Owners
are always told that “they signed a contract and should abide
by it.” But this so-called contract is clearly a one-sided
piece of paper that is only binding to the owner, not any other
party or even the legislature. Florida
statutes – confirmed by the Florida Supreme Court (Woodside
vs. Jahren) -- allow the governing documents (THE CONTRACT?) to
be amended without the agreement of all owners. Families buying
into a “pet-friendly” community – as advertised by the
developer – are suddenly facing a majority of members
“hostile” to pets, amending the deed restrictions and making
a no-pet community out of the advertised pet-friendly
community.
In
other words: If you buy a home relying on the verbiage of the
deed restrictions, you may face one day the fact that the reason
why you bought into this community is no longer allowed.
I
still remember the fight over HB1223
in Tallahassee in 2004 that created this provision that protected buyers of
investment property against amendments that curbed their right
to rent these units: FS718.110(13)
An amendment prohibiting unit owners from renting their units or
altering the duration of the rental term or specifying or
limiting the number of times unit owners are entitled to rent
their units during a specified period applies only to unit
owners who consent to the amendment and unit owners who acquire
title to their units after the effective date of that amendment.
As
usual, no such protection exists for homeowners regulated by FS
720. But what’s new?
As
Eric noted in his BLOG headlined “AMEND
TO YOUR HEART'S CONTENT”,
more and more unit owners are trying to create rules that would
prevent an owner from smoking in his/her own unit, claiming they
don’t like the smell of the smoke – or are allergic to
cigarette smoke.
To
be honest, I think the one to blame for this “inconvenience”
is actually the developer/builder of this building, not the
smoker. Smoke from one unit shouldn’t bother the folks living
in a neighboring unit. Cheap construction?
Imagine
the next step: A new neighbor loves his curry and is permanently
cooking meals that dispense a very strong curry odor. Ever
walked by an Indian restaurant? That smell is a lot stronger
than the smell 100 cigarettes can create. Does that mean that
the association membership should now pass a rule that would
disallow an Indian native to cook his hometown cuisine?
How far should the right to AMEND go?
I
think this “Right To Amend” is the crux of the whole problem
-- the reason why the community association system will never
work. It seems that in this country everybody always wants to
tell everybody else how to live their lives and what to do and
how to do it.
Despite
my United States
passport I’m still European in my heart. Where I come from you
wouldn't dare to even consider telling your neighbor how to live
his/her life, if they can have pets, if they can smoke in their
apartment or who to have as guests and who to rent their
home/apartment to. That would be considered outright
impolite and most likely folks would call the folks with the
little white jackets to straighten out the people who would try
that!
If your neighbor has a dog that barks constantly -- that might
create a neighborhood feud. But telling a neighbor he can’t
have pets – not even a goldfish?
In
my opinion about 90% of the wars in associations are caused
because someone is trying to force neighbors to live their lives
the way someone feels is right! Can’t we just get back to a
simple: “Live
and let live”?