Bow Mar suit: the cities plan to ask for a quick order blocking the gates. The town isn't commenting

Denver and Littleton's lawsuit against the Town of Bow Mar, filed Monday, Nov. 9, is the first step. The complaint says the cities "will move separately for a preliminary injunction," a court order that would stop the town from building the gates while the case goes on.

Bow Mar declined to comment when Denver7 asked for a statement, the station reported.

Why it matters: construction had been expected to begin around Thanksgiving, 9News reported in October. If the gates go up before a judge rules, the cities argue, the harm can't be undone. Our Tuesday story lays out the cities' legal arguments.

What the cities want, and what they don't

The complaint's request to the court lists:

• declarations that Bow Mar's gate resolutions and its contract with the installer, Wizard Works Security Systems, exceed the town's authority under state traffic law and are void;
• a declaration that a gate that works like a vacation of a boundary road is void without the joint action state law requires;
• preliminary and permanent injunctions against building or running the gates; and
• "attorneys' fees and costs as allowed by law."

The cities "do not seek damages," the complaint says.

Our Tuesday story noted that the mayor's office announcement said the suit "seeks compensation as the court deems fit," while the complaint disclaims damages. The only money the complaint itself requests is attorney fees and costs, plus the standard closing request for "such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper." Denverite reported the fees request as well.

The case for moving fast

The complaint argues the court should act before trial because:

• injuries to people from traffic pushed onto Denver and Littleton streets "cannot be undone";
• once the gates are built and running, the harm can't be fixed after trial; and
• an order would keep things as they are, because "the roadways are open today."

As government bodies, the cities say, they don't have to post the bond a court can require before granting an injunction.

Littleton's piece of road

Most of the attention has been on Sheridan Boulevard and Tufts Avenue on the Denver side. The complaint also describes a Littleton stake: the stretch of West Belleview Avenue between South Perry Street and Bow Mar's town line. Littleton owns and maintains it, and it has no cross streets inside Littleton. Its only purpose, the complaint says, is to connect Littleton to Bow Mar's streets and on to Sheridan, Quincy Avenue and Denver. With gates on Sheridan and Prospect, the cities argue, it "would become, in substance, a dead end serving only Bow Mar," while Littleton keeps paying to plow and repair it.

Littleton Mayor Kyle Schlachter told Denver7 that "any bit of slowdown, even if it's 30 seconds or a minute, could be a life or death situation" for emergency response.

What our records add

Who's arguing the case. The copy the city posted lists an assistant city attorney in the Denver City Attorney's Office for Denver and a private firm for Littleton. The filing date line on that copy is blank.

Still no Council action. A search of the Council's legislative records for "Bow Mar" and "Tufts" turns up nothing. The complaint says closing Tufts would require vacating Denver right-of-way, which only the Council can approve.

Flynn's concern. District 2 Council member Kevin Flynn, whose district borders Bow Mar, told Denver7 the gates would make left turns from Quincy more dangerous for residents to the east. Our October story has his earlier comments.

What's next

Watch for the injunction motion and Bow Mar's first response in Denver District Court. We'll follow the case.