5 ms·
Could you elaborate on how this is different from the current system? With the current system, the condo board decides that repairs are needed, assesses fees,
by klodolph 5y ago
Could you elaborate on how this is different from the current system?
With the current system, the condo board decides that repairs are needed, assesses fees, and makes the repairs. The fees are either paid immediately by the condo owners, or the HOA puts a lien on the condo. Local laws require larger buildings to be inspected on some scehdule... in New York I think there's a type of inspection (FSPM: fire safety and property maintenance) that is required every three years, for all multi-tenant residential buildings.
From what I can tell, the big problem is that the condo board is just made up of people who own the condos, and the bylaws of individual HOAs require certain actions by the condo board to be approved by the owners.
The other problem is that Florida has weaker laws for condos than other states.
- toomuchtodo 5y agoIf the condo board doesn’t have the will or the unit owner votes to approve the work, it won’t be done.
- klodolph 5y agoWouldn't it be more straightforward to tighten the building codes? The condo board is already required to perform repairs to keep the building up to code.
- toomuchtodo 5y ago> The condo board is already required to perform repairs to keep the building up to code. A collapsed condo building disagrees.
- klodolph 5y ago> A collapsed condo building disagrees. That's a really cutesy way of putting it. My take on this is that the building codes in Florida are perhaps too lax, although I'm not an expert on building codes. From the reports I've been reading, the relevant inspections were to be done on a 40-year interval, and the building lasted less than 40 years (so its first inspection, in service, was never conducted). This, to me, indicates that if the building was ever up to code, the code was too lax. If the maintenance was done to code, then the code was too lax.
- toomuchtodo 5y agoIt’s about incentives. If you try to tighten building codes, developers will fight tooth and nail to prioritize profits over more durable and longer lasting housing (and everyone will complain housing isn’t affordable). If you tighten maintenance and life safety reviews and upkeep, owners will vote you out of office (either your condo board or local government) because they don’t want to spend the money (or failing voting you out, stonewall approving repairs as long as possible). You need an independent party that can force life safety repairs when necessary (which, in this most recent case, should’ve been Surfside’s building dept), and longer term, some development will likely be entirely off limits due to financial unsustainability (as you elude to).
- klodolph 5y agoWhat makes the incentives in your proposal different? If the city is coming in and mandating repairs, then their authority comes from laws, which were passed by politicians, who can be voted out of office by condo owners.
- toomuchtodo 5y agoUsually, I think you’d be right, but this is a great opportunity to use this crisis and the Surfside tragedy to enact robust measures along these lines. Regulations are written in blood as they say. A firefighter had to recover the body of his 7 year old daughter out of the rubble pile. Hard to take the other side of the argument while this is occurring, and I wouldn’t wish that on my worst enemy.
- klodolph 5y agoWouldn't we be able to tighten building codes and enforcement / inspection in Florida for exactly the same reason?
- toomuchtodo 5y agoMaybe! Really depends on the appetite of the Florida legislature and the governor. With DeSantis eyeing a 2024 presidential run, it could be feasible. Hard to say. Without state efforts, it’d be up to each local government.