Transparency in Community Associations

It's been quite the busy year so far, so I apologize my blog posts have been few and far between.  Trying to make a difference in Florida community associations is a major task, but comes with some rewards. Our firm was again a winner of the Florida Community Association Journal's Readers' Choice Awards.

The topic for today's blog is transparency.  Transparency is a good thing.  Associations should recognize if they want their members to pay their assessments on time, keep their property maintained and volunteer to help the community, then transparency is the place to start.  The Florida Legislature has started pushing for this with the recent legislative updates to the Condominium Act, Chapter 718, Florida Statutes, by requiring condominium associations with 150 units or more to have a website and post a good number of the official records on the website.  This statute has not been enacted in Chapter 720 governing homeowner associations, but maybe we will see this in the future.

Some of the biggest complaints I hear from homeowners are about transparency --  the HOA will not provide them copies of the records, the records are not easily obtained, the HOA is hiding something.  Now I will be the first to admit this is a red flag for me and I suspect something fishy is going on with the money if the HOA is fighting too hard to keep the members from seeing the financials.  I also recognize some board members do not understand their duties, do not know what records to keep or how to keep them, which records can be disclosed and not disclosed, or how to set up a website to store the documents so members can see them without going through the certified letter, return receipt process.  Those are the HOAs I am eager to represent so I can train their board members on the right protocol.  

The homeowners need to understand the HOA has no duty to respond to a request to send copies to them.  There is a duty to provide access to the official records and allow the members to make copies at the inspection.  

Often this request makes even honest board members suspicious.  It's only natural to get defensive when a request is received and perceived as an attempt to catch you doing something wrong.  And board members make mistakes while homeowners tend to accuse them of intentional wrong-doing.  If everyone would just be respectful of each other and act in a civil manner a good number of these disputes would not even be disputes.

My advice is:

• HOAs put your official records on a website if possible or set up one of the free software applications like Google Docs or Dropbox to share documents with members.  Not only is it easier, but it takes out the possibility of confrontations if one side just can't be civil and respectful.

• Homeowners use the certified letter, return receipt in order to obtain access to records so that you document your request and everyone knows the deadline (10 business days from the date the receipt is signed).  Also, make your request clear and if possible exact.  Asking for "all official records" is your legal right, but it is creates some difficulties because the HOA may have boxes and boxes of records which you will have to go through and may be required to pay for a management person to assist in going through with you.  In addition, it comes across as a fishing expedition and like all fishing trips, you may have to keep casting lots of times before you get the fish you want.  If you are looking for a specific financial transaction, narrow down the description of your request.

• HOAs remember you cannot ask the homeowner why they want the document.

• Everyone keep in mind the HOA does not have to produce a document it does not have.  This means no creating special reports if the reports are not used in the normal course of running the HOA.  If there is a document the HOA should have and can reasonably obtain it without any undue hardship, then the HOA should get it after the first request so it is available should a second request be made for that document.

The Marketable Record Title Act ("MRTA")

There's been lots of discussions regarding the Marketable Record Title Act ("MRTA") lately with some of the most back and forth discussions coming from the Real Property, Probate and Trust Law ("RPPTL") section of the Florida Bar.  This piece of legislation is very complicated and it is nothing short of amazing how different facts can produce different legal opinions. 

Recently Chapter 720 of the Florida Statutes, also known as the Homeowners' Association Act ("the Act"), was revised to provide for a more expeditious process to file a Notice of Preservation.  The Notice of Preservation is done before the covenants expire against any lots, which is usually the 30th anniversary of the date the covenants were recorded.  Note the word "usually."  I'll get back to that later.

The Act also contains a section for revitalization of expired covenants, which is a whole different process from preservation.  Once covenants have expired against any lot a homeowners' association is left with only revitalization to try and breathe new life into the old covenants.

The hard part for most non-lawyers to understand is covenants can expire against just one lot, but not all the lots.  It's not as simple as saying the covenants are 30 years old and because no Notice of Preservation was filed, they cease to exist.  Covenants can be preserved in a number of ways, including a reference on a recorded plat by the Official Records Book and Page.  Covenants recorded on a plat in such a way do not expire which is why I used the word "usually" with caution.

Covenants can also be preserved in the chain of title to a lot by the recording of a deed which references the covenants by the Official Records Book and Page within the last 30 years.  This is why a title search is necessary before an opinion can be rendered whether or not the covenants expired against that particular lot.  

Once covenants have expired against a lot the HOA cannot enforce those covenants against that lot or usually cannot collect assessments from that owner. There's that pesky word "usually" again.  The exception to this rule regarding the collection of assessments would be very fact specific and based on a theory of unjust enrichment.  An example would be when an association owns the roads and the lot owner uses those roads to get to and from their home.  It would be unfair for the owner to use the roads but not be required to contribute to the repair and maintenance of those roads, which is called unjust enrichment.  The court would have to make such a determination based on the facts specific to that lot.

Fighting Over Your Lawn and the Florida Friendly Landscaping Statute

We frequently hear about disputes with homeowners who are fighting with their association ("HOA") over their right to Florida-Friendly Landscaping ("FFL").  For those of you who are going "what?," several years ago Florida passed several laws to help conserve water and reduce the amount of chemicals applied to landscaping as an initiative to save our aquifers.  The motto of the program is "right plant, right place."  Florida tends to go through cycles of droughts, so having a yard which is 90% St. Augustine grass is not always feasible or environmentally friendly.  This grass is hard to grow in sandy soils and can require watering up to four times a week during the summer.  It also is less tolerant to disease and pests than some of the other alternatives.  For more information on FFL, go to www.floridayards.org.

The purpose of this blog is discuss the litigation aspect of exercising your right to FFL.  Chapter 720 of the Florida Statutes provides a homeowners association may not prohibit a homeowner from implementing FFL.  This does not mean the homeowner can just rip out the St. Augustine grass and proceed with new landscaping.  If the Declarations of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("Declarations" or "CCRs") require approval for landscaping changes, then the homeowner must fill out the application and get approval.

The biggest obstacle to implementing FFL is there are some bad, bad associations out there who know most homeowners are not going to spend their life savings and three or more  years of fighting over their grass.  There is no way to estimate how much a case will cost because you never know what the other party is going to do or how aggressive they will fight.  Staying in a case all the way through trial could cost $100,000 or more.  If the homeowner wins, they are entitled to their reasonable attorneys' fees (not 100%), but if they lose they are on the hook to reimburse the association its reasonable attorneys' fees.  Not many people are willing to take this risk or spend the money, especially over grass, so like so many other association disputes, the homeowner backs down.  There are no state agencies to hold the associations accountable, so they get away with breaking the law.

Homeowners sometimes will start litigating, but halfway through they have a change of heart, run out of money, or worse yet, face some type of personal crisis (divorce, death, health issues).  The problem is they have to decide if they can stick it out or pay the association its attorneys' fees.

Stress is another big challenge to defending your right to FFL.  Just like all litigation, it's an emotional rollercoaster.  There are wins and losses in the battle to the finish line.  Sometimes the stress is overwhelming.

So what's the solution?  Better legislation.  That's no easy task!  Until the Florida Legislature decides to put in a monetary penalty enforceable by a state agency into the FFL statutes, we are at the mercy of the Board of Directors of the associations.  There are a number of good associations out there which embrace FFL.  Your homework, if you want FFL, is to talk to your board and write your legislators!  Now get out there and save the planet!

Revitalization Question

Today I answered a question on www.avvo.com regarding the revitalization process and I think it is important to post the question and my response in this blog for those who do not or have not visited the Avvo website.

Question:

Our HOA's CC&R's have expired and an attempt is being made to revitalize the Declaration. In the interim, I am told we are a voluntary association and a not-for-profit corporation governed under FS617. 

Can the previous Board simply "take over" the corporation and run it without ratification by the owners? There is no confidence in the current Board and their continuing possession of documents, control over Management Company and bank accounts is regarded as hostile. Do owner/shareholders have a right to reorganize under any law?

Response: 

Here's a crash course on the Marketable Record Title Act (MRTA) and revitalization process governed by Fla. Stat. 720.403 - 720.407: 

1. It is possible for the Declarations to be valid against some lots, but not all. The Declarations can be preserved by being specifically referenced in a deed by the Official Record Book and Page Number or by reference to a plat that has the deed restrictions recorded on the plat. An analysis of each lot is required to determine if the deed restrictions have been extinguished by MRTA against that lot because the last reference is more than 30 years old. 

2. Revitalization can be used to breathe new life into the Declarations if they have ceased to govern one or more lots. 

3. The Declarations have no force and effect against those lots where the deed restrictions have expired and there is no duty to obey the restrictions or pay assessments. If the Declarations are revitalized they are not retroactive -- meaning the HOA cannot go back and collect assessments for the period of time between expiration and revitalization. 

4. It takes at least a majority of the homeowners to approve revitalization. It could be more if the Declarations require more than a simple majority to approve amendments to the Declarations. 

5. Revitalization is a very strict process which requires the HOA to appoint an organizing committee and to have a court reporter present at a meeting to vote on revitalization. While written consents can be used to gather the votes, if the bylaws and articles of incorporation do not provide for written consent the HOA is required to hold a meeting so homeowners can vote in person or by proxy (if proxies are allowed). 

6. If revitalization is approved by the homeowners the HOA has to apply to the Dept. of Economic Opportunity (DEO) for revitalization and, if granted by DEO, re-record the Declarations, index them against each lot and deliver a copy of the revitalized Declarations to each homeowner. The revitalized Declarations cannot be more restrictive than the original Declarations, although there are a few exceptions in the statute. 

To answer your question, in the interim the HOA still has bylaws and articles of incorporation which must be honored, including having elections and annual meetings. 

The revitalization statute was recorded in 2004. My opinion is this statute presents a constitutional issue on property rights and contract impairment for anyone who purchased their property before the statute was enacted. Statutes cannot be applied retroactively to change existing contracts and the Declarations, bylaws and articles are contracts between the HOA and the homeowner. This issue has not, to my knowledge, been litigated. 

If you feel your HOA is not following the procedures for revitalization properly you should consult with a HOA lawyer for an opinion. If revitalization is granted by DEO and you feel the HOA did not follow the procedures in the statute and any requirements in the Declarations, bylaws and articles (which is required by the revitalization statute), you have a very short period of time to petition DEO for an administrative hearing to challenge the revitalization.

HOA Emergency Powers - Legislative Update FS 720.316

There is trouble brewing on the horizon and it doesn't come from a hurricane, but the effects will be felt after a hurricane or some other natural disaster passes through.  I'm talking about the provisions in House Bill 807, which is now state law (FS 720.316) effective July 1, 2014, which give homeowner associations emergency powers in case of a natural disaster.  Those powers include levying special assessments, borrow money or pledge assets as collateral without a vote of the membership.  You want to know why I think it's a bad idea? Subsection (2) of the law states the authority granted in subsection (1), which I stated above, is "limited to that time reasonably necessary...."  Any time you see the word "reasonable" in a statute it will take a judge, at least two lawyers and close to $200,000 or more in legal fees and expenses to determine what is "reasonable."

Why would the Florida Legislature think giving HOAs a free pass on this is a good idea?  Do they really think life in a HOA is perfect for most people and all will be okay? These are the same people who could not get a bill passed to allow for a state agency to regulate HOAs -- they should know giving them more power will only add to the corruption and abuse that goes on in an unregulated industry.  My only guess is someone spiked the refreshments on Capitol Hill. This is why my friend, Jan Bergemann of CyberCitizens for Justice, thinks the HOA statute is the "Attorney Employment Act."  It will surely keep me busy for years to come.  

Let's revisit this after a hurricane hits Florida.  I would like any HOA or member of a HOA hit by a hurricane to let me know how this new law worked out for you.  Please prove me wrong.

And speaking of new laws....we now have a challenge under the Florida Constitution for retroactive application of a new law to an existing contract.  The law doesn't say it is intended to be applied to existing associations.  In the section authorizing special assessments, it comes slightly close. In subsection (1)(j) with "Notwithstanding a provision to the contrary, and regardless of whether such authority does not specifically appear in the declarations..."  Wait a minute -- the first part says the HOA can't do it if there is a provision in the association documents prohibiting it, but the part after the comma says the HOA can regardless of what's in the governing documents!  More billable hours for all attorneys! 

This one really disappoints me......

HOAs - Don't Mess with the Disabled!!!

It's that time of year when all the community association law firms start blogging about the legislative updates to the Florida Statutes that will be enacted July 1, 2014.  It's interesting to read the various blogs because they always include what the writer interprets the meaning of the new statute will be and, if you read more than one blog, you get a more than one interpretation (flag on the play -- litigation imminent!).

Here's one that should be real clear and I credit John and Kim Whitt for standing firm and seeking justice. They proposed to our elected leaders to add two words to Fla. Stat. 720.303(2), which requires meetings to be open to all members. Those two words "and accessible" make a world of difference to people like John who is confined to a wheelchair.  Common sense and compassion for other human beings would lead you to think this is not necessary; after all, the Fair Housing Act requires HOAs to provide reasonable accommodations for those who request it in order to attend meetings. Well, no one goes around accusing HOA board members of using common sense with any regularity.  In fact, all I hear all day is about conduct that is not only senseless, but unreasonable, offensive, insensitive and ruthless.  But I digress.  While those two words didn't make it into the statute, a version of it did:  "A meeting of the board must be held at a location that is accessible to a physically handicapped person if requested by a physically

handicapped person who has a right to attend the meeting."

This was no simple task and I congratulate the Whitts and our political leaders for accomplishing this. At this point I bet you're wondering what led to this.  I am here to tell their story -- the real story.  Not some version with a spin on it to make the people think it was an innocent mistake.

John and Kim Whitt are wonderful people.  They are nice people.  They are not troublemakers.  When they bought their home in 2009 in a beautiful, rural community in Pasco County life for them changed. The community is comprised of 45 or so well-kept spacious homes on spacious lots, many of which are adjacent to wetlands.  Everyone's dream home, right?  The Whitts were eager to be involved in the community and to get to know their neighbors.  One obstacle faced them.  The HOA held it's meetings, as it did for a number of years, in a vacant lot with a cattle grate, livestock fence and extremely soft soil.  The meetings are held in a far back corner under trees with roots that made it impossible and still make it impossible for John to attend the meetings.  John asked the board if the meetings, not all, but at least some, could be held somewhere so he could attend and even offered his house.  He was refused.  A former board member, who is a contractor, offered to install a concrete pad a no charge to accommodate John's request.  The board voted against this. Of course in their version they offered to install the concrete pad and John refused, but that's just the usual HOA spin on facts to try and get people to believe they meant well.  John even offered the HOA to remove him from membership and the deed restrictions so the HOA would not have to comply. It's not like he was going to start a pig farm at his beautiful home.  Pig farms are prohibited by zoning ordinances in this area, but more on that later.  The HOA spins the tale the Whitts never wanted to be part of the community and when their request to be excused was denied they resorted to pushing the access to meetings as the issue.

Here we are five years later. The Whitts sued the HOA, but lost. I won't rant about that until I'm ready to relinquish my license to practice law.  The former board member/contractor and two other couples who own homes in the community sued the HOA because the deed restrictions had expired while the Whitts were litigating and were not properly amended to extend them.  They won on summary judgment.  No HOA.  The HOA is appealing, but going through the revitalization process as the same time. They are promoting revitalization by claiming if the deed restrictions are not revitalized they will be a community with pig farms.  I don't think any of the owners have a pot-bellied pig, much less a pig farm, which is illegal in this particular area anyway.  On top of that, the HOA has held the Whitts out in ill will to the neighbors every chance they get, blaming them for the high legal fees they incurred with a huge unpaid balance.  No one really knows what that balance is because not only will they not show the owners the amount due and the balance changes frequently.  If they think the HOA won, how come they owe so much money in legal fees?  

The Whitts may have lost the case, but evidently a lot of people, including members of the Florida Legislature and some decent people in their community, thought they shouldn't.  They were successful in getting the statute amended despite the HOA attorney saying they wanted to create the "Homeowners Association with Disabilities Act."  They have suffered for it.  Homeowners in their community who do not even know them despise them based on the tale the HOA spins about this -- a HOA that has been ruled to not have deed restrictions.  

And just for giggles -- the HOA now claims it is still a mandatory association without deed restrictions because the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws are still valid.  

Community Association Managers (CAMs)

Laws Regulating CAMs

Fla. Stat. 468.431 requires a CAM to be licensed when "the association served contains more than 10 units or have an annual budget or budgets in excess of $100,000." The management firm is required to have a license as well. CAMs are limited in what duties they can perform by statute as well as an advisory opinion issued by the Florida Supreme Court. 

The advisory opinion has designated activities which would constitute the unlicensed practice of law, such as drafting amendments to documents, drafting proxies, preparing liens, advising anyone how the law applies to a set of facts or circumstances, interpreting statutes, administrative code, the governing documents of an association or contracts, drafting contracts or drafting legal notices. CAMs are licensed and regulated by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation ("DBPR"). Effective July 1, 2013 laws were enacted to create more regulation of CAMs and penalties for violating the regulations. A CAM can be subject to penalties for any violation of Chapters 718, 719 and 720 of the Florida Statutes.

But the Real Problem Is.....

There seems to be a rise in the number of complaints I hear from associations who state their CAM who make decisions without consulting the Board of Directors ("BOD") or take actions against homeowners without BOD approval. I frequently come across liens and foreclosures for trivial amounts against homes which the BOD will claim they did not authorize. I often expect the BOD is not being honest and is throwing the CAM under the bus, but there have been some instances I have investigated where the lien or foreclosure is not in any meeting minutes and the CAM made the decision on their own. I have heard from several associations the CAM handles all the finances, including which bills to pay and when. I have even come across associations claiming the CAM will not let them have access to the association funds. Even more troubling is when the CAM is making board decisions without input from the BOD. The courts have judicially dissolved associations which delegate the board duties to a CAM. It rarely happens, but has happened. Or worse yet, the court can appoint a receiver, which makes assessments skyrocket. Board members need to know their fiduciary duty is to operate and manage the association, including making financial decisions and signing checks. If no one is watching the checkbook except for the person who gets paid regularly with checks, you are not doing your duty! Don't get me wrong -- there are some wonderful CAMs out there, but the BOD should know what their CAM is doing because the association is responsible for the CAMs actions.

Single Biggest Mistake Is.....

Whenever there is a turnover of board members due to an election or other events, the CAMs are naturally concerned because the new BOD can terminate their contract. All too often I come across CAMs who will continue to work with the former BOD to try and oust the new BOD. I have seen CAMs sabotage records and meetings and provide former board members with privileged documents. I have seen CAMs try to circumvent the election process. Associations need to know if their CAM is engaging in this behavior the association needs to replace the CAM because the potential risk of litigation against the association is high in these situations.

Conclusion

Board members need to communicate with their CAMs at the slightest hint of these problems. Sometimes the BOD is sending mixed signals and the CAM needs clear instructions. Anytime there is a change in board members, the board should meet with the CAM to discuss expectations. If something does happen, the board should provide the CAM with a letter outlining the situation and an opportunity to cure the situation. The BOD-CAM relationship is supposed to be a partnership and not a battle of egos.