REMBAUM'S ASSOCIATION ROUNDUP | The Community Association Legal News You Can Use

561-241-4462    |    9121 N. Military Trail, Ste. 200   |   Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410

Tag: house bill

Posted on

What Managers and Board Members Need to Know About House Bill 913

On June 23, 2025, Florida Governor DeSantis signed House Bill 913 (HB 913) into law. Its provisions took effect on July 1st. In last month’s Roundup we discussed how HB 913 amends the Florida Condominium Act, Chapter 718, Fla. Stat. In today’s article the Roundup considers how HB 913 affects Chapter 468, Fla. Stat., which addresses the statutory requirements for both management companies and individual licensed community association managers (LCAMs). The following information is presented generally in the order in which it is presented in HB 913.

If an LCAM’s license is revoked, then such individual cannot own any interest in a management company during the 10-year period after the effective date of the license revocation and cannot reapply for ownership in a management company until such 10-year period is completed.

LCAMs must create and maintain an online licensure account with the Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation (DBPR). In addition, all LCAMs must both identify the community(ies) for which he or she is designated as an on-site manager, and such records must be updated within 30 days of any changes.

A community association management company must identify for the DBPR all managers that it employs to provide community association management services.

If an LCAM has his or her license suspended or revoked, then the DBPR is obligated to provide notice to the LCAM’s management company in which they are employed and must also notice all community associations to which the LCAM is assigned.

An LCAM must not knowingly perform any act directed by a community association if such act violates any state or federal law.

If the community association is subject to the statutory requirements of the structural integrity reserve study and/or milestone report, then such LCAM must comply with all relevant sections of law as directed by the community’s board of directors.

All management contracts must have, in at least 12-point type, the following language: “The community association manager shall abide by all professional standards and recordkeeping requirements imposed by part VIII of chapter 468, Fla. Stat.

An LCAM must attend at least one board meeting or member meeting per year (while this is not a new requirement in HB 913, it is important to note).

All LCAMs must post their hours of availability and summary of duties in a conspicuous place in the community, which must also be posted on a website (or app) if the association is required to have one (while this is not a new requirement in HB 913, it is important to note).

LCAMs and management companies must provide a copy of the management contract if requested by a member. (This obligation is separate and distinct from an official record request, and while not a new requirement in HB 913, it is important to note.)

A rebuttable presumption of conflict of interest exists if the LCAM, or their relative, proposes to enter into a contract or other transaction with the association or actually enters into such contract for services or goods other than community association management services. Such a proposed conflict must be disclosed on the board meeting notice and agenda along with a copy of the proposed contract attached to the meeting notice (and such contract must be approved by two-thirds of all directors present at the meeting). However, if the community association manager or firm previously disclosed a conflict of interest in an existing management contract with the association, such conflict of interest does not need to be additionally noticed and voted on during the term of the management contract but, upon renewal, must be noticed and voted on as described above.

If a violation of the conflict-of-interest requirements occurs, then the contract itself is voidable by the board; and the association only owes the vendor for monies due up to the date of cancellation and is not liable for any other damages including liquidated damages, etc. which may otherwise be due under the contract.

If the association receives and considers a bid for a good or service that exceeds $2,500, and the good or service is unrelated to community association management services, and such good or service would be reasonably construed as a conflict of interest under § 468.4335 F.S., the association must receive multiple bids from other providers; however, this requirement of multiple bids does not apply to any goods or services that are disclosed in the management services contract as a conflict of interest.

If you have any questions regarding anything discussed herein, please be sure to discuss them with your association’s legal counsel.

Posted on

House Bill 913: A Summary of What You Need to Know

As initially written for the Florida Community Association Journal, by the time you read this article we will know whether Florida House Bill 913, as approved by both houses of the Florida Congress, is the law of the state. In fact HB 913 was approved by the Governor and will be effective July, 1 2025.

This bill primarily pertains to condominium and cooperative associations. There are also new requirements for licensed community association managers and management companies that will be addressed in detail in our 2025 Legal Update Guide and a future Roundup article, too. Homeowners’ associations governed by Chapter 720 F.S.are not addressed in this bill.

With that in mind, let’s take a look at a few of the more notable changes as related to condominium associations.

      • The term “video conference” is added to § 718.103, F.S., and requires that if a video conference is used (such as Zoom), then a hyperlink and call-in conference telephone number be set out in the meeting notice along with a physical location for unit owners to attend in person. Such a meeting must be recorded, and the recording must be maintained in the official records of the association for at least one year. With the aforementioned in mind, it is now clear that board meetings and membership meetings can be conducted by video conference so long as the foregoing requirements are followed.
      • If a unit owner membership meeting is held electronically and the foregoing requirements are followed, then the unit owners may vote electronically.
      •  
      • If the annual membership meeting of the members is held electronically, then a quorum of the board of directors must be physically present at the physical location, the meeting must be recorded, and of course the recording must be maintained as an official record of the association. The Florida Division of Condominiums is charged with adopting additional requirements. (Yes, it is quite strange that this new law requires a majority of the board to be physically present when in fact it is a membership meeting, not a board meeting. Perhaps this will get straightened out in future legislation or not.)
      • If the bylaws are silent as to the required location, unit owner membership meetings must be held within 15 miles of the condominium property or within the same county as the condominium property.
      • Condominium associations will be required to have an insurance replacement cost appraisal performed every three years.
      • Official records now include electronic records, bank statements and ledgers, recordings of all such meetings that are conducted by video conference, and all affidavits as may be required by Chapter 718 F.S.
      • A board of directors may use their best efforts to make prudent investment decisions carefully considering risk and return to manage both operating and reserve funds. This new legislation makes clear that the board can invest in certificates of deposit, savings and loans, banks, and credit unions without a vote of the unit owners.
      • If a board of directors prepares a budget that requires assessments against the unit owners that exceed 115 percent of the prior year assessments, then the board must also simultaneously propose a “substitute” budget that does not include any of the “discretionary” expenditures that are not required to be in the budget. The substitute budget must be proposed before adoption of the other budget that exceeds the 115 percent. Unit owners will have the right to vote on that substitute budget and may adopt it if it meets with the approval of the majority of the total voting interests unless the bylaws require a greater percentage. The 115 percent calculation excludes repair, replacement, and maintenance of the components required for the structural integrity reserve study along with insurance premiums.
      • The prior $10,000 threshold for statutory reserves has been increased to $25,000, meaning that the budget must include reserves for capital expenditures and deferred maintenance for roof replacement, building painting, pavement resurfacing, and any other items that have deferred maintenance or a replacement cost that exceeds $25,000 or such inflation-adjusted amount. The same is true for the structural integrity reserve study (“SIRS”) items, meaning that reserves for the SIRS items must include any other item that has a deferred maintenance or replacement cost that exceeds $25,000 (rather than $10,000), and the failure to maintain such item would negatively affect any of the SIRS items.
      • Structural integrity reserves may be funded by regular assessments, special assessments, lines of credit, and loans; but if it is being funded by special assessment, line of credit, or loan, then an approval of the majority of the total voting interests of the membership is required.
      • Clarification is provided that a unit owner-controlled association subject to a structural integrity reserve study that has forthcoming capital expenses as required by a milestone inspection may obtain a line of credit or loan to fund the cumulative amount of the previously waived or underfunded reserves.
      • Clarity is provided that requirement for a structural integrity reserve study, which must be prepared at least once every 10 years, only applies to condominiums that are three or more “habitable” stories.
      • For a budget adopted on or before December 31, 2028, if the milestone inspection was completed within the previous two years, then the board of directors (with the approval of a majority of the total voting membership interests) may temporarily “pause” for a period of not more than two consecutive annual budgets the reserve fund contributions or reduce the amount of such funding. If a condominium association does properly “pause” such funding, then they must have a new structural integrity reserve study performed to determine the new needs and to recommend a revised reserve funding plan. This “pausing” option excludes developer-controlled associations, unit owner-controlled associations where the owners have been in control for less than one year, and condominium associations controlled by a bulk buyer or bulk assignee.
      • Reserve funding for the structural integrity items can only be pooled with other structural integrity reserve items (and pooling can be used for nonstructural reserve items as well).
      • In order for a condominium association to go from straight-line funding to pooling or from pooling to straight-line funding, a vote of the membership is no longer required. Such decisions will be vested to the board of directors.
      • The Division of Condominium is to adjust the minimum $25,000 reserve threshold annually to account for inflation.
      • The structural integrity reserve study must, at a minimum, include a recommendation for a funding schedule based on a baseline funding plan that provides a funding goal for each year that is sufficient to ensure the cash balance is always above zero. Additionally, the structural integrity reserve study must take into account the funding method used by the association, whether via regular assessments, special assessments, lines of credit, or a loan. If the structural integrity study is completed before the association knows how it will be funded, then after the decisions are made regarding the funding of the structural integrity reserve study, the actual study must be updated to take into account the selected funding method.
      • Clarity is provided that the structural integrity reserve study must be completed by December 31, 2025, instead of December 31, 2024. But, if the condominium association is required to have a milestone inspection by December 31, 2026, then such association can do the structural integrity reserve study simultaneously with the milestone inspection.
      • If a condominium association completed a milestone or similar inspection as required by local government, then the association may delay its structural integrity reserve study for no more than two budget years to focus on the financial resources now required for repair and maintenance as required by the milestone inspection.
      • An officer or director (not manager) must sign an affidavit acknowledging receipt of the completed structural integrity reserve study.
      • If 25 percent of the unit owners petition the board to adopt electronic voting within 180 days of the last annual meeting, then the board must hold a meeting within 21 days after receipt of the petition to adopt electronic voting. Additionally, if electronic voting is not provided for, then there are new provisions requiring unit owners to have the opportunity to electronically transmit a ballot to an email address designated by the association (which would obviously waive anonymity if the vote is for the election). The electronic ballot must comply with the statutory form.
      • The 14-day requirement for a board meeting notice where electronic voting will be considered is deleted.
      • Regarding hurricane protection, unless provided otherwise in the declaration of condominium, a unit owner is not responsible for removal or reinstallation of hurricane protection, window, or other aperture if removal is necessary for maintenance, repair, or replacement of the condominium or association property for which the association is responsible.

The aforementioned is intended as a summary review only. Do not make the mistake of relying on summary reviews, but rather only on the text of the legislation itself. Stay tuned for future Rembaum’s Association Roundup articles regarding this new legislation. If you’re not receiving our electronic versions, then you are not receiving all of our publications. Remember to check in with your association’s lawyer regarding any questions you may have concerning this new legislation.