New Florida Statute on Storage

The Florida legislature just passed (and the governor signed) a bill that adds a paragraph to FS 720 that takes away the right for HOAs to prohibit storage of anything, including boats, in back yards if the items cannot be seen from the frontage or from adjacent parcels. This was tacked onto a bill that allows two flags per unit (instead of just one) and adds a bunch of other flag types to the statute.

The wording "adjacent parcels" was added at the last minute or basically a community would have to allow anything in a backyard as long as it wasn't visible from the street.

I'm not too worried about the storage statute in our community because we have small lots and back yards can been seem from all adjacent parcels, but I'm pretty sure this is going to cause a lot of lawsuits. Our community also prohibits freestanding sheds which I believe would also be covered by this new statute.

Here's the new statute 720.3045:

Regardless of any covenants, restrictions, bylaws, rules, or requirements of an association, and unless prohibited by general law or local ordinance, an association may not restrict parcel owners or their tenants from installing, displaying, or storing any items on a parcel which are not visible from the parcel's frontage or an adjacent parcel, including, but not limited to, artificial turf, boats, flags, and recreational vehicles.

I guess if you have no solutions for the big problems, you distract people with the piddly crap and hope they won't notice.

Blow up how?

For fun, witness the Surfside condo survivors who are complaining that the developer of the land on which their condos once sat, will not set aside space for a memorial. The survivors are attending city council meetings and recently got coverage in the Washington Post. The mayor of Surfside has explained that he has no power to force the developer to set aside land for a memorial. The comments in the Washington Post again and again point out that the time to negotiate for a memorial was before the survivors agreed to the sale of the land. Said sale helped pay their mega-settlements and put cash in their pockets mega-quickly.

And please, when the law supports the battle, and in my advanced age, I think I specialize in what you might call "performative outrage." I backed a certain nonprofit this past year on a Constitutional issue and contributed (in a tiny tiny way) to a major victory. After the win I even got quoted in a national newspaper. (Haruumph.)

I think the new statute section adds clarity, especially where covenants are murky.

The addition to FS 720 says flags or any "... items [that] cannot be seen from the frontage or from adjacent parcels..." are OK. So why would anyone care if your ISIS or Pride flag is flown if only household members can see it?

I also think that the Atlantic Ocean will settle the debate once and for all when the Antarctica ice sheet floats off the underlying rock..

I read one interpretation that said that the "adjacent parcels" language is going to be an issue in cases where the house is on a corner and can't be seen from next door but can be seen from the street. Or where someone isn't adjacent but can still see into the back yard (like from a multi-story building or home that is near by). And the "adjacent parcel" language was added at the last minute. The senate version of the bill just had the frontage language. That would have been chaos.

I agree that it shouldn't be an issue if it's displayed and can't be seen by neighbors. But with my recent experiences in our community with our "gay pride" rainbow windsock on the pickleball courts (it wasn't meant to be political - it was the cheapest one the volunteer could find) and the small rainbow garden flag (an older resident who just thought it was pretty and didn't know what it meant) plus angry residents who couldn't display their "let's go Brandon" and "thin blue line" flags, I just wish that they had left well enough alone and left the statute as it was. If you look at it now, the list of flags that can be displayed goes on for half a page.

I guarantee that someone is going to bring this up at one of our board meetings and say they have the right to park their boat or RV in their back yard now because they think they are an expert in HOA law.

I truly don't know how our state government could get more dysfunctional than it is this year.

If Jane Doe posts a photo of her (say) hateful flag on social media (not owned by the HOA), how is this the HOA's concern?

How is this different from Sam Jones posting photos to social media that show symbols from the inside of his home supporting the Nazi genocide, Rwandan genocide (of Tutsis) and Indigenous American genocide?

Are you really digging into an untenable position?

Are we (you) overly puffed up for some reason (in the midst of an election season at your HOA)?

720.3045 states it's OK to "display" items, e.g., flags, banners in the backyard so long as they can't be seen form the frontage or adjacent parcel, so I think it means that if someone in a 2nd story can see the item, it's forbidden.

Yes, Lori, it's really badly worded. If it cannot be "seen" by anyone outside of the residence, how does the word "display" make any sense. Display for one's self & one's guests???

High rises all around ours forbid, btw, any flags (except official US flag) , banners, etc. on our exclusive use common area balconies, decks, patios. The high rise across the street from our west facing Units &. balconies has a very large rainbow banner on their balcony this month. No one living there can see it. It's directly across a street from one of our homophobic owners, who probably thinks that HOA permits it. Heh. Heh.

Quick edit to the last post - setback is a total of 15 feet - so 7.5 on either side. That would be a tight fit even for a car.

Hear, hear! Yes, especially in this forum. A major percentage of the posts here are, in some way, devoted to either defending or attacking some rather creative interpretations of laws and rules and &c. I confess that when I read the wording of the law in this thread, I immediately began to wonder about how someone might ‘display’ a controversial flag in such a way that it can’t be seen from the front or from adjacent parcel - but it still manages to be visible to *someone* who will complain about it. I think Lori ? already suggested multistory dwellings; I’m also wondering about Google Earth (or any kind of aerial or satellite photos). Or some real-world version of Rick Sanchez who builds an EPR portal to move his boat in and out of the backyard without traversing the space in-between?

And what exactly does “adjacent” mean here? (I’m reminded of a previous discussion on the meaning of the word “contiguous”). If 4 parcels share a common corner (ala Arizona, Utah, Colorado, and New Mexico), are they all “adjacent” (in Florida)?

Bill

lol, this was funny

I see the change about ability to have flags and flag pole, but not the storage piece. If it's now law, shouldn't it be recorded in the state statute?

It definitely went into effect July 1. But I don’t see it in the statute yet. See https://www.varnumlaw.com/insights/florida-legislative-update-key-laws-affecting-hoas-condos-and-cooperatives/#:~:text=Effective%20October%201%2C%202023%2C%20House,in%20the%20case%20of%20emergencies.