including fluorescent fixtures and any attached solar panel or motion detector); a retractable clothesline; and a heat pump system as defined at § 39-26-732(2)(c). Because the list is closed, a fixed clothesline or a freestanding drying rack falls outside the protection.

Subsection (2) preserves an association's power to impose reasonable aesthetic rules on dimensions, placement, or appearance, so long as it weighs the device's purchase price, operating cost, and performance and its own governing-document criteria, plus bona fide code-based safety requirements. Subsection (3) confirms the statute grants no right to install a device on someone else's property, on leased property without the lessor's consent, on loan collateral without the lender's consent, or on a limited or general common element. The section was added in 2008 (effective August 5); SB 21-246 amended the clothesline and lighting entries and added heat pumps effective September 7, 2021; SB 23-016 updated the heat pump cross-reference effective August 7, 2023. 5) applies that same bar to association declarations, bylaws, and rules.

A declaration provision, bylaw, or rule that violates § 38-33.3-106.7 is void and unenforceable; the fix is a civil action, not a fine. Under CCIOA's general enforcement statute, § 38-33.3-123(1)(c)(I), a court hearing a suit to enforce the declaration, bylaws, or rules "shall award reasonable attorney fees, actual costs, and actual costs of collection to the prevailing party." An association's recoverable fees are capped at $5,000 or 50% of its actual costs, whichever is less, unless the court finds the owner was able to comply but willfully refused, so an association that loses typically pays the owner's litigation costs on top of dropping the ban.