FL 718.113(1) Maintenance of the common elements is the responsibility of the association

Florida ststue 718.113(1) states Maintenance of the common elements is the responsibility of the association: elsewhere is also includes repair and replacement.

In another statute, 718.111 it states The board of administration of any condominium association registered in the State of Florida has the fiduciary responsibility to the owners

Now that that is out of the way, let's present the situation.

There are two tennis courts that have lights for night playing. It has been determined that the provided lighting is insufficient for night playing. It does not meet the level of lumens as set forth by lighting professionals. The Board has acknowledged this and has set aside funds for the correction but has for many years refused to act.

They, association board, claim that there are very few players who use the court and that this was verified by a recent owner's survey. They also claim that a 75% vote would be required to 'change' the common amenity.

What position is correct?

1. In this matter the board and its members have the fiduciary responsibility to maintain, repair and replace this [tennis court lighting] common element. And based on facts presented no owner's vote is required.

2. The board is correct in not taking action and their interpretation that a vote is required.

Your comments are most appreciated

The association are the owners. It is you and your neighbors. So the maintenance would be up to you all as a group to take action and do something. There is no "they or them" in a HOA. If you want something to happen, then go to the meeting and bring a bid for the work to be done. Atleast be willing to take on some of the responsibility.

Jerry, I tend to agree with Fred.

This "upgrade" would no qualify as maintenance. And IMO fiduciary duty of the Board has little if anything to do wih this matter.

The Board seems to think this upgarde is unwarranted and that the number of folks using the courts does not justify the expense.

I just have to wonder how long have hese existing lights been in place?

What would be the cost of installing these new lights. Have they gotten bids?

Who is raising this issue and how many folks support this change being made? Out of how many unit owners?

Is there in fact limited use of these courts? How many units use the courts out of total number of units?

Jerry

I say the responsibility to maintain is to keep as is.

The question then becomes what do your docs say about paying for upgrades/improvements?

An argument could be made if an upgrade would cost less then maintaining, it might not require permission to upgrade. Like something less expensive to replace then repair.

Non-tennis players probably care less about tennis court lighting thus if opened to an association vote to spend money to upgrade, I would expect the vote might just fail.

Taking it a step further, it may be a case of how much it costs. In some instances, if a capital improvement does not exceed a certain percentage of the annual budget, a vote may not even be necessary.