Select Page

Q: At the current annual meeting for my condo that there has been a hotly contested election.  Ballots were owners, consequently making them confidential.  The association rejected those votes.  If those votes have depended?  A.P.  
In reaction to this institution’s argument that compliance with the Legislation and rules to voting and balloting had been demanded, to ensure any ballot not strictly conforming to the statute and guideline could be automatically invalid, the arbitrator said that”substantial compliance would be the norm with which to judge the power of the vote…[and]…the collapse of the individual unit owners to keep the secrecy associated with their ballot does not render their own ballots invalid.”

Senate Bill 812 (filed by Senator David Simmons, Longwood) covers passing accommodation (short term rentals) and conflicts with all that the Bill discussed above, inasmuch as it affirms that local governments may regulate vacation rentals. This Bill also requires that a valid certificate of registration be displayed in lease listings and ads (failure to do so results in a civil penalty ranging from $50-$100/day until compliant).

This problem was addressed in the mediation case of Alvarez v. Club Atlantis Condominium Association, Inc..  Within this event an association rejected ballots because either the owner signed the ballot, signed the”inner envelope”signed equally.  The association claimed this violated the Condominium Act as well as the institution’s own instructions, all which required a particular procedure along with ballots for balloting.  The arbitrator stated”…the secrecy of their ballot is designed primarily to gain the individual voter.  Since it is a privilege, that privilege may be waived from the person voter.  The unit owners in this instance, by signing the ballots or internal envelopes, waived their right of secrecy provided for in the statute and rules”
The publication of this column does not make an attorney-client relationship between the reader and Becker & Poliakoff, P.A. or any of our lawyers. Readers should not act or refrain from acting based upon the information contained in this article without first contacting an attorney, if you have queries about any of the topics raised herein. The hiring of an attorney is a decision that shouldn’t be based solely on ads or such column.
A: Yes, there are several bills currently pending before the Florida Legislature which tackle short term rentals, including the following:

The Business focuses a substantial quantity of its clinic.  Attorney Muller reacts to your community institution questions.  Send inquiries to Attorney Muller through email to dmuller@beckerlawyers.com.      

This bill preempts regional regulations and ordinances regarding short term rentals.  As an example, local governments would not be able to demand inspections or inflict occupancy limits on vacation rentals. The home companion to the bill is HB 987.
As there are a Couple of weeks remaining of the session, If any of these statements will ultimately become law remains to be seen.   You can access the complete text of those bills by going into the Florida Senate website (www.flsenate.gov).

Q:  On your recent March column you dealt with a question regarding the issues created by short-term rentals.  Are there some bills pending using the Florida Legislature which affect short term leases? F.C.

Senate Bill 1196 (filed by Senator Debbie Mayfield, Melbourne) provides that state law of leases (with regard to this issuance, revocation or renewal of permits ) is subject to a neighborhood association’s leasing limitations regarding equal. This Bill would also allow the Division of Hotels and Restaurants to notify an internet hosting system of an ad for a temporary lease that fails to show a valid license number issued by the Division, as well as the hosting system would be required remove all listings and advertisements for this land in three business days, unless the list is brought into compliance. An hosting platform which fails to take such corrective actions would be subject to penalties up to $1,000 per offense (with each day or portion of a day when a hosting platform is dividing the Division’s directive thought of a separate crime ) and also to suspensions, revocation or denial of a registration.