Floride ARC homeowner Sunshine Law.

Is the ARC required to come under the Florida Sunshe Law when meeting to approve/diapprove a ARC request from homeowners?

RayB

If you read FL720 in the section referring to board meeting notice requirements (sorry, I don't have a copy of it near me to cite exact subsection #, etc) it mentions that:

[and I'm paraphrasing here]the rules regarding BOD meetings ALSO applies to a meeting of any body (i.e. ARC committee) that has the "power" to make final decisions regarding architectural control decisions. Thus, meaning (to me) that an "ARC" committee meeting must be posted 48 hrs. in advance and be open IF the committee has the [BOD given] authority for final application approval/disapproval. If they merely ADVISE the BOD who then have the final vote...I believe they are permitted to meet in a closed or otherwise private session if they choose.

RW1

Nancy,

Why the frowning imoticon?

You agree with me.

My statement did not conflict with your opinion and was not specifically inclusive.

I did not have a copy of 720 before me. I did say I was paraphrasing.

It was a given the person was aware of BOD meeting proceedures.

RW1

Nancy: The " Sunshine Law" does pertain to HOAs and Condos in that if 3 or more officers of the bod. Are walking they cannot discuss bod situations, unless they take minutes of the meetimg and add it to the next BOD. So says our lawyer during a multi-million dollar law suit that we won from a huge developer in Florida. In addition to the lawyers who handled the Principle part of the law suit, our normal lawyers or second law firm told us the same thing. I would say it is a safe bet that when 2 different HOA Law Firms agree I usually agree with them.

Now on to the ARC the law does apply to the arc meetings but our docs state 3 members to make a arc. Minutes are to be taken and attached to the next meeting. Usually we request the member to appear to state there case. In addition all discussions of the ARC can be changed by the BOD or made final by the BOD. So technically as you see the ARC does not make final discussions in arc matters. In our docs the member has the right to appeal in front of the entire BOD.They can over-ride the ARC. Because they serve at the pleasure of the BOD.

c. Homeowners' associations

The Sunshine Law does not generally apply to meetings of a homeowners' association board of directors. Inf. Op. to Fasano, June 7, 1996. Other statutes govern access to records and meetings of these associations. See, e.g., s. 720.303(2), F.S. (homeowners' association board of directors); s. 718.112(2)(c), F.S. (condominium board of administration); s. 719.106(1)(c), F.S. (cooperative board of administration); and s. 723.078(2)(c), F.S. (mobile home park homeowners' association board of directors). Cf., AGO 99-53 (an architectural review committee of a homeowners' association is subject to the Sunshine Law where that committee, pursuant to county ordinance, must review and approve applications for county building permits).

The above is an answer posed to the FL attorney General, do the Sunshine laws apply to HOA's. It is found on the AG web site.

Thank You NancyD for the quote of the sunshine paragraph. I did that one from memory of a year ago when I looked it up. Not bad huh?

Brad, thanks. I won't do that again!!

John,
Donna S. here, formerly a Salon owner and now a member of our B.O.D. I also am chairman of our Documents committee and research member for a Documents committee in a 55 + community where I own a unit. Not a Lawyer!
During a court case where our community was answering to an owner who would not comply with a protective covenant, our attorney and the Judge concured that the word "generally" is meaningless. Therefore,look at the subject matter of the sentence. There are 2 paragraphs in the Sunshine Law that state that H.O.A. are not subject to Sunshine Laws except in cases where permitting for the County is involved. Pages 4 and 7. I do not have the copy nearby but you can look it up on line. Nancy D. stated one of them correctly.

John, I was an attorney, but not in Florida. 14 years ago when I moved to FL a company hired me as a legal consultant for the developments (HOA & Condo)they produced. I set up many communities CC&R, By-Laws and Rules & Regs. I retired a year ago.

I am the Treasurer of my HOA. I speak from experience only and have legal knowledge of certain facts. I respond to questions asked mainly about either FL HOA or Condo issues or general questions about the way we do things in our community.

I have not professed or expounded legal advise to anyone. When a question is asked about a legal issue or FL statutes I have tried to provide the backup information for the individual asking the question. Everyone can have theory's but the quotation provides the answer in most cases. Most of the information that is quoted is available on the web. As is the Sunshine Law.

I was intrigued when you stated your association won a case involving the Sunshine law. If your HOA case was cited before June 7, 1996, you may have won the case. I did not find it worth the time or effort to investigate because as you can see from the quotation from the AG site, the Supreme court of FL cites an opinion of Fasano June 7, 1996. At this time it became case law.

If I read and comprehended RayB's original question he asked if the ARC was ruled by the Sunshine Law. Maybe it was my assumption, but I thought the question pertained to the current time period not pre June 7, 1996.

You should also read the Administrator disclaimer at the bottom of the page again. Where does it state that anyone, even an attorney cannot respond to questions on this forum. If the sponsoring attorney's answer a question it is not to be taken as a professional opinion. And Condos, what have they got to do with anything? No one should ask a question about condos only HOA's? Since Condo law was in place in most states before HOA law, and many of the laws are interchangeable, they are pertinent to this forum. I have never seen anywhere on this website that a question cannot be asked about condo. The main site, that sponsor this forum, is called Community Association Network, A Condo and HOA Resource.

Doesn't a question ask for an answer? If that answer happens to be something you don't agree with, that's your prerogative and you can post your response.

Nancy, thank you for sharing information based on your expertise and experiences. I find your posts to be wonderful!! In particular backing up your statements with references is most useful.

Thanks to all for your support. Please know that I would not say something that I am not versed on. I ask questions sometimes before I give an answer because I want to make sure of the circumstances and I do not want to make assumptions. If I recommend attorney action, I have to believe that there is just cause.

Florence thank you for the updating of information on the ARC. Reference the others you are entitled to your opinions. I have lived thru 20 years on my BOD. What I speak of is experience, day in and day out. We were told by the Judge who has been the Judge on 8 of our cases in her opinion that the Sunshine Law effects HOAs and I choose to listen to her cause most of the time she agrees with our method of handling things brought before her court period.

To get back to the original post thank you Florence for the update. It is now a nightmare enforcing HOA covenants thanks to several lawyers in Tallahassee who refused to allow any input from any of the Bods before they changed the rules for ARC findings.

In closing we were told by 5 different lawyers that our lawsuit against the biggest developer in the entire USA was un-winnable. But we chose to ignore them cause we felt we were right. As is the usual case many lawyers equals many different opinions on everything... PS we won the case but the lawyers got most of the money! We got a few bucks they got the rest.

I agree with the frown. Total legislative over reach.

WM

It is best to start a new thread vs. reactivating an old one.
This is for 2 reasons:

1) Many don't read all the posts and your question at the end of a thread may simply be missed as others, who don't notice the posting dates, reply to the original poster of the thread.

2) As Lori stated, laws change over time. What may have been good advice 10 years ago may be bad advice today.

With that said, Lori has answered your question.

I would add that you should go through your purchase agreement paperwork and see if you kept an old email or letter approving the run at the time. A second option would be to try and contact those who were on the architectural committee at the time and see if they recall approving the run. A third option would be to request copies of Board meeting minutes for that time frame. It's possible that a report from the ARB was made to the Board and the approval was included within the board meeting minutes.

WM1, you say you received approval prior to closing some ten years ago. Did you check your ten-year-old closing paperwork for a notation indicating HOA approval?

Do you have any written evidence to prove that the dog run was installed some ten years ago?

Google earth history view can provide when the run was installed (if the skies were clear of course).
I've used it several times to provide some history on lots.

WM1, is this dog run in the backyard? See https://www.siegfriedrivera.com/blog/new-florida-law-prohibits-hoas-from-regulating-some-backyard-storage-installations-or-displays/

It would not be uncommon for the original poster to have gotten "permission" from the developer controlled ARC before closing on their house even if the item violated the official documents. That happened with many homes in our community. The developer's representatives gave them permission to install fences and pools and patios in the easements and to use fencing types that were not allowed. They did anything to get the house sold.

What's probably happened is that the current board and ARC saw the fence (most likely chain link if it's a dog run) and the documents don't allow that type of fencing. If the ARC is unwilling to budge on this and you are not willing to take the fence down, they may fine you and you may have to file a lawsuit against them. I doubt they will win based on the length of time the fence has been there, but at least that would force them to try and find the ARC approval. But it would cost you money. Do you have a receipt or check from when you installed the fence to show how long ago it was?

The New ARC did see the fence because of the dead bushes. It is NOT chain link it is a small wrought iron fence that is an approved material according the ARC standards. We submitted ARC forms prior to closing and then received notice we were approved. Our ARC only saves documents up to 7 years which is required by law. The onus is on them because as a community that is now 20+ years old, they have archives.

UPDATE: I attended the monthly ARC committee meeting last Thursday. That was VERY interesting to say the least!! I was given an opportunity at the beginning of the meeting prior to them calling the meeting to order to address my issue. I had a very distinct timeline I presented and two of the members were adamant that it was merely a "he said, she said" situation and it still is against the ARC standards. I told them I understand the standards however I pointed out that for 10 years I NEVER received a "violation" until now only because the hedges are dead due to our landscape associations neglect and I had had a prior approval. The hedges were actually replaced that same day and there were sprinkler issues that caused the hedges to die which were also corrected. (Sprinklers are also controlled and maintained by the landscape association we pay for.) The two individuals on the board flat out said that "I would never have approved it". I told her it doesn't matter, a previous committee did, and you can't undo past approvals. Another member claimed to be the "archive" person reached out to someone during the meeting to see if their records go back that far and they do not, only 7 years as required by law.

That same committee member motioned to give us an exception due to their lack of record keeping past 7 years and no violations for said issue for the past 10 years. Another member seconded the motion, but the other two wanted to "table the discussion" until they met with counsel. That was the end of the discussion.

I will be following up with an email about what was discussed and we will be present at their next meeting as they have an open motion that they need to vote on.

The ARC standards DO allow a fence which is evidenced by other fences in the community I have pictures of. When we bought the house we were very careful to follow the standards to a tee. If we had not had approval we would have never bought the house. It was a deal breaker.

Attending the meeting I got a feeling for this committee's stance and have lot's of concerns for others in our community in how they conduct business.

Stay tuned....