Become a 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. 

I WARNED ABOUT THE DANGERS OF INADEQUATE RESERVES  By Eric Glazer, Esq.

I WARNED ABOUT THE DANGERS OF INADEQUATE RESERVES By Eric Glazer, Esq.

  • Posted: Jul 12, 2021
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on I WARNED ABOUT THE DANGERS OF INADEQUATE RESERVES By Eric Glazer, Esq.

I WARNED ABOUT THE DANGERS OF INADEQUATE RESERVES

By Eric Glazer, Esq.

In May of 2018, at about the same time the engineer was advising Champlain Towers South that their building need millions and millions of dollars in repairs, I wrote about the dangers facing condominiums all over the state because of the ability for owners to opt out of funding reserve accounts. I implored The Florida Legislature to get tough when it comes to reserves and make them at least partially mandatory. We know that as a result of the tragedy in Surfside, now The Florida Legislature will be forced to look long and hard for the first time at making condominium residents across our state put money away for major expensive repairs, or continue to allow many associations to ignore the necessary repairs and keep kicking the can down the road.

I can tell you right now that lobbyists who represent developers and contractors will try to prevent new laws requiring developers to fund reserve accounts before turnover, and even the residents after turnover. Why? Because it will make it harder to sell condominium units if reserves are mandatory. That means monthly assessments will be higher and units may not sell so quickly. They will make arguments like the government should be less intrusive into the lives of our Florida condominium residents and If the residents don’t want to fund reserves they know the risk. Right. And cigarettes don’t cause cancer.

Today, I’m simply going to reprint, verbatim, my blog written in May, 2018 below. Your thoughts are welcome.

 

SHOULD RESERVES BE MANDATORY?

 

I hate beating around the bush, so I want to get to the point. A financial crisis is coming and it’s going to be a big one. It’s also going to hit those that can least afford it. It’s going to result in massive amounts of foreclosures. It’s going to result in countless cases of elderly persons being displaced from their homes. The worst part is, it’s absolutely avoidable but I don’t believe any legislator would ever have the courage to float a bill to save the pending disaster.

 

My last 24 hours made it clear to me what’s on the way. I was at a meeting last night in a 55 and over condominium that is about 40 years old. Elderly unit owners were complaining that the pipes are getting old, there are occasional leaks, and they sometimes have to come out of pocket a few hundred bucks in order to clean up the mess in their unit and/or repair that broken pipe. They are complaining about bills for a few hundred bucks and find it difficult to pay them because their sole income is social security.

 

To state the obvious, there is no reserve account. There never will be. Generally, senior citizens don’t believe in reserving funds for repairs that may be necessary a decade or two from now because they believe they won’t be here anyway. So, year after year goes by, decade after decade goes by and there is never a reserve fund to fall back on should a major repair become necessary. As I write this column, the season’s first storm is forming in the Gulf, and it’s still May. We all know what just one storm can do to the community’s finances. Even if we are lucky to escape this year, next year and the next five years without a hurricane or tropical storm coming, there is another storm coming that is simply unavoidable and definitely on its way.

 

Think of how much building has gone on in the past 50 years. It is staggering. But the buildings are getting older. As the buildings start to approach the 40 year mark or more, things start to break down and repairs become unavoidable. Concrete restoration is incredibly expensive, and unavoidable. Replacement of pipes is incredibly expensive, and unavoidable. And the same goes for electrical renovations and roof replacements. All unavoidable. Yet, so many people, especially seniors, are rolling the dice thinking that none of these repairs will be necessary while they own the property. That may be true for now, but eventually, everyone rolls a 7.

 

If you roll a 7 at the craps table however, you get up and go home. If you roll a 7 at the condo and all these repairs are necessary while you’re the owner, you may lose your home because year after year after year you decided to waive the funding of reserves and now you have nothing to fall back on.

 

So what’s the answer? I know this is going to sound unpopular, but if action is not taken now it’s going to result in much bigger problems of people losing their homes later on. So, like it or not, some form of reserves should be mandatory and not subject to being waived. There, I said it. Let’s streamline the way reserves are calculated. Let’s get rid of the “life expectancy” formula the state says you should follow but nobody does. It’s a joke anyway. We all know the truth that the life expectancy of the roof somehow gets longer, the closer you get to the original estimate of how long it was going to last. Five years ago it had a five year life expectancy. Money is tight, so today it has a new 10 year life expectancy. Somehow, like fine wine, the roof got better with age. We all know that happens, and it happens every day. So how about we make things simple. Let’s just say every condominium must contribute 10% of its annual budget to reserves for roof, plumbing, electrical, structural and painting. It all goes into one pot and it can be used for any repair necessary for those categories. It can’t be waived. If however an association wants to contribute more, they can.

 

If we implemented this, I’m guessing the average monthly increase for most condominiums that are not already reserving funds would be anywhere from $25.00 to $75.00 per month. I know that for some that increase is not easy. However, it’s going to be a lot more expensive if any one of these inevitable repairs become necessary and it’s time to pass a special assessment because there are no reserve funds. God forbid two of these items need repair. Sorry, but it’s still easier for a person on a fixed income to pay an extra 30 or 40 dollars per month than it is to come up with a special assessment of a few grand.

 

Mandatory reserves, for even modest amounts, is a necessary evil. I say so because I see the hand writing on the wall. I see buildings getting older and unavoidable repairs coming on strong. I also see hurricane seasons becoming active with the potential to cause catastrophic results to our communities. I see fear in the faces of senior citizens now when faced with small special assessments. What I don’t see is sound financial planning for the inevitable, and I don’t want to see people, especially the elderly, losing their homes when they don’t have the money to pony up and fix up their homes when a special assessment comes their way.

 

This year The Florida Legislature looked into the future and envisioned that in the next decade or so, we will all be driving electric cars. So, they bravely passed an electric vehicle statute to deal with that issue right now, before the issue got out of hand a decade from now. I’m asking them to do the same thing now and protect people from losing their homes over the next decade or two by ensuring the condo has a piggy bank to shake lose when massive expensive repairs become unavoidably necessary. Mandatory reserves are needed now.

 

Tags:
Florida’s condominium laws will undergo a top-to-bottom review by a task force established by the Florida Bar Association after the deadly collapse of the Champlain Towers South condo building in Surfside.

Florida’s condominium laws will undergo a top-to-bottom review by a task force established by the Florida Bar Association after the deadly collapse of the Champlain Towers South condo building in Surfside.

  • Posted: Jul 08, 2021
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on Florida’s condominium laws will undergo a top-to-bottom review by a task force established by the Florida Bar Association after the deadly collapse of the Champlain Towers South condo building in Surfside.

Florida’s condominium laws will undergo a top-to-bottom review by a task force established by the Florida Bar Association after the deadly collapse of the Champlain Towers South condo building in Surfside.

Members of the task force who confirmed its existence to The Washington Post on Tuesday said their goal is to review state laws and regulations that govern condo developments, board operations and maintenance rules, and recommend potential changes to the governor and the state legislature.

Condo regulations in Florida have come under close scrutiny since the tragedy in Surfside on June 24, with at least 46 people confirmed dead and 94 still unaccounted for as of midday Wednesday. While investigators warn it could be months before a cause of the collapse is known, attention has turned to the decisions made — or not made — by city officials, consultants, developers and the residents and board members of Champlain Towers South.

“What we’re looking at are specific changes to prevent that from happening again,” William Sklar, an adjunct faculty member of the University of Miami’s law school and task force chair told The Post. “We also want to be realistic relative to the needs of unit owners, and we don’t want to dissuade [board members] from service.” Navigating those competing interests, Sklar and others acknowledged, is a complex mission. What lures many to condos in the first place is precisely what can eventually undermine them: Shared responsibility for maintenance with the perks of private ownership.

‘I anticipate a lot of push-pull’

Despite the detailed, extensive condo laws in Florida, several real estate experts said the rules are often easy to manipulate or have toothless enforcement.

“Condos are so critical to our local economy, but the state does nothing to bring clarity to it because it’s a cash cow,” said Peter Zalewski, a Florida condo industry analyst. “No one wants to kill the market prices.”

Condo owners and developers aren’t the only ones who may be skittish of changes: Politicians eager to enact tougher oversight in the wake of Surfside are still responsive to the will of voters, said Peggy Rolando, a Miami-based real estate lawyer and co-chair of the Florida Bar Association’s Condominium and Planned Development Committee.

“In Florida, condo owners are a hugely powerful political force,” Rolando said. Board meetings of well-heeled condo associations warrant campaign stops, and some buildings are even large enough to be their own voting precinct, she said.

Even tightening regulations in the name of building safety is likely to face resistance. Experts agreed the current rules that give condo owners significant leeway to defer costly maintenance can lead to a worst-case scenario in which a building becomes too unsafe to inhabit and too expensive to repair.

At the same time, they recognized putting off pricey fixes is sometimes a matter of short-term economic survival. In a place like South Florida, affordable housing is scarce, and many residents are fixed-income retirees who can’t easily absorb sudden spikes in homeowner fees.

“I anticipate a lot of push-pull,” Rolando said. “There’s an expression in South Florida that ‘you’re throwing grandma off the balcony’: If you’re passing laws saying ‘you must fully fund reserves for the entire building’ and price people out of their homes, you’re going to have a very unhappy constituency.”

Scrutiny on volunteer condo boards

After the collapse in Surfside, attention — and blame — quickly settled on the Champlain Towers South Condominium Association.

The association is the subject of at least 10 lawsuits filed since the building fell. In each of the complaints, residents detail what they say are oversights and failures of the condo board to act on crucial maintenance they argue contributed to the building’s structural instability.

But a Washington Post investigation found that while plans for repairs dragged on for years even as the building’s 40-year safety certification was coming due, dozens of unit owners in the condo balked at the estimated repair costs, which eventually tallied $15 million. In April 2019, dozens of owners signed a letter raising last-minute objections to the repair plans and asked for a lower assessment. A few months later, five of the seven board members quit.

The tension exhibited by the fallen tower’s condo association underscores why a condo building’s troubles don’t start and end with its board of directors, said Peter M. Dunbar, a longtime legal expert in Florida real estate who has written several reference books on Florida condominium law and management used by the state.

Florida condo board seats are volunteer roles in which elected members are not required to have any specialized training or vetting, even in buildings where board members are responsible for reserve accounts worth hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars and approve maintenance for complex amenities like elevators and swimming pools.

New board members have 90 days to take an elective course approved by the Division of Florida Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes Complaints/​Investigations or simply file a statement saying they have read the condominium’s rules and legal documents and understand their duties as a board member, Dunbar said.

“The lack of knowledge is not often where I find the biggest concerns,” Dunbar said. “You may know what you’re supposed to be doing, but are you doing it in a timely fashion, and are you doing it to the extent it’s required? To me, that’s a bigger issue.”

Anyone who serves as a director of an association has what Florida law states is a “fiduciary duty” to the association, or an obligation to act in the association’s best interests where maintenance, finances, quality of life and property value are concerned. In other words, Dunbar said, board members don’t have to know how to fix everything; they just need to hire the right people to assess what needs fixing and then act on those recommendations.

“But because they’re elected, they also have the pressures of their constituents,” Dunbar said. “The difference for the volunteer board is, you can do your best, and a resident can still say, ‘I don’t want to pay,’ and recall you.”

Public battles over personal budgets

Condo board members face personal liability if they’re found to have acted negligently or criminally in an individual capacity. But most problems that befall condo associations are not from nefarious board members or tightfisted unit owners, said Rolando, the Florida Bar Association’s Condominium and Planned Development Committee co-chair.

More often, personal circumstances or simple human nature cloud decision-making.

“There are very, very few associations that have really extensive, comprehensive reserve structures,” she said. “But if you know your neighbor just lost their job, or just sent their kid off to college, what are you going to do? You have an obligation to do the right thing for the association. But you have people who don’t want to or can’t afford to do the right thing.”

Documents from the Champlain Towers South Condo Association revealed infighting among neighbors as building repairs grew more urgent and more costly; one neighbor recounted toxic board meetings that would devolve into “screaming and yelling.”

The tension can erode the quality of life in a building where board members and condo owners pass one another every day in the lobby, by the pool or walking the dog, Rolando said.

“I have a lot of sympathy for board members because I think it’s rewarding that you can do something that improves your community and has a direct impact,” she added. “But it’s also enormously demanding, unpaid and thankless. I guess it’s like being a mom or something.”

The Florida legislature requires condo associations to have financial reserves for painting, roof repair, paving and any item of deferred maintenance that exceeds $10,000, Rolando said.

Rolando said she sympathizes with unit owners who face unmanageable costs that can balloon from years of neglected or delayed maintenance.

“Mandatory reserves are probably the right thing to do fiscally. But when you’re dealing with human beings with myriad financial issues, do you want to force people into a situation where they can’t afford to pay and will have to sell their unit?” Rolando said. “There are no good answers.”

Transparency and tougher rules

Members of the new safety task force hinted that changes to safety certifications and inspection schedules are likely to meet the least resistance.

Sklar, the task force co-chair, suggested that South Florida’s 40-year safety recertification program could be significantly narrowed to 10, 25 or 30 years and that it could be applied uniformly statewide; right now, it applies only to Miami-Dade and Broward counties.

Other considerations include expanding inspections to include geological and hydrological factors affecting building stability and structure, and periodic and comprehensive reviews of specific building elements such as concrete, rebar and electrical.

Sklar said the law allowing condo owners to hold an annual vote and waive fully funding the association’s reserves will need to be re-examined as well.

The task force will also consider ways the government can help residents who can’t afford the reserves or maybe bought into a lower-cost building or live on a fixed income.

“We may review if there’s a low-cost, government-backed, subsidized financing available,” he told The Post.

Zalewski, the condo industry analyst, said he hopes the task force also considers making real estate transactions more transparent and favorable to buyers. Under Florida law, a prospective condo buyer has a 15-day right of rescission, or ability to pull out of a pending condo purchase, if they are buying directly from a developer; if the purchase is made from an existing condo owner, the period shrinks to three days.

Zalewski, who is critical of the three-day rescission period, said that amount of time does not give a prospective buyer an adequate period to do the research and inspections that could prevent them from buying into a condo building that has hidden costs lurking down the road.

“The three days doesn’t make sense if you’re worried about the buyer,” he said. “It would change the market overnight because it would force everyone to be on the up and up.”

Tags: , ,
If a 2008 Florida law that required condos to plan for repairs had still been in place, “this never would have happened,” said the legislator who sponsored the law.

If a 2008 Florida law that required condos to plan for repairs had still been in place, “this never would have happened,” said the legislator who sponsored the law.

  • Posted: Jul 08, 2021
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on If a 2008 Florida law that required condos to plan for repairs had still been in place, “this never would have happened,” said the legislator who sponsored the law.

If a 2008 Florida law that required condos to plan for repairs had still been in place, “this never would have happened,” said the legislator who sponsored the law.

 

SURFSIDE, Fla. — Late last year, after years of delays and disputes, the Champlain Towers South Condominium Association began a desperate search for $16.2 million to fix major structural damage that was slowly threatening the Surfside high-rise — and that may have contributed to the building’s partial collapse June 24.

The obvious place to look was the building’s reserve fund — extra money socked away to cover the cost of future repairs. But the account held just $777,000, according to condo board documents — nowhere near enough to soften the blow.

The collapse, which killed at least 64 people and left 76 others missing, occurred before the condo board could collect the needed money from residents and begin repairs. The cause of the collapse is unknown, and investigators, experts and advocates are trying to determine whether the uncompleted repairs played a role, whether the board could have seen the problem coming earlier — and whether a Florida law regulating condo repairs that was repealed a decade ago could have made a difference.

 

One way to keep track of needed repairs is a “reserve study,” in which condo boards bring in experts like engineers or certified specialists every few years to inspect buildings and estimate how much the boards should collect from residents to prepare for future fixes. The building’s financial documents, obtained by NBC News and NBC 6 South Florida, show that Champlain Towers South had not done a professional reserve study since at least 2016. That decision was legal, but it meant that planning was left to the board, a shifting group of volunteers with little training in building maintenance.

“If the owners would have had a reserve study, if the board was proactive and had funded its reserves, this never would have happened,” said Julio Robaina, a former Republican state legislator.

Robaina sponsored a 2008 law requiring condo associations to hire engineers or architects to submit reports every five years about how much it would cost to keep up with repairs.

The law lasted just two years before it was repealed in 2010, after Robaina left office. Robaina blamed pushback from real estate lawyers and property managers, who he said claimed that the law was too burdensome for condo owners. The legislator who sponsored the repeal, former state Rep. Gary Aubuchon, a Republican real estate broker and homebuilder, did not reply to messages seeking comment.

 

The repeal left Florida’s condo residents less protected than those in nine states that legally require reserve studies, according to the Community Associations Institute, a nonprofit organization that advocates for condo associations. Thirty-one other states, including Florida, regulate reserves in some way — although Florida is one of three states with loopholes that enable owners to opt out of requirements, the nonprofit said. Ten states have no regulations about reserves at all.

“One of the steps that should be taken by a building, especially an aging building, is having adequate funds available so that when you have to face significant cost challenges there’s an appropriate amount of money available,” said Gary Mars, a South Florida lawyer who represents condo associations.

survey last year by the Community Associations Institute found that most homeowners associations are hesitant to increase residents’ fees, anticipating opposition, and therefore fail to plan for long-term infrastructure fixes.

“In postponing inspections, reserve studies, and — ultimately — complete repairs or renovations, boards often end up facing an exponentially more comprehensive and expensive project in the long run,” the report said.

 

Maxwell Marcucci, a spokesman for the Champlain Towers South Condominium Association, declined to comment on reserve studies. In a previous statement to NBC News, he said the condo board was doing its best to ensure the building was safe. “They are not engineers and not building safety experts,” Marcucci said. “They hired experts, trusted experts, and at no point did the experts indicate that there was a threat of imminent collapse.”

The lack of a professional reserve study is a departure from what many experts say is best practice for condominiums, particularly older ones on the coast — like Champlain Towers South, built in 1981 — that have been exposed for decades to corrosive salt and water.

Robaina, who co-owns a property management company, said maintaining healthy reserves “is the single most important action that a condominium board needs to take.”

Florida law requires condo boards to maintain reserves for repairs over $10,000, but it does not say exactly how much to set aside. That means condo boards have some flexibility in avoiding saving for repairs that do not need to be made right away.

In addition, the law allows condo buildings to waive the reserve requirement altogether. Once it has passed its annual budget, a condo board can give residents the opportunity to opt out of collecting reserves by a vote of a majority of unit owners. The votes are common in Florida condo buildings, condo lawyers say.

That is what it appears Champlain Towers South did, lawyers and reserve experts said.

The experts pointed to the board’s reliance on special assessments — additional fees on top of residents’ normal monthly payments — to fund needed repairs. The board imposed a $1 million special assessment in 2016 for hallway renovations and a $350,000 special assessment in 2019 for work on a generator, a fuel pump and a fuel tank. Such lump-sum levies are indicative of a building whose owners have decided not to set aside enough reserves through regular monthly fees, choosing instead to wait until a big-ticket repair is needed to ask residents to pay for it, experts said. Many associations make that choice by repeatedly voting to waive or reduce the funding of their reserves.

“I can’t help but think that the building did that for years and years, which is why there was not enough funds available,” said Matthew Kuisle, Southeast regional director for Reserve Advisors, which prepares reserve studies. “Why would they do that? So they have lower fees. But in the long run, the fees are a small price to pay.”

The shortcomings of that approach started to become clear in 2018, when the board began inspecting the building before a checkup mandated by Miami-Dade County for buildings that reach 40 years old. In an October 2018 report, engineer Frank Morabito alerted the board to “major structural damage” to concrete slabs underneath the building’s pool deck and its entrance drive. He blamed a “major error” in the building’s construction and years of corrosion. He estimated the cost of repairs at $9 million.

Reeling from sticker shock, the board invited a Surfside building official to its November 2018 meeting. The official told the board that the building was “in very good shape,” according to minutes of the meeting. Some residents have said that led them to believe the situation was not dire.

Even so, the board began trying to find a way to repair the damage — and to pay for it.

Disagreements over the costs frustrated board members. Five members quit over two weeks in fall 2019. The condo association has had four presidents since 2018.

 

By late last year, the board had accepted that there was no safe way forward without doing the massive reconstruction Morabito recommended, along with repairs to a deteriorating roof. Morabito began preliminary work and found that the damage discovered in 2018 had gotten worse. The bill rose to more than $16 million.

The board scrambled for money. It found $707,000 left over from the previous special assessments and $777,000 more in reserves. But a quarter of the reserves were designated for insurance deductibles, leaving $556,000. The board chose not to tap the reserves just in case there was another emergency. That meant the building was short by $15.5 million, which the board voted in April to raise through a special assessment. The cost to residents would be $80,000 to $360,000 per unit.

“A lot of this work could have been done or planned for in years gone by. But this is where we are now,” board President Jean Wodnicki wrote to residents before the vote.

By last month, the board had started work on the roof, and it put other repairs out for bid. Responses were due July 7. Two weeks before the deadline, the building partly collapsed.

The board’s nearly three-year struggle to start work on the concrete replacement project has loomed over the catastrophe’s aftermath. Investigators have not determined what caused the failure; the deteriorating supports are among the possibilities.

Experts say the extent of disrepair documented in the 2018 report raises questions about how the damage went unnoticed previously.

“I read the report, and I wondered how long the building looked that way,” said Robert Nordlund, founder and CEO of Association Reserves, a reserve study firm based in California. “Did it look that way in 1998? 2008? Because clearly there was some significant deterioration in that 2018 report.”

 

Documents reviewed by NBC News and NBC 6 South Florida, including audits, budgets, financial statements and board meeting minutes, do not indicate when the structural issues noted by Morabito started, though the board did pay to replace leaking pipes in the building’s parking garage in 2016. But the documents do show that the board did not perform professional reserve studies and instead relied on board members to determine how much to set aside for repairs. In 2016, an accountant performing a year-end audit noted that “an independent study has not been conducted to determine the adequacy of the current funding” and that “the estimates for future replacement costs are based upon estimates provided by the budget committee.”

Audits conducted by the same accountant in 2017, 2018 and 2019 included the same language. Last year, a different accountant provided a similar disclaimer.

Mars, the lawyer who represents condo associations, said he believes that the note was “the CPA saying, ‘We don’t have any official documentation to rely on.'”

The accountants who conducted the audits did not respond to messages seeking comment.

 

Jeffrey Rembaum, another lawyer for condo associations, pointed to figures in the audits that showed that from 2016 to 2020, the board did not update the amount of money needed to replace balconies and concrete. Each year, the board estimated needing $320,000 for the work, even after Morabito’s report found that much more extensive and costly repairs were needed.

“We know the building had millions in concrete repairs on the horizon,” Rembaum said. “So how did it come up with $320,000 for their current needs? If they’d had a reserve study and an engineer looked at what they had, they would have come up with a higher number. That suggests the board wasn’t regularly updating it.”

He added: “This is the effect of the Florida Legislature not requiring a reserve study by qualified people.”

More than a decade since his short-lived law on reserve studies was repealed, Robaina said he hopes lawmakers will change course and reimpose the mandate.

“This is a window of opportunity,” he said, “and unfortunately it took a tragedy that could have been prevented.”

Jon Schuppe reported from New York; Phil Prazan reported from Surfside, Florida

By Jon Schuppe and Phil Prazan, NBC 6 South Florida

 

Tags: ,
A newly filed bill by Senator Jason Pizzo, SB 1490, could create a significant change in terms of an association’s ability to invest the community’s operating and reserve funds in depositories other than a traditional bank or savings and loan.

A newly filed bill by Senator Jason Pizzo, SB 1490, could create a significant change in terms of an association’s ability to invest the community’s operating and reserve funds in depositories other than a traditional bank or savings and loan.

  • Posted: Feb 26, 2021
  • By:
  • Comments: Comments Off on A newly filed bill by Senator Jason Pizzo, SB 1490, could create a significant change in terms of an association’s ability to invest the community’s operating and reserve funds in depositories other than a traditional bank or savings and loan.

A newly filed bill by Senator Jason Pizzo, SB 1490, could create a significant change in terms of an association’s ability to invest the community’s operating and reserve funds in depositories other than a traditional bank or savings and loan. 

 

For years there have been significant legal constraints on a condominium association’s ability to use reserve funds. In addition to the statutory requirement to obtain membership approval for non-designated reserve usage, the prevailing school of thought was that association funds could not be invested since investments can and do fail.

A newly filed bill by Senator Jason Pizzo, SB 1490, could create a significant change in terms of an association’s ability to invest the community’s operating and reserve funds in depositories other than a traditional bank or savings and loan.

The bill provides as follows:

“Unless otherwise prohibited in the declaration, and in accordance with s. 718.112(2)(f), an association, including a multicondominium association, may invest any funds in one or any combination of investment products described in this subsection.”

If this bill passes and an association invests funds in any type of investment product other than a depository account, the association must meet all of the following requirements:

  1. The board shall annually develop and adopt a written investment policy statement and select an investment adviser who is registered under s. 517.12, F.S. and who is not related by affinity or consanguinity to any board member or unit owner. Any investment fees and commissions may be paid from the invested reserve funds or operating funds.
  2. The investment adviser selected by the board shall invest any funds not deposited into a depository account in compliance with the prudent investor rule in s. 518.11, F.S. It is important to note that the statutory prudent investor rule is a test of conduct and not resulting performance. Under this statute, no specific investment or course of action is, taken alone, considered prudent or imprudent. Instead, the investment adviser is deemed to be acting as a fiduciary and he or she may invest in every kind of property and type of investment, subject to that statute. The fiduciary’s investment decisions are evaluated on the basis of whether he or she exercised reasonable business judgment regarding the anticipated effect on the investment portfolio as a whole under the facts and circumstances prevailing at the time of the decision or action. Although the proposed statute requires that funds invested be subject to insurance under the Securities Investor Protection Corporation, it is important to note that this insurance is only there if the brokerage firm fails, not if the investment turns out to be ill-advised and loses the association’s money.
  3. The investment adviser shall act as a fiduciary to the association in compliance with the standards set forth in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 at 29 U.S.C. s. 1104(a)(1)(A)-(C).
  4. At least once each calendar year, the association shall provide the investment adviser with the association’s investment policy statement, the most recent reserve study report or a good faith estimate disclosing the annual amount of reserve funds which would be necessary for the association to fully fund reserves for each reserve item, and the financial reports.
  5. The investment adviser shall annually review these documents and provide the association with a portfolio allocation model that is suitably structured to match projected reserve fund and liability liquidity requirements. There must be at least thirty-six (36) months of projected reserves in cash or cash equivalents available to the association at all times.
  6. Portfolios managed by the investment adviser may contain any type of investment necessary to meet the objectives in the investment policy statement; however, portfolios may not contain stocks, securities, or other obligations that the State Board of Administration is prohibited from investing in under ss. 215.471, 215.4725, and 215.473, F.S. or that state agencies are prohibited from investing in under s. 215.472.

Lastly, the bill would exempt registered investment advisors from having their bids subjected to the competitive bidding requirements found in Section 718.3026, F.S.  The companion bill to SB 1490 is HB 1005 (Killebrew/Fine).

As more associations change their old habits and begin to fund reserves, the allure of more aggressive investment vehicles for these funds, which can be substantial amounts, is undeniable. However, the risk is also undeniable. As such, if this bill becomes law and the investment of reserves becomes available, boards are strongly encouraged to take an extremely cautious, measured approach with reserves.

While investment of your association’s operating and reserve funds might result in a substantially better return than a savings account, you might also see significant losses. The investment of association funds must be done with careful consideration of the demographic in your community, the age of your buildings and facilities, the required liquidity of your funds and, most importantly, the sensitivities and risk tolerance of your membership all taken into account. If your members fuss about your board’s landscaping decisions imagine the potential fallout if you make the wrong investment decisions!

 


Very truly yours,

Donna DiMaggio Berger, Founder & Executive Director
Community Association Leadership Lobby
Tags: , , ,