Become our Member : JOIN SFPMA TODAY   LogIn / Register: LOGIN/REGISTER

SFPMA Industry Articles | news, legal updates, events & education! 

Find Blog Articles for Florida’s Condo, HOA and the Management Industry. 

A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE LAW THAT HAS DANGER WRITTEN ALL OVER IT

A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE LAW THAT HAS DANGER WRITTEN ALL OVER IT

  • Posted: Feb 03, 2020
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE LAW THAT HAS DANGER WRITTEN ALL OVER IT

Until now, you couldn’t sue an association for a violation of these rights inasmuch as the action by the association did not constitute “state action.”  This new statute changes all that if it passes and will open a Pandora’s box and flood of litigation between associations and their owners.

By Eric Glazer, Esq. 

Published February 3, 2020

Two weeks ago, I wrote to you about House Bill 623 that is making its way through The Florida Legislature.  Another change to the law currently included in the bill is the following language:

718.112 Bylaws.—

(1) GENERALLY.—

(c) Any provision of the declaration, the association bylaws, or reasonable rules or regulations of the association which diminish or infringe upon any right protected under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution or Art. I of the State Constitution is void and unenforceable without further action of the association. The association may record a notice in the public records of the county in which the condominium is located evidencing its intention to not enforce such provision. The failure of the association to record a notice in the public record may not be the basis for liability or evidence of discrimination or a discriminatory intention.

To simplify, the 14th Amendment made The Bill of Rights (The first ten amendments to the Constitution) applicable to the states.  So this law basically says no provision of your governing documents can infringe upon the rights you have under the Bill of Rights.  All of you know several of these rights such as the right to free speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion.

There is plenty of law out there that says when you move into an association, you may give up some of the rights you may ordinarily have in your private home. You do this by agreeing to be bound by the governing documents.   For example, courts have upheld the rights of Florida associations to prevent the use of the common elements for religious purposes, allowed associations to impose reasonable restrictions on speech through time limitations at meetings, impose restrictions on placement of political signs on the property or even placement of religious symbols in excess of certain sizes on your windows and doors.

The adoption of this proposed amendment by The Florida Legislature may throw all of these restrictions into doubt, including another one I haven’t mentioned yet.  The Second Amendment is the right to bear arms.  Inasmuch as Florida law allows associations to prohibit alcohol use on the common elements and prohibit religious ceremonies on the common elements I always opined that the association had the right to ban weapons on the common elements via a rule. If this proposed amendment passes, no way would an association be allowed to ban guns from the common areas.

I have serious concerns that if this amendment passes, associations will potentially be embroiled in case after case, where the association attempted to impose all of the reasonable restrictions mentioned above, and unit owners taking the position that the association is prohibited from doing so because it violates their constitutional rights.  Until now, you couldn’t sue an association for a violation of these rights inasmuch as the action by the association did not constitute “state action.”  This new statute changes all that if it passes and will open a Pandora’s box and flood of litigation between associations and their owners.

If you are a believer that associations are notorious for not providing their owners with rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, this new proposed law may not bother you.  If on the other hand you believe that the association should still be able to impose reasonable restrictions in order for all of us to live in harmony with each other, this new law should bother you.  A LOT.

 

 

Tags: ,
The Internet of things

The Internet of things

The telecommunications industry says the upgrades are needed by 2020 to meet the demand for faster internet speeds, smart cities, driverless vehicles, instantaneous 3D downloads, the “Internet of things” where machines talk to machines, and more.

The battle between infrastructure needed for fast digital service and property rights may soon come to communities across Palm Beach County. Right now, it’s playing out in Tallahassee courtesy of legislation before lawmakers.

“It’s a ticket for multi-billion dollar wireless communication companies to come into a city and do as they please in city right of ways,” said Riviera Beach Councilwoman Dawn Pardo.

The brewing fight is over technological advances. First there was 1G wireless technology, for “first generation,” and as telecommunications technology evolved, 2G, 3G, 4G and 4G LTE came to be. Now 5G, a fifth generation network technology allowing greater connectivity at higher speeds for many more devices, is on its way.

To place the infrastructure needed for 5G service, a proposal pending in the Florida Legislature would limit state and local control of public rights-of-way where the 5G equipment is being installed.

 

SFPMA feels that with the proposal in the Florida Legislature with some changes is what we need to advance this to all of our Florida communities, this upgrade is for reliability “If you are stranded in an heavy traffic area or one that has many customers using services at one time it slows down and this brings problems” Can you get through in an emergency? We have members right now that offer Building Owners the ability to place towers, on rooftops and other locations with need to advance the networks. Many of our building members can make money each month by the placement of these on the properties and in the communities they own and manage. 

Senate Bill 596 sponsored by Sen. Travis Hutson, R-Palm Coast, and House Bill 687, sponsored by Rep. Mike La Rosa, R-St. Cloud, would create the Advanced Wireless Infrastructure Deployment Act and prohibit the Florida Department of Transportation and local governmental entities from prohibiting, regulating or charging for collocation of small wireless facilities in public rights-of-way.

Municipalities say the bill is one-sided, would take away their ability to control where 5G equipment is installed and totally favors telecommunications giants such as AT &T, Verizon and Sprint. The companies want the right to install their equipment on utility poles, light posts, signs and traffic arms in rights-of-way.

Pardo was one of about a dozen officials from cities and counties across Florida, including Miami, Fort Lauderdale and St. Petersburg, who spoke against the bill before the Senate Committee on Communications, Energy and Public Utilities in Tallahassee on March 7.

Pardo told the committee the bill would eliminate residents having a say in the location of 5G facilities.

Currently, Riviera Beach requires “stealth designs” that are unobtrusive, and has other rules as well. The city doesn’t allow the equipment within residential communities.

“We have a couple of these wireless companies proposing to put towers in residential communities without any input from the public. This is unacceptable. This bill allows companies to put as many towers as they want,” Pardo said.

The proliferation of poles and equipment on rights-of-way would jeopardize public safety, entice kids to climb up the poles and create more debris when a hurricane hits, Pardo said.

Riviera Beach has spent a “couple million dollars” to bury utility lines, Pardo said, adding, “Then the next thing you know, we have these 100-foot poles in the middle of the sidewalk.”

Both bills have passed their first round in the Senate Committee on Communications, Energy and Public Utilities and the House Subcommittee on Energy & Utilities.

While the bills deal only with “small cells,” the suitcase-size to small refrigerator-size building blocks of the 5G system, some companies are also submitting applications for poles as high as 120 feet.

The telecommunications industry says the upgrades are needed by 2020 to meet the demand for faster internet speeds, smart cities, driverless vehicles, instantaneous 3D downloads, the “Internet of things” where machines talk to machines, and more.

Houston-based Crown Castle, the nation’s largest provider of wireless infrastructure, sought to install 50 to 60 poles all over Riviera Beach, but in September 2016 the city passed an ordinance regulating them. The equipment boxes must be grouped together in a single location and spaced a minimum of 2,000 feet from each other unless technical documentation is provided by the applicant and approved by the city management. If more than six poles are to be located within one linear mile of a city block, the manager must notify the council.

Crown Castle installed four poles prior to the regulations. Mobility had planned to install numerous 120-foot poles, but Riviera Beach’s ordinance does not allow the poles to be over 35 feet. That’s got municipal leaders worried.

Eric Poole, deputy director of public policy at the Florida Counties Association, spoke about SB 596 before the committee. The committee passed the bill on preliminary reading.

“This bill is a one-way street. It says the telecommunications industry can come into any county and city and require us to give them a permit to co-locate one of their small cell packages on any of our utility poles, light posts, signs or traffic arm signals. We can’t tell them no,” Poole said.

Poole said he first became aware of the 5G issue about 10 months ago when a wireless infrastructure provider submitted an application in a Florida county he did not mention by name, and said it had the right to use the right-of-way. In the past, such installations were typically done on private property, not on public rights-of-way.

The proposal states that if the local government doesn’t approve or deny the telecommunication company’s application within 60 days, approval is automatic. The maximum fee the companies can be charged for use of each right-of-way is $15.

Some local governments have declared moratoriums while they work with the industry, Poole said. He said his organization doesn’t want to stop smart schools, economic development and other advancements, but that the industry needs to respect home rule authority.

Advocates for the bill included representatives of AT&T, Sprint, Verizon, T-Mobile and other companies, as well as their trade groups.

Bethanne Cooley, legislative affairs director of CTIA, the trade association for the wireless communications industry, said networks need to be updated today to be ready for the next generation of wireless networks.

The fifth generation, 5G, will connect 100 times as many devices and be up to 100 times faster. It could create up to 3 million jobs nationwide over the next seven years, Cooley said.

A January report by the Florida Association of County Attorneys Cell Tower Right-of-Way Task Force states that numerous counties and cities in Florida have been confronted with applications from private companies wanting to place cellular telecommunications towers and small cells in the public right-of-way.

The companies are seeking to classify these cellular towers as tall as 120 feet as “utility” poles, but they are not, the report states.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the Florida Statutes do not support a right of telecommunication firms to force local government to allow placement of cellular communication facilities in the local government’s own right-of-way, the report concludes.

Reposted by: SFPMA for the advancement of our communities. original published by; The Palm Beach Post (West Palm Beach, Fla.) Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

 

Tags: , ,
House Bill 841 containing this year’s community association legislation.

House Bill 841 containing this year’s community association legislation.

KAYE BENDER REMBAUM’S 2018 LEGISLATIVE GUIDE – HOUSE BILL 841 AFFECTING COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION IS SIGNED INTO LAW

House Bill 841 containing this year’s community association legislation (“HB 841” or “Bill”) has made its way through the 2018 Florida legislative session and was signed into law by Governor Scott on March 23rd. As the Bill is now signed into law, it becomes effective on July 1, 2018. The following is a digest explanation of these newest laws to affect Florida’s community associations:

Condominium Official Record-keeping: Certain official records must be permanently maintained from the inception of the association, including the following:

(i) a copy of the plans, permits, warranties, and other items provided by the developer;
(ii) a copy of the recorded declaration of condominium and all amendments thereto
(iii) a copy of the recorded bylaws and all amendments thereto;
(iv) a certified copy of the articles of incorporation and all amendments thereto;
(v) a copy of the current rules; and
(vi) all meeting minutes.

All other official records of the association must be maintained within the state for at least seven years, unless otherwise provided by general law. Notwithstanding, all election records, including electronic election records, must only be maintained for one year from the election.

 

Kaye Bender Rembaum
9121 N Military Trail #200,
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410

 

 

Condominium Website: As a result of the 2017 legislative session, the website posting requirement applies to condominiums containing 150 or more non-timeshare units. The deadline to post digital copies of the governing documents, association contracts, budget, financial report, and other required documents on the association’s website is extended to January 1, 2019. Of the documents to be posted to the website, a list of bids received by the association within the past year for contracts entered into by the association and any monthly income and expense statement must also be posted. Notwithstanding this requirement, the failure to post these documents on the website does not, in and of itself, invalidate any action or decision of the association. Additionally, in complying with the posting requirement, there is no liability for disclosing information that is protected or restricted unless such disclosure was made with a knowing or intentional disregard of the protected or restricted nature of such information.

 

Condominium Financial Reporting: In the event an association fails to comply with an order by the Division of Florida Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes to provide an owner with a copy of the financial report within a specified amount of days, then the association is prohibited from waiving the financial reporting requirement for the fiscal year in which the owner’s initial request for a copy was made and for the following fiscal year, too.

 

Condominium/Cooperative Board Meeting Notices: Notice of any board meeting in which regular or special assessments against unit owners are to be considered must specifically state that assessments will be considered and provide the estimated cost and description of the purposes for such assessments.

 

Condominium/Cooperative Meeting Notices: The association may adopt a rule for conspicuously posting meeting notices and agendas on the association’s website for at least the minimum period of time for which a notice of a meeting is also required to be physically posted on the condominium property. This rule must include a requirement that the association send an electronic notice in the same manner as a notice for a meeting of the members, including a hyperlink to the website where the notice is posted. (As yet, it is not patently clear whether this is in place of the existing “posting in a conspicuous place” requirement or in lieu of it. The safer course of action is to do both.)

 

Condominium Director Term: A director can serve a term longer than one year if permitted by the bylaws or articles of incorporation. However, a director cannot serve more than eight consecutive years, unless approved by two-thirds of all votes cast in the election or unless there are not enough eligible candidates to fill vacancies on the board. This part of the legislation replaces and fixes last year’s ridiculous new law that a director could not serve more than four consecutive two-year terms. (It appears that based on this year’s legislative changes, directors can serve any length of term so long as authorized by the articles or bylaws. At present, directors can only serve one or two year terms depending on the provisions of the articles and bylaws. Also, staggered terms remain permitted.)

 

Condominium/Cooperative Electronic Notice: A unit owner who consents to receiving notices by electronic transmission is solely responsible for removing or bypassing filters that block receipt of mass emails sent to members on behalf of the association in the course of giving electronic notices.

 

Condominium Director Recall: A recall is only effective if it is facially valid. (Of course, as what the term of art “facially valid” is intended to mean is left out of the legislation.) In any event, if the recall is determined to be facially invalid by the board, then the unit owner representative of the recall effort may file a petition challenging the board’s determination on facial validity. Similarly, a recalled board member may file a petition challenging the facial validity of the recall effort. If the arbitrator determines that the recall was invalid, the petitioning board member is immediately reinstated and the recall is null and void. In some instances, the arbitrator may award prevailing party attorney fees.

 

Condominium Material Alterations: In situations where the declaration as amended does not specify the procedure for approving material alterations or substantial additions to the common elements or association property, the already statutorily required approval of seventy-five percent of the total voting interests of the association must now be obtained before the material alterations or substantial additions to the common elements or association property are commenced. (Clearly then, if the declaration is silent as to the procedure for material alterations or substantial additions to common elements or association property, this new legislation implies that a curative vote of the members to approve the changes is a thing of the past. It does not make sense to force the association to restore the property to its prior condition where the members might vote to approve the change. Hopefully, this will be fixed in next year’s legislative proposals.)

 

Condominium Electric Vehicles: A declaration of condominium or restrictive covenant may not prohibit or be enforced so as to prohibit any unit owner from installing an electric vehicle charging station within the boundaries of the unit owner’s limited common element parking area. Moreover, the board may not prohibit a unit owner from installing an electric vehicle charging station for an electric vehicle within the boundaries of his or her limited common element parking area. The unit owner is entirely responsible for the charging station, including its installation, maintenance, utilities charges (which must be separately metered), insurance, and removal if no longer needed. The association may impose certain requirements upon the installation and operation of the charging station, including, for example, that the unit owner comply with all safety requirements and building codes, that the unit owner comply with reasonable architectural standards adopted by the association governing charging stations, and that the unit owner use the services of a licensed and registered electrical contractor or engineer knowledgeable in charging stations. Labor performed on or materials furnished for the installation of a charging station may not be the basis for filing a construction lien against the association, but such a lien may be filed against the unit owner.

 

Condominium Director Conflicts of Interest: The process allowing a director to enter into a contract with the director’s association has become better organized. Disclosure requirements that were set out in section 718.3026(3), Florida Statutes were deleted from that location and relocated to section 718.3027, Florida Statutes. In brief, directors and officers of non-timeshare condominiums must disclose to the board any activity that could be reasonably considered a conflict of interest. A rebuttable presumption of such a conflict exists if:

i) directors or officers of the association (including their relatives) enter into a contract for goods or services with the association;

ii) directors or officers of the association (including their relatives) holds an interest in a corporation. Limited liability corporation, partnership or other business entity that conducts business with the association.

In the event of such a conflict, then the proposed activity and all relevant contracts must be attached to the meeting agenda and the requirements of section 617.0832, Florida Statutes must be adhered to, as well. The relevant provisions of section 617.0832, Florida Statutes follow:

“No contract or other transaction between a corporation and one or more of its directors or any other corporation, firm, association, or entity in which one or more of its directors are directors or officers or are financially interested shall be either void or voidable because of such relationship or interest, because such director or directors are present at the meeting of the board of directors or a committee thereof which authorizes, approves, or ratifies such contract or transaction, or because his or her or their votes are counted for such purpose, if:

a) The fact of such relationship or interest is disclosed or known to the board of directors or committee which authorizes, approves, or ratifies the contract or transaction by a vote or consent sufficient for the purpose without counting the votes or consents of such interested directors;

b) The fact of such relationship or interest is disclosed or known to the members entitled to vote on such contract or transaction, if any, and they authorize, approve, or ratify it by vote or written consent; or

c) The contract or transaction is fair and reasonable as to the corporation at the time it is authorized by the board, a committee, or the members.”

In addition, section 718.3027, Florida Statutes, provides that the disclosures required by this section must be set out in the meeting minutes, and the contract must be approved by two-thirds of all of the directors present (excluding the conflicted director). At the next membership meeting, the existence of the contract must be disclosed to the members and then may be canceled by a majority vote of the members present. If the contract is canceled, the association is only liable for the reasonable value of the goods and services provided up to the time of cancellation and is not liable for any termination fee, liquidated damages, or other form of penalty for such cancellation. Finally, in the event of a failure to disclose a conflict or potential conflict, the contract is voidable and terminates upon the filing of a written notice terminating the contract which contains at least 20 percent of the voting interests of the association. (Note that section 718.112(2)(p) Florida Statutes, pertaining to service provider contracts still provides that “an association, which is not a timeshare condominium association, may not employ or contract with any service provider that is owned or operated by a board member or with any person who has a financial relationship with a board member or officer, or a relative within the third degree of consanguinity by blood or marriage of a board member or officer. This paragraph does not apply to a service provider in which a board member or officer, or a relative within the third degree of consanguinity by blood or marriage of a board member or officer, owns less than 1 percent of the equity shares.”)

 

Condominium/Cooperative Grievance Committee: The grievance committee appointed by the board to conduct hearings for fines and use right suspensions for violations of the governing documents must be comprised of at least three members who are not officers, directors, or employees of the association, or the spouse, parent, child, brother, or sister of an officer, director, or employee. (The restriction against not allowing someone living with the director from serving on the committee was removed.) The fine or suspension can only be imposed if approved by a majority of the committee. If a fine is approved, the fine payment is due five days after the date of the committee meeting at which the fine is approved. (This seems illogical in that the offending member may not have received the required written notice of the confirmation of the fine from the association.) The association must provide written notice of the approved fine or suspension by mail or hand delivery.

 

Cooperative Official Records: The official records must be made available to a unit owner within ten working days after receipt of written request by the board or its designee.

 

Cooperative Director/Officer Eligibility: In a residential cooperative association of more than ten units, co-owners of a unit may not serve as members of the board at the same time unless the co-owners own more than one unit or unless there are not enough eligible candidates to fill the vacancies on the board at the time of the vacancy.

 

Cooperative Director/Officer Financial Delinquency: A director or officer more than 90 days delinquent in the payment of any monetary obligation due to the association shall be deemed to have abandoned the office, creating a vacancy in the office to be filled according to law.

 

Cooperative Bulk Communication Contracts: Cooperatives are now lawfully permitted to enter into bulk communication contracts which can include internet services and such expenses are deemed common expenses of the cooperative.

 

HOA/Cooperative Board Email Use: Members of the board may use email as a means of communication but may not cast a vote on an association matter via email.

 

HOA Fines: If a fine levied by the board is approved by the grievance committee, the fine payment is due five days after the date of the committee meeting at which the fine is approved. (This seems illogical in that the offending member may not have received the required notice of the confirmation of the fine from the association.)

 

HOA Amendments: A proposal to amend the governing documents must contain the full text of the provision to be amended with new language underlined and deleted language stricken. However, if the proposed change is so extensive that underlining and striking through language would hinder, rather than assist, the understanding of the proposed amendment, the following notation must be inserted immediately preceding the proposed amendment: “Substantial rewording. See governing documents for current text.” An immaterial error or omission in the amendment process does not invalidate an otherwise properly adopted amendment. (In other words, HOA proposed amendments must be presented in the same manner as proposed condominium amendments have been required to do for years and years.)

 

HOA Election by Acclamation: If an election is not required because there are either an equal number or fewer qualified candidates than vacancies exist, and if nominations from the floor are not required and write-in nominations are not permitted, then such qualified candidates shall commence service on the board of directors, regardless of whether a quorum is attained at the annual meeting. (This is a major change!)

 

HOA Application of Payments: The application of assessment payments received by the association is applicable regardless of any purported accord and satisfaction or any restrictive endorsement, designation, or instruction placed on or accompanying a payment

http://rembaumsassociationroundup.com/2018/03/26/kaye-bender-rembaums-2018-legislative-guide-house-bill-841-affecting-community-association-is-signed-into-law/

 

 

 

 

Tags: , , ,
Special Legislative Update – Bill that would limit HOAs from being able to restrict rentals.

Special Legislative Update – Bill that would limit HOAs from being able to restrict rentals.

Special Legislative Update

The Florida legislature is considering a Bill that would limit HOAs from being able to restrict rentals.

You need to act fast to prevent it!!

PRESENTS

Rembaum’s Association Roundup

The community association legal news that you can use!

The free e-magazine for Community Association Managers, Board Members, Owners & Developers

Have an association related question? Find your answer at

RembaumsAssociationRoundup.com

 

Tags: , ,