Trustee Likely Able to Serve on the Board

Q: I am the trustee of a trust that owns a condominium.  I want to run for the board of directors at the next annual meeting. My neighbor said that I will not be able to run because my name is not on the title. As the trustee of the trust that owns the condominium, am I qualified to run for the board? (C.M., via e-mail)

A: Probably. You should first review the association’s bylaws to see if there are any provisions addressing whether a trustee qualifies to be a director. If the bylaws are silent on the issue, Chapters 607 and 617, Florida Statutes (the “Florida Business Corporation Act” and the “Florida Not For Profit Corporation Act,” respectively) do provide some guidance. However, the answer may depend on whether or not you reside in the unit.

The Florida Business Corporation Act states that in the event the eligibility to serve as a member of the board of directors of a condominium association is restricted to membership in such an association, a grantor of a trust or a qualified beneficiary of a trust which owns a unit shall be deemed a “member” of the association and is eligible to serve as a director of the association provided that the beneficiary occupies the unit. The Not For Profit Corporation Act, which applies to all not for profit associations, has a similar provision.

Additionally, the Division of Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes, the state agency which regulates condominiums and adjudicates most condominium election issues, has taken the position that where the association’s bylaws provide that a board member must be the owner of a unit, it is reasonable to interpret this language to apply to other current, legal interests, such as trustees. Therefore, unless there is something in your association’s condominium documents stating otherwise, you, as the trustee, would likely be eligible to serve as a director of the association.

Q: I was recently appointed to my homeowners’ association’s board of directors, and there are a number of questions that I and the other board members have. Particularly, is there any Florida law that states how many members of the board there must be? Additionally, how is the board supposed to address vacancies when a member of the board of directors resigns? (K.E., via e-mail)

A: For homeowners’ associations, governed by Chapter 720, Florida Statutes, the “Homeowners’ Association Act,” there is no guidance concerning the number of board members an association must have. Therefore, it would be necessary to review the governing documents for your association to determine if either the articles of incorporation or the bylaws define how many board members your association is supposed to have. Well-written documents will state with specificity the size of the board. Accordingly, in order to determine how many board members your association is supposed to have, it would be necessary to review the governing documents. However, for many associations the default position is five board members.

With regard to condominium associations, governed by Chapter 718, Florida Statutes, the “Condominium Act,” Section 718.112(2)1, states that in the absence of a provision in the bylaws specifying the number of board members, the board should be composed of five members unless the condominium has five or fewer units. This same section also provides that where the condominium has five or fewer units the board must consist of at least three members, unless the bylaws provide otherwise. Therefore, a condominium association with five or more units would have a five member board and one with five or fewer units would have at least a three member board, unless the bylaws provide otherwise.

With regard to filling vacancies, both Chapter 718 and 720, Florida Statutes, state that a vacancy on the board of directors may be filled by a vote of a majority of the remaining board members, unless the governing documents state otherwise.

Originally posted on floridacondohoalawblog.com. Written by Joe Adams is an attorney with Becker & Poliakoff, P.A., Fort Myers. Send questions to Joe Adams by e-mail to jadams@beckerlawyers.com

Associations Can Require a Key

Q: I recently received an e-mail from my condominium association asking for a key to my unit. I have a problem with the board having a key to my unit. Am I required to provide a key? Can the association enter my unit at any time? (J.M. via e-mail)

A. Florida law gives your association the irrevocable right of access to your unit. However, this does not mean that the board can enter your at any time, for any reason. The association can access your unit during “reasonable hours” when it is necessary for the maintenance, repair or replacement of the common elements or of any portion of your unit that is required to be maintained by the association.

The right of access provide by the Condominium Act has been interpreted by the state agency which regulates condominiums to be broad enough to support a requirement that unit owners must provide keys to their unit to the association. Therefore, if your association’s declaration requires unit owners to provide keys to the association, I believe the provision is enforceable. If the requirement arises from a board action, there is more room for debate, but the prevailing view is that such rules are generally enforceable as well.

Unless there is an emergency, the association should provide reasonable notice to you before accessing your unit. The association’s acceptance of keys imposes a duty to handle the keys in a reasonable fashion. For associations that require owners to provide pass keys, it is a good idea for the board to establish policies addressing safety measures such as how the keys will be stored and who will have access to the keys.

Q: I live in a gated community that is governed by a homeowners’ association. I am a veteran and I often display my American flag outside my home. I intend to display the same flag for other holidays and days of remembrance. I recently received a letter from the board of directors of my association complaining about my “unapproved” flag. Can my association prevent me from displaying my flag on Labor Day? (L.F. via e-mail)

A: Section 720.304(2) of the Florida Homeowners’ Association Act states that any homeowner may display one portable, removable United States flag or official flag of Florida in a “respectful” manner, and one portable, removable official flag that is not larger than 4 ½ feet by 6 feet, which represents the United States Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard, or a POW MIA flag regardless of any covenants, restrictions, bylaws, rules or requirements of the association. A homeowner may also erect a freestanding flagpole not more than 20 feet high on any portion of the homeowner’s real property, regardless of any covenants, restrictions, bylaws, rules or requirements of the association as long as the flagpole does not obstruct sightlines at intersections and is not erected within or upon an easement.

Additionally, in 2005, Congress passed the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act to ensure that the right of an individual to display the United States flag on residential property not be abridged. The law generally provides that a condominium association, cooperative, or residential real estate management association may not adopt or enforce any policy that would restrict or prevent a member of the association from displaying the flag of the United States on residential property within the association. It is important to note, however, the law does permit associations to adopt reasonable restrictions pertaining to the time, place, or manner of displaying the flag of the United States necessary to protect a substantial interest of the association.

Originally posted on floridacondohoalawblog.com and written by Joe Adams is an attorney with Becker & Poliakoff, P.A., Fort Myers. 

Weathering the Storm of Unexpected Community Association Financial Needs

In Florida, particularly in the summer months, a beautiful sunny day can suddenly morph into a torrential downpour. Similarly, an association with no obvious financial problems can suddenly find itself in the perfect storm that arises when restrictive financial language in governing documents, unexpected-yet-necessary repairs and a shortage of funds collide. There are various ways a community association can address these unexpected financial times as there is no one size fits all. Key however to every community is discussing the issue with its attorney, treasurer and accountant as the budget, fund availability and governing documents all come into play.

The Florida Condominium Act, Cooperative Act and Homeowner’s Association Act all address annual budgets. Generally, the annual budget should set out the estimated revenues and expenses for the year. In addition to annual operating expenses, a condominium association and a cooperative association is required to include reserve accounts for capital expenditures and deferred maintenances. These accounts must include roof replacement, building painting, and pavement resurfacing (regardless of the amount of the deferred maintenance expense or replacement cost), as well as for any other item for which the deferred maintenance expense or replacement cost exceeds $10,000. The budgets for Florida homeowner’s associations may include reserve accounts for capital expenditures and deferred maintenance for which the association is responsible, depending on whether the developer originally established them and/or if the membership affirmatively elects to do so.

In any event, statutory reserve funds are protected under Florida community association law, in that they may only be used for authorized reserve expenditures. Use of reserve funds for any other purpose must be approved by the membership. Further, even if the money is needed for repairs of items that are within the items specifically reserved for, if the reserve money is insufficient to cover the expense the association must seek the rest of the money from other sources.

The need for more money may result in additional assessments. Assessments that are levied above and beyond those derived from the budget are referred to as special assessments. However, Florida community association law does not specifically state that a community association has unfettered special assessment authority. This requires turning to the governing documents of the association for guidance. Some governing documents place restrictions on the right of the association to levy special assessments in terms of the amount of the special assessment or the need for member approval. Even in cases where the Board of Directors is empowered to levy a special assessment without membership approval, the statutes (and sometimes the governing documents) impose specific notice requirements for the meetings at which these assessments will be considered and notice requirements to advise owners of what their share is and when it is due. Finding out about the restrictions, notice requirements specifications and other legal requirements too late can hamper an association’s ability to timely begin collection of necessary funds.

Another option that is sometimes considered as a solution when funds are unexpectedly needed for a repair is a loan or line of credit. As with the special assessments referenced above, some association governing documents require a particular percentage of owner or other approval to authorize the association to borrow money. Further, loan documents can be complex and extensive and have a number of requirements that the association will have to meet before closing the loan. The association should consult with its legal counsel to assist with this and make sure it is not improperly providing collateral to the bank as part of the loan.

The words “unexpected financial needs,” by their very nature indicate the association does not know about them in advance. However, this does not mean that the association cannot prepare for the possibility of unexpected financial needs in advance. It can and it should. Prior to preparing the next year’s budget, community associations should meet with their accounting and legal professionals to discuss the benefits and detriments of the varying options available to the association for funding unexpected financial needs and the approval or procedures required in order to use any one of them. It may be that a revision to the proposed budget or reserves or amendments to the governing documents can be used to make the process less frustrating. Making it easier to weather the storm when it does strike.

Originally posted on floridacondohoalawblog.com and written by Lilliana Farinas-Sabogal

New Term Limit Law Not Retroactive

Q: In one of your recent columns, you wrote about a new law that imposes term limits of eight years on condominium directors. Is this retroactive? (S.L. via e-mail)

A: In my opinion, no. Of course, lawyers’ opinions are just that, and what the courts have to say is what ultimately counts.

My interpretation is based on a long-standing rule of statutory construction. Florida courts have consistently held that condominium legislation is not to be retroactively applied, unless the legislatures evinces an intent that it be applied retroactively. There are certain exceptions to this rule for “procedural” and “remedial” changes to the statute.

If legislation is intended to be retroactively applied, then a second level of analysis needs to take place which largely focuses on constitutional issues. However, in the case of the new “term limit” law, there was no statement of retroactive application in the new law, so no need to consider constitutional implications.

Of further relevance is the fact that a similar law was enacted a couple of years ago (dealing with term limits on two-year terms) and most attorneys conversant in this field of law, as well as the state agency charged with enforcement of the law, took the position that it was likewise was not to be retroactively applied.

However, internal term limits contained in an association’s bylaws have been legal for a number of years, and would still be effective regardless of the recent statutory changes.

Q: My homeowners’ association recently hired a management company. While the decision to hire the management company was discussed at a series of board meetings, there was no vote by the membership for this significant cost to our association. Can the board simply hire a manager without a vote of the owners when we’ve never had one before? (J.C. via e-mail)

A: Generally, the decision to hire a management company is a decision for the board of directors. That is because the governing documents for most associations either grant this specific authority to the board, and/or provide that all corporate powers can be exercised by the board except where the statute or governing documents specifically require a members’ vote.

Typically, members are afforded the right to vote on amendments to the governing documents, election of the board of directors, the waiver or nonscheduled use of certain reserves funds, and other items as set forth in the statute or the community’s governing documents. Unless there is some specific contrary requirement in your governing documents, which would be unusual (though I do see it from time to time), the board of directors can retain or disengage a manager or management company, without a vote of the membership.

Q: My condominium association holds a number of social events throughout the year and in order to help pay for the cost of these events, our social committee holds various types of fundraisers including raffles and “50/50 drawings.” Some owners are now stating that these drawings are “illegal” and that someone could go to jail. Is this true? (D.G. via e-mail)

A: Your question is timely in light of recent news reports regarding a local political candidate facing allegations that they broke the law by running a “50/50 game” at a campaign event. While I am not familiar with the details of those allegations, and how the law may or may not apply there, it does present an opportunity for community associations to review the issue.

Chapter 849 of the Florida Statutes regulates gambling in Florida. Section 849.09 specifically prohibits a person from promoting or conducting any “lottery for money or anything of value.” This section of the law essentially prohibits all raffle-type games including “50/50 drawings.” While there are exceptions for raffles conducted by certain charitable organizations, these exceptions do not apply to community associations.

Violation of Chapter 849 by holding a raffle or lottery is a first degree misdemeanor for the first offense. Subsequent violations can result in felony criminal charges.

Originally posted on floridacondohoalawblog.com and written by Joe Adams is an attorney with Becker & Poliakoff, P.A., Fort Myers. 

Board Must Allow Renewable Energy Devices

Q: I would like to install solar panels on the roof of my home, but I did not see any standards addressing this within my homeowners’ association’s documents or architectural review guidelines. Would I be allowed to install these in order to make my home greener? (K.L. via e-mail)

A: Probably. Under Section 163.04 of the Florida Statutes, homeowners’ association declarations may not prohibit owners from installing certain renewable energy devices on buildings located on lots or parcels that are subject to the declaration. These devices include “solar collectors, clotheslines, or other energy devices based on renewable resources.” In the event that an owner wishes to install solar collector devices on a roof, the statute allows the approving entity under the declaration (such as the architectural review committee) to determine the specific location where they may be installed, including positioning the solar collectors to the south or within 45 degrees east or west of due south, if this does not impair the effective operation of the solar collectors.
This law was first enacted in 1980, and the prevailing view is that covenants which predate the statute may still be enforced.

In the condominium context, the statute provides that owners may not be denied the ability to install the solar panels by the approving entity in the declaration, so long as the proposed installation is done within the unit boundaries. However, from a practical standpoint, these panels would rarely be located within the unit boundaries.
The Florida Condominium Act also allows the board of directors to install solar collectors, clotheslines, or other renewable energy devices upon or within the common elements or association property to benefit unit owners, without unit owner approval.

Q: My condominium association has historically had problems getting people to serve on the board. Two board members recently resigned and the remaining three board members cannot get volunteers to fill the vacancies. Some people in our community have suggested simply having the State come in and run the Association. Is that actually an option? (W.P. via e-mail)

A: Not really. The Florida Condominium Act does not provide a mechanism for the State to take over and handle the operation of the association. The Division of Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes is the administrative agency in charge of regulating condominium associations. However, it does not have the authority to step in and run a condominium association.

You may be referring to the process of having a “receiver” appointed. Section 718.1124 of the Act provides that when an association fails to fill the vacancies on the board of administration sufficient to constitute a quorum, any unit owner can give notice of their intent to apply for a receiver to be appointed to manage the association’s affairs.

The statute outlines the process to have a court appoint a receiver, including providing notice to all owners, which must be given 30 days before filing the petition, in order to give the association sufficient time to constitute a quorum of the board of directors.

A receiver is typically a professional such as an attorney or an accountant who would run the association until such time as a quorum of the board can be sufficiently constituted. The association must pay the receiver’s salary, which could potentially be expensive. In my experience, appointing a receiver is not a desirable option for an association or your property values. Owners in your condominium need to step up and take their turn serving on the board. You should also look into professional management if your association does not currently use it.

Another option for the association would be to amend the bylaws to provide for a three-member board, which may make it easier to fill all the positions, and only requires two directors for a quorum.

Originally posted on floridacondohoalawblog.com and written by Joe Adams is an attorney with Becker & Poliakoff, P.A., Fort Myers. 

To Record or Not Record? That Is The Question!

Community association boards often ask the question of whether they must record a claim of lien on a property in order to protect the association’s right to recover past due assessments on the property. Although the answer to this question changes based on the specific set of facts controlling each scenario, there is at least one scenario where the answer is NO!

In Calendar v. Stonebridge Gardens Section III Condominium Association, Inc., the association was faced with a scenario where a property was sold at a tax deed sale and there were surplus funds in the registry as a result of the tax deed sale. Pursuant to §§197.582(2) and 197.522, Fla. State., the association was entitled to file a statement of claim against the surplus funds. However, the association did not have a claim of lien recorded in the public records at the time of the tax deed sale. The association filed a statement of claim against the surplus funds, as did the prior homeowner. The prior homeowner argued that the association was not entitled to the surplus funds as the association did not have a recorded claim of lien on the property. The trial court disagreed and entered an order awarding the surplus funds to the association. The prior owner appealed.

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s ruling, citing to the case of Bessemer v. Gerstein, 381 So.2d 1344, 1348 (Fla. 1980) and the specific language found in §718.116(5)(a), Fla. Stat, which states:

The association has as lien on each condominium parcel to secure the payment of assessments. [T]he lien is effective from and shall relate back to the recording of the original declaration of condominium. However as to first mortgages of record, the lien is effective from and after recording of a claim of lien in public records of the county in which the property is located.

Based on this language and the holding in Bessemer that the owner’s acceptance of a deed referencing the recorded Declaration of Condominium puts the owner on notice of the lien provisions found in the Declaration, the appeals court found that the association had a statutory lien on the subject property and that this was sufficient to protect the association’s ability to collect the surplus funds from the tax deed sale.

While in this case the appeals court ruled in favor of the association despite the lack of a recorded claim of lien, uncertainty remains as to whether the statutory lien alone will always protect the association’s ability to collect past due assessments. In its opinion, the appeals court references scenarios in which an association also needs to have a recorded claim of lien to recover past due assessments, namely scenarios where a first mortgagee is also asserting a claim. Given this uncertainty and the various fact-specific scenarios faced by associations, obtaining the advice of counsel on this issue is the best way to protect the association and its membership.

Originally posted on floridacondohoalawblog.com and written by K. Joy Mattingly

Legislative Review Wrap-Up

This week we conclude our annual review of 2018 legislation affecting Florida community associations, with a review of the amendments to Chapter 712 of the Florida Statutes, the Marketable Record Title Act, or MRTA, which become effective on October 1, 2018.

MRTA is primarily intended to facilitate real estate transactions, by eliminating “stale claims” against real property. However, the courts have found that covenants and restrictions of a homeowners’ association can be extinguished by MRTA. The general yardstick for MRTA extinguishment is thirty (30) years from the “root of title.” Though usually not the exact extinguishment date for most parcels, the most prudent yardstick for determining potential MRTA extinguishment is 30 years from the recordation of the original covenants and restrictions.

MRTA includes a process that allows residential homeowners’ associations to preserve the covenants and restrictions to prevent extinguishment. There is also a process in the Florida Homeowners’ Association Act, Chapter 720 of the Florida Statutes, which allows a community to “revitalize” covenants and restrictions that have been extinguished by MRTA.

One of the most significant changes regarding MRTA is actually found in the Homeowners’ Association Act. The new law requires that at the first board meeting after the annual members’ meeting, excluding the organizational meeting, the board shall consider the desirability of filing notices to preserve the covenants or restrictions affecting the community or association from extinguishment under MRTA.

Therefore, pursuant to the new statute, the board of every homeowners association, must annually consider the impact of MRTA even if the 30 year deadline is not imminent, or even if a preservation notice has already been filed.

Updates to Definitions in Chapter 712

  • Creates a new definition for “community covenant or restriction” to mean any agreement or limitation contained in a document recorded in the public records of the county in which a parcel is located which:
  • Subjects the parcel to any use restriction that may be enforced by a property owners’ association; or
  • Authorizes a property owners’ association to impose a charge or assessment against the parcel or the parcel owner.
  • Changes the term “homeowners’ association” to “property owners’ association” and defines the term to include a homeowners’ association as defined in Section 720.301, a corporation or other entity responsible for the operation of property in which the voting membership is made up of the owners of the property or their agents, or a combination thereof, and in which membership is a mandatory condition of property ownership, or an association of parcel owners which is authorized to enforce a community covenant or restriction that is imposed on the parcels.
  • Amends the definition of “parcel” to mean any real property that is subject to any covenant or restriction of a property owners’ association (and no longer requires that the property be used for residential purposes).

Filing Notice to Preserve

  • A property owners’ association may preserve and protect a community covenant or restriction from extinguishment by the operation of MRTA by recording, at any time during the 30-year period immediately following the effective date of the root of title:
    • A written notice in accordance with Section 712.06 of MRTA; or
    • A summary notice in substantial form and content as required under Section 720.3032(2) of MRTA; or an amendment to a community covenant or restriction that is indexed under the legal name of the property owners’ association and references the legal name of the property owners’ association and references the recording information of the covenant or restriction to be preserved.
  • The new law also includes a form which satisfies the notice obligation and constitutes a summary notice sufficient to preserve and protect the referenced covenants and restrictions from extinguishment under MRTA.

Revitalization of Covenants and Restrictions by Parcel Owners Not Subject To A Homeowners’ Association

  • Creates a process for communities not governed by a homeowners’ association to revitalize covenants and restrictions to revive covenants or restrictions, with certain exceptions.

Written by Joe Adams and originally posted on the FL Condo HOA Law Blog

Board Members Can Be Recalled Without Cause

Q:        I have heard that a condominium board member can be removed from the condominium association board by a process called recall. What causes can be used to justify the recall? (C.Q. via e-mail)

A:        Section 718.112(2)(j) of the Florida Condominium Act states that any board member can be recalled and removed from office with or without cause by a vote or written agreement of a majority of all voting interests.

While cause could be specified to justify the recall of a board member, just cause does not have to be shown.

After a director is recalled, the law allows the board to fill the director’s vacancy by appointing a new director, pursuant to a majority vote of the remaining directors, even if it is less than a quorum. The appointed director then serves the remainder of the recalled director’s term. A different process is used if a majority of the board, or the entire board, is recalled.

Homeowners’ associations generally use a similar process for recall.

Q:        What happens if there is a tie between two candidates running for a board of directors’ seat at the annual meeting? Do both candidates win? (E.A. via e-mail)

A:        No. The Florida Administrative Code, Rule 61B-23.0021, states that if two or more candidates for the same position receive the same amount of votes, the association must conduct a runoff election.

At the runoff election, the only eligible candidates are the candidates who received the tie vote at the previous election. The runoff election cannot be held less than 21 days or more than 30 days after the date of the election where the tie vote occurred.

The Code also requires the association to send notice of the runoff election within 7 days of the election where the tie occurred. The notice must be mailed or personally delivered to the members, and must include the date of the runoff election, a ballot, required envelopes, and copies of any candidate information sheets previously submitted to the association by the runoff candidates.

Q:        The board of my condominium association is considering adopting new rules, including rules which change some of the restrictions contained in the condominium declaration. Can board rules change the declaration of condominium? (M.O. via e-mail)

A:        No. Board made rules cannot conflict with any right which is expressly granted or inferable from the declaration. Further, board rules must be “reasonable.” The rules must also be adopted in a procedurally correct manner.

Q:        Are reserve accounts supposed to be kept in separate accounts? In other words, should the roof reserve be in one account, the painting reserve be in another account, and so on. (D.R. via e-mail)

A:        No. There is no requirement in the law prohibiting the “comingling” of reserve funds, and they are most often kept in a single account (but should also be kept within federal insurance limits).

Section 718.111(14) of the Florida Condominium Act does prohibit “comingling” reserve and operating funds. However, for investment purposes only, a multicondominium association may commingle the operating funds of separate condominiums with the reserve funds of separate condominiums.

Q:        Can a candidate running for a homeowners’ association board of directors seek and hold proxies to vote for themselves? (T.M. via e-mail)

A:        Yes. Assuming that the bylaws permit proxy voting in the election of directors (which is prohibited in the condominium context) and absent a limitation on the number of proxies a particular person can hold, there is no prohibition in the law against this.

Most associations that use proxies in elections, however, use a “limited proxy,” so that the person soliciting the proxies would have no discretion on how the votes should be cast.

 

Written by Joe Adams and originally posted on FL Condo HOA Law Blog

Owners Generally Do Not Have the Right to Approve the Annual Budget

Q:        Do condominium owners have a say in approving the annual budget? (D.J. via e-mail)

A:        Unit owners do not have the right to adopt or approve a proposed budget as a matter of law. The association’s bylaws will address how the budget is adopted, which is usually by the board. Some condominium documents, particularly older documents, require unit owner approval to adopt the budget. Such a provision is, in my opinion, lawful (though not recommended).

Section 718.112(2)(e) of the Florida Condominium Act, provides that any meeting where the proposed annual budget will be considered shall be open to all unit owners. Notice of the meeting must be provided to all unit owners 14 days in advance, along with a copy of the proposed budget. Owners also have the right to speak at board meetings regarding all designated agenda items.

The statute does provide unit owners with a process to propose an alternative annual budget under certain circumstances, typically when assessments exceed the prior year’s by more than 115%, excluding assessments for reserves and non-recurring items. Also, owners do have some say in the budget process, even where the bylaws give the board the authority to adopt the budget. Specifically, a board cannot adopt a budget without “fully funded” reserves unless a majority of the unit owners voting at a meeting have authorized a waiver or reduction of reserve funding.

Written by Joe Adams is an attorney with Becker & Poliakoff, P.A., Fort Myers. Originally posted on FL Condo HOA Law Blog

Notice of HOA Board meetings

Q:        Does notice of a homeowners’ association board meeting with an attorney require an agenda to be posted? (W.C. via e-mail)

A:        No. The Florida Homeowners’ Association Act does not require posting of an agenda for any board meeting, only posting notice. I do believe that a notice should be posted, even for properly closed meetings of the board with legal counsel.

In the condominium setting, notice and an agenda must be posted 48 hours in advance of board meetings. Again, I recommend posting a notice even for permissible closed meetings with association counsel. The state agency which enforces the condominium law has made at least one ruling to this effect.

The agenda for closed board meetings should be prepared or reviewed by the association’s attorney to avoid the risk of inadvertent waiver of the attorney-client privilege.

Written by Joe Adams is an attorney with Becker & Poliakoff, P.A., Fort Myers. Originally posted on FL Condo HOA Law Blog