St Augustine Real Estate Information

Homeowner’s association/Community association disclosure portion of HB 679. Changes will take effect July 1 unless the governor vetoes the bill.

Bill:

Section 8. Paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of section 720.401, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

720.401 Prospective purchasers subject to association membership requirement; disclosure required; covenants; assessments; contract cancellation.–

 (1)(a) A prospective parcel owner in a community must be presented a disclosure summary before executing the contract for sale. The disclosure summary must be in a form substantially similar to the following form:

DISCLOSURE SUMMARY

FOR (NAME OF COMMUNITY)

1. AS A PURCHASER OF PROPERTY IN THIS COMMUNITY, YOU WILL BE OBLIGATED TO BE A MEMBER OF A HOMEOWNERS’ ASSOCIATION.

2. THERE HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE RECORDED RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS GOVERNING THE USE AND OCCUPANCY OF PROPERTIES IN THIS COMMUNITY.

3. YOU WILL BE OBLIGATED TO PAY ASSESSMENTS TO THE ASSOCIATION. ASSESSMENTS MAY BE SUBJECT TO PERIODIC CHANGE. IF APPLICABLE, THE CURRENT AMOUNT IS $_____ PER _____. YOU WILL ALSO BE OBLIGATED TO PAY ANY SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IMPOSED BY THE ASSOCIATION. SUCH SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS MAY BE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. IF APPLICABLE, THE CURRENT AMOUNT IS $_____ PER _____.

4. YOU MAY BE OBLIGATED TO PAY SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS TO THE RESPECTIVE MUNICIPALITY, COUNTY, OR SPECIAL DISTRICT. ALL ASSESSMENTS ARE SUBJECT TO PERIODIC CHANGE.

5. YOUR FAILURE TO PAY SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS OR ASSESSMENTS LEVIED BY A MANDATORY HOMEOWNERS’ ASSOCIATION MAY COULD RESULT IN A LIEN ON YOUR PROPERTY.

6. THERE MAY BE AN OBLIGATION TO PAY RENT OR LAND USE FEES FOR RECREATIONAL OR OTHER COMMONLY USED FACILITIES AS AN OBLIGATION OF MEMBERSHIP IN THE HOMEOWNERS’ ASSOCIATION. IF APPLICABLE, THE CURRENT AMOUNT IS $_____ PER _____.

7. IF THE ASSOCIATION IS STILL UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE DEVELOPER, THE DEVELOPER MAY HAVE THE RIGHT TO AMEND THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIP OR THE APPROVAL OF THE PARCEL OWNERS.

8. THE STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS DISCLOSURE FORM ARE ONLY SUMMARY IN NATURE, AND, AS A PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER, YOU SHOULD REFER TO THE COVENANTS AND THE ASSOCIATION GOVERNING DOCUMENTS BEFORE PURCHASING PROPERTY.

9. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE EITHER MATTERS OF PUBLIC RECORD AND CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE RECORD OFFICE IN THE COUNTY WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, OR, IF ARE NOT RECORDED, AND CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE DEVELOPER.

10. THERE MAY BE AN OBLIGATION TO PAY ASSESSMENTS (TAXES OR FEES) TO A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF RETIRING BOND OBLIGATIONS USED TO CONSTRUCT
INFRASTRUCTURE OR OTHER IMPROVEMENTS.

11. YOU ARE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY LIABLE WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNER OF YOUR PROPERTY FOR ALL UNPAID ASSESSMENTS THAT CAME DUE UP TO THE TIME OF TRANSFER OF TITLE.

DATE:                                                     PURCHASER:

PURCHASER:
The disclosure must be supplied by the developer, or by the parcel owner if the sale is by an owner that is not the developer. Any contract or agreement for sale shall refer to and incorporate the disclosure summary and shall include, in prominent language, a statement that the potential buyer should not execute the contract or agreement until he or she has they have received and read the disclosure summary required by this section.

A powerful citizens panel culminated a year of work on Thursday and put a plan to swap some property taxes for sales taxes on the November ballot, despite weeks of intense back-room lobbying by business groups that wanted to kill it.

The measure would cut most property-tax bills by at least 25 percent, revamp the way the state pays for schools and order the Legislature to replace the estimated loss of $9 billion with new, expanded sales taxes or other revenue.

The Taxation and Budget Reform Commission voted 18-7 for the amendment – one more than needed to get it on the ballot.

Proponents hailed the tax swap as the salve needed to stimulate the ailing housing market, revive the economy and prepare the state’s tax system for the next 20 years. The tax cut would take effect Jan. 1, 2010.

“With virtually the stroke of a pen, or the support of the people, this ballot initiative will create approximately $80 billion of wealth in Florida,” said commission member John McKay, a Bradenton developer, former Senate president and sponsor of the amendment.

He said an analysis done for the commission by economist Hank Fishkind predicts the amendment “will spur retail sales. It will accelerate the recovery of the housing industry. People will be able to qualify for mortgages with less difficulty . . . Then, the construction industry will kick back in.”

But opponents warned the proposal – which would eliminate the property taxes the state now requires school districts to collect – is “wrong-headed” and “foolhardy” because it relies on the Legislature to find other means to fund education.

“We know that is not going to happen,” said commission member Randy Miller, a vice president of the Florida Retail Federation and a former state Department of Revenue director. “Where are we expecting to get this?”

The tax-swap idea received preliminary approval from the panel three weeks ago.

But mounting pressure from a stream of business and trade groups, and a one-man campaign by Senate Finance and Tax Chairman Mike Haridopolos, the lone legislator to speak out against the plan, led three commission members – Susan Story, Brian Yablonski and Mike Hogan – to switch sides and vote no.

Story, the chief executive of Gulf Power, said her main concern was that legislators will have few options but to raise some taxes on services that are now exempt. She said that will hurt small businesses and lead to job losses.

“I would love to have property tax relief, but I am very concerned,” she said. “It’s one thing to have relief, but it’s another thing not to have a job.”

But most commission members held true to the tax swap, considered by many to be the hallmark reform of their yearlong review of the state’s tax system that involved what commission chairman Allan Bense said was “hours and hours and hours and hours of public hearings.”

The Florida Constitution mandates that the panel meet every 20 years to recommend constitutional changes to improve the state’s tax and budget system.

“If we don’t vote this out, I don’t think we will just disappoint the people. I think we will fail the people,” said Roberto Martinez, a commission member and Miami lawyer. “I think people want to have an opportunity to vote for a property-tax proposal and while this is far from perfect, it is the best and wisest proposal we can present to the people.”

McKay said he will raise money to promote the amendment he championed.

The Florida Association of Broadcasters, a trade group opposed to taxing advertising, is already mounting a campaign against it, Miller said.

“The good thing is it still has to go on the ballot. It still has to survive a campaign and the voters still have to hear the pros and con,” said House Speaker Marco Rubio, who said Thursday he supports the amendment. “I have a feeling the cons are going to be much better funded than the pros.”

Rubio said that while he understands the concerns of Haridopolos, he is confident the Legislature can find enough budget cuts, coupled with sales tax increases and economic growth, to stave off creating a sales tax on services.

“People need to know that a ‘No’ vote dooms us inevitably to property tax increases in the state,” Rubio said. “If we keep this current system in place, you will be forced to raise property taxes in the future in order to fund education at a level where people want it.”

The Miami Herald, Mary Ellen Klas.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – April 23, 2008 – Allstate Corp. is preparing for both favorable and unfavorable rulings on its ability to conduct new business in Florida after an appeals court erroneously released a decision late Monday that could have meant trouble for the insurer.

The 1st District Court of Appeal late Monday appeared to uphold state Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty’s order in January suspending Allstate’s business licenses. McCarty accuses Allstate of failing to cooperate with subpoenas issued by the Office of Insurance Regulation, which is investigating homeowners insurance rate-setting.

But the court quickly withdrew the order. On Tuesday, court clerk Jon Wheeler stated that a “clerical error” led to the release, and according to court procedures, the earliest permissible release date is next Tuesday. The court will now take “its full time authorized by court rules to consider the motion,” Wheeler wrote in a statement, and “a new order ... will be released at a later time.”

That doesn’t mean the result will be the same, said Allstate spokeswoman Amy Moore.

“It’s really hard to speculate on what the outcome of the ruling will be before it is issued,” she said. However, “we have to look at both outcomes at this point.”

Moore said Allstate is cooperating with the Office of Insurance Regulation to produce the documents the agency says it needs.

2008 Tampa Tribune, Fla., Jerome R. Stockfisch.