Background
Ritz-Carlton Development Company challenged the 2023 valuation of the Ritz-Carlton Club near Beaver Creek Ski Resort. The property contains fifty-five condominiums, although the parties stipulated to the value of one marketing unit. A deed covenant restricts the property to residential timeshare estates. Each remaining unit has twelve fee-simple interests, each generally providing twenty-one days of annual use under a rotating calendar and winter/summer allocations. Those interests account for thirty-six weeks; sixteen other weeks are available at the homeowners association’s discretion for a nightly rate. The association owns the furnishings.
The Eagle County Assessor increased the valuation from $68,644,830 in 2022 to $123,995,880 in 2023. After the Board of Equalization upheld that figure, the Board of Assessment Appeals (BAA) heard competing evidence. Ritz-Carlton broker Brad Cohn described the interests as “fractional,” while acknowledging that the deed does not use that term. Valuation-firm managing director Bruce Cartwright proposed calculating values from both wholly owned condominiums and fractional-estate sales and adopting the lower result. His $67,098,210 valuation used selected Residence Interest sales, adjustments, and a personal-property deduction. He acknowledged a contingency-fee arrangement and that his analysis was not compliant with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
County appraiser Andrea Noakes instead used wholly owned units at the adjacent Bachelor Gulch Village Resort and Spa, citing similarities in construction, design, condition, location, ski access, tunnels, and amenities. Her unadjusted figure was $174,290,050; she applied a 30% reduction based on evidence concerning other deed-restricted properties and reached $122,000,000. She rejected Residence Interest sales as unreliable because of their variables, wide price ranges, unconfirmed arm’s-length status, and failure to account for sixteen unallotted weeks. The BAA found Cartwright’s analysis deficient, credited Noakes’s analysis, and reduced the assessment to $122,000,000.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals affirmed. It held that Colorado law does not recognize fractional interests or estates as a third statutory category: section 38-33-110(5) defines a timeshare estate as either an interval estate or a time-span estate. The deed likewise expressly establishes statutory timeshare estates. Assessors must consider property characteristics and comparability, but the court rejected Ritz-Carlton’s contention that the law requires a separate fractional-interest methodology.
The Division of Property Taxation’s continuing-education Course Materials did not compel Cartwright’s two-step, lower-value approach. Materials in the Assessors’ Reference Library (ARL) bind assessors; these Course Materials were not published there and expressly described themselves as informational and training materials. The BAA’s 2015 Snowmass decision also did not control because BAA hearings are de novo proceedings addressing the relevant tax year. The court additionally identified other BAA decisions supporting valuation through wholly owned comparable sales.
The court distinguished legal compliance from factual weighing. It concluded that Noakes’s unit valuation complied with the statutory market approach, unit assessment rule, and ARL requirement that timeshares be valued as a unit. Competent evidence supported the BAA’s comparability and credibility findings, and substantial evidence supported its criticisms of Cartwright’s unexplained selections, calendar adjustments, personal-property deduction, and unverified sales. Any error concerning missing transfer declaration forms was harmless because independent grounds supported rejection of his analysis. Finally, the court declined to consider the hearing-time due process claim as unpreserved: counsel questioned timekeeping and requested cross-examination, but then cross-examined Noakes without raising a due process objection.
Key Takeaways
- The BAA’s amended order and its $122,000,000 valuation were affirmed.
- Non-ARL training materials and a prior BAA valuation decision did not mandate the proposed two-step methodology.
- Statutory compliance and competent evidence supported Noakes’s valuation; substantial evidence defeated the arbitrary-and-capricious challenge.
- The missing-forms issue was harmless on these independent findings, and the due process claim failed on circumstance-specific preservation grounds.
Why It Matters
The decision explains the legal and evidentiary framework for Colorado timeshare assessments while rejecting a universally required fractional-interest valuation method. Comparability, witness credibility, and evidentiary weight remain BAA factual questions when the assessor follows the statutory scheme.
It also illustrates the separate consequences of harmless-error and preservation rulings. The unpublished opinion was issued under C.A.R. 35(e).