The Solutions

The Florida Code Enforcement Analysis is presented as follows:

• ​The Framework
• The Problem
• The Solution

[Code Enforcement actions are typically initiated through the filing of complaints by county residents]

The Florida Code Enforcement legal and regulatory framework is neither designed nor intended to prudently delegate decision-making responsibility among and between:

1. Real property owners, including:
   1. Owners of single family homes (not regulated by any condominium association or homeowners' association);
   2. Owners of condominiums regulated by condominium associations; and
   3. Owners of single-family or multi-unit homes located within housing developments regulated by homeowner associations).
2. Community associations, including:
   1. Condominium associations; and
   2. Homeowners' associations.
3. Code enforcement agencies responsible for ensuring that all real property owners comply with all county and municipal (i.e., city) building and zoning regulations and ordinances to ensure, among other objectives, the safety and structural integrity of buildings and structures within their respective jurisdictional borders.

[FLORIDA STATUTES]
​[POTENTIAL LIABILITIES]
​[REVIEW code enforcement letter for topics to include]

Disparities in regulatory prioritization of Code Enforcement actions

[Compare and contrast disparities in the regulatory pursuit of code enforcement actions against small homeowners versus large commercial buildings, structures, and community developments]

Competing interests within community associations lead to failures to comply with construction, building, and safety codes, ordinances, and regulations

[The election of community association boards of directors by a majority of the unit owners results in persons who own multiple units within a community association possessing an out-sized influence on the persons elected to the boards, and on the officers of the community association who are selected by the board of directors]

[Persons who own multiple units have the right to cast multiple votes in the election of the board of directors]
[Unit owners who rent their units, where the unit is not the owner's principal residence, have interests that differ significantly from those of unit owners who occupy their units as their principal residences]
[Rental units + no principal residence in the community association =

1. Lesser interest in prudent maintenance of association buildings and equipment (due to increased maintenance and special assessments)
   
2. Greater interest in lowest possible expenditures on maintenance and special assessments
3. Avoidance of any reserve accounts to set aside funds for future expenditures on building and equipment maintenance and repair]

[Competing interests within community associations too often result in boards of directors failing to:

1. Authorize expenditures necessary to comply with building and safety codes, and to maintain the safety and structural integrity of community association buildings and structures.
2. Timely inform community association residents (including renters) of building safety issues, and of known failures by corporation to prudently maintain community association buildings and structures.

The code enforcement framework should be realistically and truthfully characterized as follows:

1. Unit owners cannot be relied upon to vote to approve costly structural repairs to community association structures.
   1. Unit owners may vote to waive the Florida statutory requirement for community association reserve accounts, which increase regular monthly assessments but also reduce substantial one-time assessments for necessary structural repairs.
   2. Unit owners may not be able to afford to pay costly special assessments for necessary structural repairs.
   3. Unit owners may choose to rent their units rather than reside within the units, which often results in the unit owner being:
      1. More inclined to shift the financial burden of community association building maintenance to future unit owners;
      2. More averse to short-term expenditures for maintenance and special assessments necessary to properly and prudently maintain the structure and safety of community association buildings; and
      3. Less averse to long-term catastrophic losses resulting from community association building condemnation, demolition, or catastrophic collapse due to long-term negligent maintenance and repair.
   4. Unit owners may want to live in community associations in which the front-loaded cost of ownership (initial purchase cost, and expenditures for maintenance and special assessments) is artificially below fair market value because the ultimate cost of failure to properly maintain the structural integrity and safety of community association buildings is back-loaded to the late-term cost of ownership
      1. Exponentially higher late-term expenditures to repair long-term damage to community association buildings resulting from failures to maintain community association structures, equipment, and safety systems; or
      2. Catastrophic losses associated with:
         1. Condemnation and demolition of unsafe community association buildings and structures by regulatory agencies responsible for code enforcement; or
         2. Catastrophic failure and collapse of community association structures resulting from long-term failures of unit owners (and community association boards of directors and relevant code enforcement regulatory agencies) to properly, prudently, and responsibly fund necessary structural repairs to community association buildings in a timely manner.
2.  Community association boards of directors
3. Regulatory agencies responsible for enforcement of building, construction, and safety codes and ordinances

This relegates responsible stakeholders to the following categories of participants in the code enforcement legal and regulatory framework:

1. Unit owners that insist on paying the full amount of community association maintenance and special assessments necessary to preserve and protect the long-term structural integrity and safety of all community association buildings, structures, equipment, and safety systems;
2. Members of community association boards of directors who [FINISH THIS]
3. Regulatory agencies responsible for enforcement of building, construction, and safety codes 

Structural failures are rare when code enforcement agencies prudently condemn unsafe buildings and require that they be demolished

[Present statistics regarding demolition of buildings, examples of Florida condemnation proceedings, etc.]
[Jacksonville uncompleted condo building on the St. Johns River]
[Fountain Gate Condominium in Jacksonville, where unit owners fought to oppose a $20k special assessment for necessary repairs]