Wednesday, February 3, 2016

Section 718 says it is OK.

The argument over who can use the Clubhouse and for what purpose still rages on. A definite opinion is below. From this posting, it is clear that political meetings are allowed and encouraged. So who says no?

David Israel and Eva, the CH Manager. They want to stop the opponents from having their say to the Villagers.

Can Florida Condo & HOA Owners Organize Political Rallies On Community Property?


   Posted in Common Areas, Reader Q&A, Rules & Regulations

ThinkstockPhotos-87753347Question: I live in a condominium association with politically active residents. One of our unit owners has asked to host a political event at the association’s clubhouse. I fear this event could attract a large public audience and be a burden to our residents. Can our association disapprove the event? J.S. (via e-mail)

Answer: The law provides that all common elements, common areas, and recreational facilities serving any condominium shall be available to unit owners in the condominium and their invited guests for the use intended. The law also permits the association to adopt “reasonable rules and regulations pertaining to the use” of common properties.
Many communities have guidelines addressing such uses, including permissible purposes for private use, regulations pertaining to the number of permitted non-resident guests, and the details of such uses like parking, security, insurance requirements, available rental times, capacity limits, and the like.
Political events, however, are afforded a limited degree of priority under the Florida Condominium Act. Specifically, Section 718.123(1) of the statute states that “no entity or entities shall unreasonably restrict any unit owner’s right to peaceably assemble or right to invite public officers or candidates for public office to appear and speak in common elements, common areas, and recreational facilities.”
Therefore, while an association could probably decline to permit the use of your clubhouse for wedding receptions or even religious services, the right to invite public candidates to speak is conferred by statute. At the least, the board would need to permit the candidate to attend and address residents. I do believe the board could reasonably limit attendance by the outside public, and to the extent the association normally requires certain procedures to reserve the facility (prior reservation, clean-up arrangements, etc.) could impose those conditions in connection with a political event.
So the smarty's over at UCO. They think, or better to say, he thinks that it all right, all legal, to shut down the Politicos. But he is wrong and 718 says so. And of course, the President thinks this rule only applies to the DA and he is the only one to OK the visit and speechifying of local dignitaries at the Delegate Assembly. Wrong!!  

2 comments:

  1. David Israel has violated Rules, Regulations, Laws, Requirements, Statutes, including our governing documents. Over and over again he openly does this without objection. Why do you ask? Well, it's pretty simple, --- everyone lets him get away with it. The Delegates, who are the governing body, -- The Board of Directors, don't seem to care. They just don't care. So, everything goes by the boards, and whatever it costs --- well, so what, as long as it doesn't terribly affect anyone's pocketbook. It is difficult to believe, but that's the way it is.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Why does everything have to be enshrined in law and statutes? What harm is there in allowing open and free election campaigns?Now that the LAW is seen to be on the side of the proponents of free speech does anyone think that the UCO gang cares? Israel has already made it clear that he is not interested in following the rules.Just making others follow them is the order of the day

    ReplyDelete