Jupiter Bay News

The 9/25/24 Board Meeting was to be the most significant meeting in 30 years where information regarding Florida’s mandated milestone inspections would be revealed and unit owners would have a clear picture of the Board’s position and plan. It was promoted as a meeting with Jupiter Town officials where members of the Building Department and our insurance broker would speak informing us of repair requirements and insurance implications.

Instead, the meeting consisted of the Board President giving a very unpresidential and inaccurate speech and three vendors (Swaysland, Triton, and Rosenbaum) telling Jupiter Bay owners how much they liked working with our Board. The vendors told us how fortunate we are for having kept up our building maintenance over the “wild west” years so that our repair special assessments would likely be less than the $40,000 to $80,000 per owner that our neighboring condominium associations required.

Their assessment was confirmed in the milestone reports provided on the Association website yesterday afternoon. According to the reports, all 9 of Jupiter Bay’s buildings 3 stories or higher were found to be structurally safe for continued occupancy with some required repairs. The milestone inspections revealed the present condition of the building structures as having no bulging, settlement, deflections, expansion, or contractions.

This indicates that the $2.3 million ($3.1 million in today’s dollars) that was spent on building restoration/spalling between 2007 and 2020 was well spent and that the prior building repair program was effective. It is rather curious that despite this, the current Board believes that we now need to “repair” and refurbish every single unit in every 3 story or higher building as soon as possible. This would place an unnecessary financial burden on the members at a time when all other costs (insurance, reserve contributions, staffing, utilities, and supplies) are increasing. It would not be a good investment.

Through two official records requests and an official inquiry, I learned the following after waiting nearly 60 days:

1. In February 2023 the Jupiter Building Department told the Association that they are to begin Milestone Inspections of all buildings over 3 stories in height.

2. The Association waited 11 months to do their first inspection. However, the Board used scarce engineering resources to do a Concrete Remediation Inspection, not a Milestone Inspection nor Structural Integrity Reserve Study (SIRS).

3. Then, the Association wrongly told members that this East C Concrete Inspection was a Milestone Inspection and the basis for a $857,000 East C building “repair” project. Their April 19^th letter said that “C East is the starting point for concrete remediation under the new state mandates.” The new statutes would only have required C East units to be repaired if a both a phase one and phase two Milestone Inspection had been done and these inspections found "substantial structural deterioration" in one or more units. This didn't happen!

4. Milestone inspections of all Jupiter Bay buildings over 3 stories and a SIRS need to be completed by yearend. So far, members have received no information on completed Milestone Inspections nor an update on the SIRS.

Once the 40 units of the East C building have been upgraded, the Association is legally bound to treat all East unit owners the same and address the other 95 East units. At $21,789 per unit ($871,555 / 40 units) and with no remaining reserve funds, not counting inflation this would require another $2.07 million expenditure and at least another $15,333 per East owner special assessment.

It is important to note that no Jupiter Bay Board has ever “repaired” and renovated all units in a single building at the same time before, and the Association has never had owners pay 3 special assessments in a single year. In fact, special assessments were seldom used until this Board took over in 2020.

In addition to the special assessments, we are already paying an average increase of $336 per quarter in maintenance fees due to this year’s record 27.8% operating cost budget increase. Even if the milestone inspections find no unit with “substantial structural deterioration”, the Association will still need to fund significant increases in reserve contributions resulting from the anticipated Structural Integrity Reserve Study (SIRS) and 20-30% insurance increase cause by the every-three-year property reappraisal.

The Board is collecting a $43,073 special assessment for security cameras but has already exceeded this estimated expense by $22,697 through July. And they want more surveillance cameras at over $2,500 per camera plus on-going service and internet costs. Miscellaneous and late charge income is down over $7,000 through July. Finally, there’s the estimated $442,000 cost of replacing 20-year-old roofs on the three 5-story East buildings which will probably require another special assessment.

On July 10, 2024, the Association posted two additional Concrete Repair and six Milestone Inspection Phase One Contracts on its website: JupiterBayCondoAssoc.com. All contracts are with Swaysland Engineering and included:

Milestone Inspections

1. East A & B dated 3/22/24 for $14,500
2. West A dated 5/30/24 for $6000
3. West B dated 5/30/24 for $6000
4. West C dated 5/30/24 for $6000
5. West D dated 5/30/24 for $6000
6. West E dated 5/30/24 for $6000

Concrete Repair Inspections

The last two Concrete Repair Inspections listed below (#2 & #3) are mislabeled on the Association website as "Milestone Inspections":

1. East C Concrete Repair dated 10/3/23 for 3 phases ($7,750, $5,000 & $2,000)
2. West F Concrete Repair dated 1/3/24 for 3 phases ($6,000, $3,500 & $1,750)
3. Villas A, C & D Concrete Repair dated 1/3/24 for 24/32 of $7,000.

On 2/13/23 the Jupiter Building Department notified Jupiter Bay to initiate Milestone Inspections of all buildings three stories or higher.  The Association missed the 14-day requirement for notifying owners of this letter and did not provide the required completion dates. All milestone inspections must be completed by 12/31/24. If Milestone Inspection Contracts exist for East C, East D, West F, and the Villas they have not yet been posted. Milestone inspections of East C and West F must be completed this year.

Upon completion of a phase one or phase two milestone inspection, the engineer who performed the inspection must submit a sealed copy of the inspection report with a separate summary of, at minimum, the material findings and recommendations in the inspection report to the condominium association and to the building official of the local government which has jurisdiction.

Within 45 days after receiving a phase one or phase two milestone inspection report from the architect or engineer who performed the inspection, the association must distribute a copy of the inspector-prepared summary of the inspection report to each unit owner, regardless of the findings or recommendations in the report, by United States mail or personal delivery at the mailing address, property address, or any other address of the owner provided to fulfill the association’s notice requirements and by electronic transmission to the e-mail address provided to fulfill the association’s notice requirements to unit owners who previously consented to receive notice by electronic transmission; must post a copy of the inspector-prepared summary in a conspicuous place on the condominium property; and must publish the full report and inspector-prepared summary on the association’s website.

To date, we have not yet seen any results from these first six Milestone Inspections which cost the Association $44,500.

The following are details confirming the conclusion that the Association is spending $857,555 on East C building repairs that are not based on a milestone inspection and are probably unnecessary under the structural damage repair mandate. Also, it is unclear whether milestone inspections or concrete restoration inspections are being performed on the other buildings. So far Association members have not seen any milestone inspection reports or the required report summaries.

Attorney Letter: On April 29, 2024, I sent a written inquiry to the Jupiter Bay Board asking whether Swaysland’s East C Concrete Restoration Inspection was a Milestone Inspection. The Association’s attorney provided a response to the question via certified mail on July 1, 2024, approximately two-months later. Her answer was “The 2020 and 2024 Swaysland Engineering inspection reports are not milestone inspection reports.”

April 19 Letter: The Attorney’s response contradicts the Association’s April 19, 2024, letter to Jupiter Bay members which said the following:

1. Because of the new legislation passed by the Florida State Assembly and Senate, a mandate is in place that requires deficiencies of substantial structural damage to be addressed. The House Committee, Board of Directors, our law firm Rosenbaum Attorneys at Law, Swaysland Engineering and Triton Property Management all understand this state mandate and are operating in accordance with its' directives.

2. At the April Board meeting, the Association President read aloud a communication from Swaysland’s V-P of Engineering which said, "Per the new milestone requirements, you are mandated to make repairs of substantial structural deterioration. We consider the concrete spalling located at the [East C] building to be substantial structural damage per its' definition.”

3. C East is the starting point for the concrete remediation under the new state mandates.

4. We are addressing every unit in East C. We only addressed the stacks that had critical units in the West buildings because there was no state mandate in place when we began the West project. Now that we are under a state mandate, we must address all deficiencies identified.

5. A and B East are currently being inspected as part of the ongoing milestone inspections. The remaining buildings, not already inspected, will have their inspections completed by August.

6. It is extremely important to point out that we are ahead of the curve in that we have secured Swaysland Engineering to conduct the milestone survey. We are also extremely fortunate to have a commitment from Daniello Construction.

7. A and B East are currently being inspected as part of the ongoing milestone inspection. The remaining buildings, not already inspected, will have their inspections completed by August.

Spring Newsletter: The Association President, in the spring addition of the JB Connection Newsletter, said that “Swaysland Engineering will be conducting state mandated milestone inspections for C and D West in June and E-West and D-East in July. When the inspections are completed, it takes about one month for Swaysland to compile and recap the surveys. Once our association receives the results, we will post them on our website.” (So far, no milestone inspection reports are posted on the Association website.)

Margaret sent an attorney letter dated June 4, 2024, to some Jupiter Bay owners. I believe that it was supposed to go to East owners, but not all of us received it.  It involves all Jupiter Bay unit owners and should have been distributed throughout the community.  Since it is an official association document, Margaret would be required to provide you a copy if you want it. The letter claims that:

• Unit owners have no right to instruct or dictate the repair of their patios,

• The Board relies on its engineering professional,

• The more we spend now, the more we save later,

• We have disregarded necessary maintenance in the past., and

• Our quarterly maintenance fees are artificially low.

It is unknown why the attorney wrote this letter and who Margaret sent it to, but because it was forwarded to me and contains many inaccuracies, I feel compelled to respond. Please see my response below.

It is rather curious that this letter was written by our attorney at the owners’ expense and not by our property manager or Board.

Patio Ownership: In her letter the attorney correctly describes our patios as limited common elements and the Board’s responsibility to maintain them. Then she incorrectly says that “unit owners do not have the right to instruct or dictate their repair”. She fails to mention that the Association is owned entirely by the unit owners, where each member owns their unit, 1/359^th of the common elements, and their patio (a limited common element). We pay a property maintenance firm, directed by the Board, to have our patios maintained and repaired. To suggest that we do not have a say in how our patios are maintained is not true.

Owner Representation: Board Members are elected to represent the unit owners. The attorney, property manager, engineers, and contractors are vendors whose salaries we pay. It becomes a problem when our elected officials and vendors no longer properly represent the owners. This is why we annually elect new board members and frequently replace attorneys and vendors. Board members who behave badly in office can be recalled via majority owner vote.

Owners' Rights: Unit owners have the right to make their voices heard, to express their displeasure with improper board actions, and to complain to the Division of Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes. They are not a “dissident” group as alleged by the attorney but a group that advocates official policy and fair governance. They have the right to point out situations where vendors are in error and board members fail to follow the law or neglect their fiduciary responsibilities. The condominium act encourages unit owners to speak up against bad decisions impacting them. House bill 2021, which will become law on July 1^st, “protects unit owners who report complaints to government agencies or law enforcement or make public statements critical of the operation or management of an association”.

Milestone Inspections: The purpose of the new Milestone legislation is to prevent another building or balcony from collapsing and not to address minor concrete surface imperfections. According to the statute these minor imperfections include cracks, distortion, sagging, deflections, misalignment, signs of leakage, or peeling of finishes. This means that the Association should not be wasting money and resources addressing the 33% of East C building units with “minor” or no damage.

Professional Engineers: Regarding the Board’s reliance on its professional engineering company, this is the same company that performed a Concrete Restoration Inspection on the East C building instead of a Milestone Inspection, reported no “severe” damage which was later overruled by their V-P as “substantial structural damage”, erroneously said that Florida statutes require “fixing minor spalls on units”, and failed to provide summary reports to the Association and unit owners. The firm doesn’t know the difference between phase one (initial) and phase two (follow-up) inspections. They are doing major repairs without the required phase two inspections and associated notifications. A second opinion from another engineering firm is needed.

Maintenance: The attorney is wrong in saying that there has been a “past practice of disregarding necessary maintenance”. Over the past 10 years the Association spent over $6.6 million ($18,384 average per owner) on necessary maintenance:

• $3,673,264 of reserve funds was spent for building repair & maintenance
  • $1,576,155 of this for building restoration/spalling
  • $1,011,928 of this for roof replacements
  • $1,085,181 for other (elevators, painting & life safety)

• $746,472 of reserve funds for common area repair & maintenance

• $1,386,364 of operating funds for common/building repair & maintenance

• $453,210 of operating funds for elevator repair & maintenance

• $348,313 of operating funds for life safety repair & maintenance

The Association had contracts with four engineering firms (Bunker Engineering, Archetype, Chalaire, and Swaysland) over this period to inspect our buildings and ensure that all needed spalling and concrete restoration repairs were addressed according to approved practices and town code.

Never-ending Repair: To suggest that committing to a possible $7.0 million expenditure now to repair and upgrade all Jupiter Bay buildings and units somehow saves us money is ludicrous. Anyone who knows about concrete deterioration in a salt-water environment knows that repairing concrete is a never-ending job. Fixing it now does not prevent it from reoccurring for the next 20 years. As Swaysland reports: “You should be prepared to make additional repairs and paint within the next 7 to 10 years.” Spending $7.0 million every 7 years is $1,000,000 per year or $2,786 per owner per year.

Insurance Coverage: Yes, roof replacements have enabled the association to maintain its insurance policies, but the only time the insurance company may be concerned about concrete deterioration is when an association falsely claims that its units have “substantial structural deterioration”. This would cause an insurance company to reconsider its coverage.

Maintenance Fees: Contrary to the attorney’s claim, our maintenance assessments are not artificially low, having increased by 55% over the past five years, not counting the $1.6 million of special assessments over this period. Besides, our maintenance assessments are going to increase substantially once this year’s property reappraisal and reserve study are complete.

Propaganda: Be cautious and vigilant when you receive this kind of attorney propaganda.

I attended a Milestone Inspections and SIRS Webinar on 5/23/24 sponsored by Florida Association News, and this is a summary of what was covered. I’ve added specific comments related to Jupiter Bay (in red) where appropriate.

Milestone Inspections

• A Milestone Inspection is: "a structural inspection of a building, including an inspection of load-bearing elements and the primary structural members and primary structural systems.” The licensed Architect or Engineer inspector attests to:
  1. Life safety
  2. Adequacy of the structural components
  3. General structural condition of the building which affects safety
  4. Determination of any necessary maintenance, repair, or replacement of any structural component.

There are two types of milestone inspections: Phase 1 and Phase 2.

• Compliance: For condos 3 stories or more in height, the milestone inspection must be completed by December 31^st of the year in which the building reaches 30 years of age, then every 10 years thereafter. The East C Inspection Report did not describe the inspection as a Milestone Inspection. It reported that only “private balconies, public walkways, and building exterior” were inspected, and its purpose was “to identify the types and estimated amounts of concrete deterioration”.

• Notification: The local enforcement agency must provide written notice, via a certified letter, of a required milestone inspection to the Association.
  • Upon receiving written notice, the association MUST notify the unit owners of the required inspection within 14 days of receipt. This notice must include the date the inspection must be completed. Jupiter Bay owners have not received any information regarding a notice from the local (Jupiter) enforcement agency.
  • Phase one milestone must be completed within 180 days of receiving notice. However, the agency could extend the date for good cause.

• Phase 1 Milestone Inspection:
  • It is a visual examination and qualitative assessment of habitable and non-habitable areas of a building, including the major structural components, to determine the structural conditions of the building.
  • If the architect or engineer finds no signs of substantial structural deterioration to any building components under visual examination, phase 2 of the inspection is not required. Swaysland has performed no Phase 2 inspections at Jupiter Bay, implying NO structural deterioration.
  • The engineering manager who spoke at the course said:
    • If buildings are painted on a regular schedule and spalling repairs are regularly addressed, it’s unlikely that the engineer will find substantial structural deterioration and Phase 2 inspections will not be needed.
    • 80% of the time they have been able to certify the buildings they inspect as “safe for occupancy with no substantial structural deterioration”. Their reports may include minor repair recommendations.

• Phase 2 Milestone Inspection:
  • Must be performed if any substantial structural deterioration is identified during phase 1. Again, no Phase 2 inspection was performed at Jupiter Bay.
  • A phase 2 inspection may involve destructive or nondestructive testing at the inspector's direction. The inspection may be as extensive or as limited as necessary to fully assess areas of structural distress to confirm that the building is structurally safe for use and to recommend repairs.
  • An inspector who completes a phase 2 milestone inspection shall prepare and submit an inspection report. If Phase 2 is required a progress report to the local enforcement agency is due within 180 days of submitting the Phase 1 inspection report.

• Notification to Owners:
  • Within 45 days after receiving the applicable inspection report, the association must distribute a copy of the inspector’s prepared summary of the inspection report to each owner. In violation of condo law, no milestone inspection report summary has been sent by the association, within 45 days after receiving the report, to each unit owner by United States mail or personal delivery.
  • Must also post a copy of the report in a conspicuous place on condo or co-op property. This was not done.
  • Must publish the full report on the Association's website.

• Milestone Inspection Report Record Keeping:
  • This is an OFFICIAL RECORD of the association, and it must be kept for a minimum of 15 years
  • The report must be posted on the association’s website.
  • Sellers of condos must provide potential purchasers with copies of the milestone inspection report and Structural Integrity Reserve Study.

Structural Integrity Reserve Study (SIRS)

• Compliance: All condominium associations existing on or before July 1, 2022 must have a Structural Integrity Reserve Study (SIRS) completed by 12/31/24 for each building on the condominium property that is 3 stories or higher in height.

• Who can perform a SIRS? The visual inspection portion of the SIRS must be performed by:
  • An engineer licensed under chapter 471, or
  • An architect licensed under chapter 481, or
  • A person certified as a reserve specialist or professional reserve analyst by the Community Association Institute (CAI) or the Association of Professional Reserve Analysts
  • The same engineering firm doing the inspections could also perform the SIRS.

• What is a SIRS? At a minimum, a structural integrity reserve study must:
  • Identify the common areas being visually inspected.
  • State the estimated remaining useful life of each common area element inspected.
  • Estimate the replacement cost or deferred maintenance expense of the common elements inspected.
  • Provide a recommended annual reserve amount that achieves the estimated replacement cost or deferred maintenance expense of each common area element inspected by the end of its estimated remaining useful life.
  • Many companies are now presenting two separate Reports a SIRS report and a non-SIRS report. This means that a second set of reserves must be identified and funded by the association in addition to what’s already being funded.

• Components included in a SIRS:
  • Roof (already included in Jupiter Bay’s current reserve schedule.)
  • Structure including Load-bearing walls or other primary structural members and primary structural systems. This includes concrete restoration.
  • Fireproofing and fire protection systems (already included in current schedule.)
  • Plumbing, including high-pressure fire sprinkler pumps and step-up pressure pumps for higher buildings.
  • Electrical systems including generators and pump room electric panels.
  • Waterproofing and exterior painting (already included in current schedule.)
  • Windows and exterior doors except where the owners are responsible (e.g., condo unit windows)
  • Any other item that has a deferred maintenance expense or replacement cost that exceeds $10,000 and the failure to replace or maintain such item negatively affects the items listed in the structural integrity reserve study. (This would probably include balcony screens and frames at $2,900 per unit.)

• New Reserve Requirements:
  • For Association buildings three stories or higher, reserves must be funded by the amounts determined by the association's most recent SIRS that must be completed by 12/31/24.
  • For associations required to have a SIRS, any budget adopted on or after 12/31/24 must include the funding specified in the SIRS, and members cannot vote to waive or reduce funding of SIRS items or vote to use SIRS reserve funds for any other purpose. (If the association’s 2025 budget is adopted prior to 12/31/24, this would apply to the 2026 and later budgets.)
  • Owners of buildings 3 stories or higher may still vote to reduce non-SIRS reserve components by a vote of the majority of voting interests (i.e. 50.01% of all owners need to vote in favor.)
  • Reserve contributions may be adjusted to account for inflation.

• Penalties: Failure to obtain a Milestone Inspection or Structural Integrity Reserve Study is a breach of the officers and directors’ fiduciary relationship to the unit owners.

Swaysland Engineering recommended the following repair scope for the 40 East C building units:

Private Balconies

1. Mobilize to the private balconies.
2. Remove the 40 existing screen enclosures.
3. Remove and reinstall, after repair, the 18 existing rail hurricane shutters.
4. Remove the tile floor from 36 units. Tile floors are prohibited and will not be replaced.
5. Remove and not reinstall 4 glass balcony enclosures.
6. Remove and reinstall at least 4 sets of sliding glass balcony doors. These may have to be replaced with hurricane glass doors.
7. Repair the deteriorated concrete in the 23 units with "moderate" damage and 9 units with "minor" damage.
8. Further investigate for any damage in 35 of the units.
9. Install new waterproofing coating/finish system at the balcony floor surface of all 40 balconies.
10. Install 40 new screen and frame enclosures.
11. Reinstall previously permitted, proper working condition shutters.

Public Walkways

1. Mobilize to the public walkways.
2. Remove the coating at repair areas.
3. Repair the deteriorated concrete.
4. Install new waterproofing coating at the repair areas. Match adjacent areas as best as possible.

Painting Sealing

1. Repair all cracked and delaminated stucco.
2. Pressure wash, prime and paint the building with a 10-year warranty wind-driven warranty finish coat.
3. Install new perimeter sealant exterior doors and windows.

Since the Jupiter Bay Board signed the Daniello contract to begin East C concrete restoration, it has obliged the Association to do similar work on the other Jupiter Bay buildings. Total cost would be nearly $6.0 million requiring owner special assessments of $14,973 to $17,392 depending on building (See chart below). These calculations assume:

1. The Association’s other buildings and units require similar repairs to those in the East C building.

2. No additional expense to repair the older and less well-built West and Villa buildings.

3. No inflation during the time to repair all 14 buildings and units.

4. Repair Cost Estimates are based on number of floors where a 5-story building (East C) has a multiplier of 1.0.  A 2-story building is 2/5 (0.4) and a 4-story building is 4/5 (0.8). Total East is 3.4 times the East C estimate and 4 story buildings are 0.8 times the East C estimate.

5. 2022 and 2023 repair expenditures reduce total repair costs.

6. No change orders and ignoring the Swaysland Engineer’s comments saying that “You can expect that there will be extra work and extra charges above and beyond the original contract price or estimate. These extras usually amount to about 25% or more of the original cost estimate but can be more depending on the severity of the deterioration. However, there have been instances where the cost of a concrete repair project has been double or triple the estimate even through a competent investigation was made.”

Likely Special Assessments:

The following email was sent to Jupiter Bay's Board of Directors on 4/10/24 regarding a vote to be taken at the 4/11/24 Board Meeting to begin East C building concrete remediation in May.

Jupiter Bay Board,

Following is my FL Statute 553.899 summary and my concerns regarding the Board’s proposed approval of “Concrete Remediation for C East” at the April 11, 2024, Board Meeting.

1. FL Statute 553.899(2)(a) defines a Milestone Inspection as:
   • Attesting to the life safety and adequacy of the structural components of the building and, to the extent reasonably possible,
   • Determining the general structural condition of the building as it affects the safety of such building, including a determination of any necessary maintenance, repair, or replacement of any structural component of the building.

2. Upon completion of a milestone inspection, the engineer who performed the inspection must submit to the association a report which:
   • Identifies any substantial structural deterioration, describes the extent of such deterioration, and recommends repairs for such deterioration.
   • States whether unsafe or dangerous conditions, as those terms are defined in the Florida Building Code, were observed.
   • Recommends any remedial or preventive repair for any items that are damaged but are not substantial structural deterioration.

3. FL Statute 553.899(2)(b) defines “Substantial Structural Deterioration” as:
   • Substantial structural distress or substantial structural weakness that negatively affects a building’s general structural condition and integrity.
   • The term does not include surface imperfections such as cracks, distortion, sagging, deflections, misalignment, signs of leakage, or peeling of finishes unless it is determined that such surface imperfections are a sign of substantial structural deterioration.

4. I read nothing in this statute that requires minor surface imperfections to be immediately addressed, particularly ahead of more serious issues in buildings other than East C.

5. It is not clear to me whether the Association has completed a milestone inspection and what this inspection reveals. Yet the Board is proposing to proceed full speed ahead with repairs to a single East building, which may not be the one with the most serious issues. I have not received the required unit owner notification.

6. The Board is seeking approval for a major $857,555 project that has not been funded. I do not believe that this decision can be made without unit owners knowing the financial impact of the decision – i.e., what will each East owner have to pay and how is it to be paid?  If a special assessment, how much and when? What will remaining repair work (for other buildings) cost and when will it be funded?

7. Since approval of this item requires a special assessment, Florida statutes require a two-week notice with discussion document sent in advance.

8. What is the basis for selecting the East C building over the other buildings? The last report disclosed to Jupiter Bay Homeowners was Swaysland’s December 2020 inspection report showing only one East unit having severe damage, and it was in the East B building.

9. The recommended Daniello bid does not address which units will be repaired and the extent of their damage. Yet it replaces screens and frames for all East C units regardless of whether they have repairs.

10. In their bid, Daniello shows that some existing structures must be replaced. How does Daniello know how many hurricane shutters to remove/reinstall and how many sliding glass doors to remove/reinstall?

11. Wouldn’t it be important to first notify unit owners of whether their unit is to be repaired and owner impact? What is the implication of an owner having a glass enclosed balcony or tile flooring?

12. Instead of addressing repairs building-by-building, why not remediate the most severe units, then the moderate ones, etc. This approach would address the most serious issues first, improving our compliance with the statute.

Regards,

Paul St. Clair, LCAM

Licensed Florida Community Association Managers (CAMs) are responsible for assuring compliance with Florida statutes and the Association’s governing documents. They, together with the association's attorney, are to advise the Board regarding legal requirements for conducting Association business.

If a Board is unfamiliar with regulations and provisions of Florida law, further assistance and intervention by the licensed Property Manager may be required. These areas include Owner Communications, Board Decisions, Proper Noticing, Official Records, and adherence to the Milestone inspections and Structural Integrity Reserve Study statutes. Here’s a summary of the requirements:

• Owner Communications – Unit owners must be informed of all Board Member deliberations regarding financials, vendor communications, project plans, statute requirements, etc.

• Board Decisions– All Board decisions must be made at a noticed board meeting open to all association members. Discussions among owners and Board Members must be encouraged with decisions made through consensus. Unfunded projects cannot be approved.

• Proper Noticing– Major project, financial, and rule amendment decisions MUST be noticed at least 14 days before the meeting.

• Official Records– Most Association records are classified according to Florida Statutes as “Official Records” and are available to all owners for review and copying.

• Milestone Inspections – Condominium Associations are required to conduct Milestone Structural Inspections of their buildings and keep unit owners informed of progress and findings. Once local enforcement agencies notify associations of the need to perform a milestone inspection, the association must conduct:

• • A phase one milestone inspection by a licensed architect or engineer which must commence within 180 days after an association receives a written notice from the agency, and

• • A phase two inspection which is required if there is evidence of “substantial structural deterioration”.

• Structural Integrity Reserve Studies – Associations existing on or before July 1, 2022, are to have a structural integrity reserve study completed by December 31, 2024. The updated replacement cost and useful life values are used to calculate full funding requirements which cannot be waived.

At a special meeting of Jupiter Bay’s Board of Directors, held on January 12, 2023, a resolution was unanimously adopted imposing a $25.00 fee per parking permit issued. This fee will help pay for the Association’s “extensive amount of time and attention required to receive requests for parking permits and issuing these permits.”

The new fee, effective on the meeting’s date, will apply to all new parking permits issued, whether for tenant or owner. Current owner window stickers and new owner placards are excluded from this fee.

The parking permit issuance fee is like other administrative fees authorized by Florida statutes. Florida statute 718.116(8) says that “an association may charge a reasonable fee for the preparation and delivery of an estoppel certificate, with the authority to charge a fee established by a written resolution adopted by the board.” The Association’s attorney chose to use the same resolution instrument to establish this parking pass fee.

The fee is authorized by the 6/25/21 Vehicle Restrictions amendment to the Association’s Declaration paragraph 10.4, section 1(f) which says, “The Board may adopt and amend additional rules and regulations with regard to the parking of permissible vehicles not inconsistent with the Declaration, including, fees associated with the issuance of decals.”

It is also consistent with the 8/26/02 Arbitrator Ruling and the Association’s Bylaw paragraph 9.9 which says, “Charges for other than Common Expenses may be made when expressly provided for in the Declaration or the Exhibits attached thereto, including, without limitation, charges for services furnished for the benefit of an Owner.” This would include services for tenants who inherit many owner rights and obligations (e.g., rule/regulation adherence) when a unit is leased.

The Association incurs significant cost and no direct benefit from registering new owners, processing leases, and issuing parking passes. Since these tasks and associated costs are specific to certain individuals, they should not be considered “common” expenses and need to be charged back to the specific individuals requiring these administrative services. The fee is needed and will significantly benefit the Association. According to the Association’s President, with 2,000 to 3,000 parking passes issued each year, it could generate substantial income, offsetting administrative costs.

Several items regarding the way in which this board meeting and resolution was conducted could have been improved:

• Although noticed as a special meeting and involving rule/regulation changes, the Association did not adhere to the required 14-day notice requirement. Per FL Statute 718.112(2)(c)1., “Written notice of a meeting at which an amendment to rules regarding unit use will be considered must be mailed, delivered, or electronically transmitted to the unit owners and posted conspicuously on the condominium property at least 14 days before the meeting.”

• The resolution did not specify the rule/regulation paragraph to be added or amended. Likewise, an updated set of rules/regulations need to be published, and recorded with the County, reflecting this change.

In summary, the Board is to be recognized for finally addressing this important issue.

Paul St. Clair created the Association's first website in 2012. After the Association purchased a new website, Paul retained maintenance responsibility. He made significant enhancements to the Association's website, some of which are listed below. In May 2024, when Paul questioned the Board President's wasteful spending on unnecessary East C building patio upgrades, his maintenance access was removed. It is one more measure that the Board has taken to reduce owner communications.

Significant enhancements were made to the Association's website https://jupiterbaycondoassoc.com by Mr. St. Clair:

The following pages were added to the Public Section of the website:

• Welcome – Introduces the Association’s management, website, governing documents, and office location/hours.

• Location – Describes the Association’s location and the area’s beaches, restaurants, entertainment, shopping, and other activities.

• Staff – Lists the Board of Directors, office staff, maintenance staff and Building Captains.

• Activities – Presents activities available to all Jupiter Bay residents.

• Rules – Provides a summary of the Association’s Rules & Regulations applicable to all residents.

• FAQs – Lists the Florida Statute required Frequently Asked Questions and Answers pertaining to our Association.

The "Internal Documents" section was redesigned to make it easier to find what you're looking for.

Here's the new "Internal Documents" structure:

Ryan Poliakoff is an attorney who publishes a weekly article in the Palm Beach Post.  Following is my question to Ryan and his answer published in the 9/18/22 Sunday paper:

Question: We are a multi-condominium association comprised of eight individual associations. Six of the eight individual associations consist of similar buildings, each with 32 units. These six associations are considering combining into one association. If we were to bring their reserves, fund balances and maintenance fees into synchronization (i.e., same values), what would it take to combine them? They all share the same bylaws. All six declarations of condominium are very similar or could be made similar, and it takes a 75% owner vote to amend them. Condo law suggests that the associations could be combined with less than 100% owner vote, but since their proportional share of common expense would change, would that dictate 100% approval of all 192 owners? Their declarations don’t appear to define voting interest approvals for changing the proportions or percentages by which owners share common expenses. Signed, P.S.

Dear P.S., You use the term “association” in several different ways in your question, but what I think you are saying is that there is one association (the corporate entity tasked with managing and maintaining the property) that governs eight individual condominiums. Six of the eight condominiums, which are largely identical, would like to combine into a single condominium so that they share expenses.

I do think, unfortunately, that would be practically impossible. As you pointed out elsewhere in your letter, Section 718.110, Fla. Stat. provides that no amendment to a declaration may (among other things) alter the appurtenances to the unit or change the proportion or percentage by which the unit owner shares the common expenses of the condominium and owns common surplus without 100% approval of the owners of the units and all record lien holders.

That is unlikely to happen except in the smallest condominiums. You effectively would need to terminate five of the six condominiums and amend the declaration of the sixth to integrate all of the other properties and units.

Condominium common elements are owned jointly and severally by the individual unit owners, so you are not only changing that appurtenant ownership, but also the shares of the common expenses of all of the units. As such I think it triggers the 100% approval rule and any single holdout would prevent the merger. You are already a multi-condominium association, which in this situation I think is the best you can achieve, in terms of saving costs and operating expenses.

Ryan Poliakoff, a partner at Backer Aboud Poliakoff & Foelster, LLP, is a Board-Certified specialist in condominium and planned development law. This column is dedicated to the memory of Gary Poliakoff. Ryan Poliakoff and Gary Poliakoff are co-authors of “New Neighborhoods — The Consumer’s Guide to Condominium, Co-Op and HOA Living.

Jupiter Bay currently has 8 associations: East, Villas, and each of the 6 West buildings. There is recent discussion regarding combining the 6 West associations into one. This would simplify our accounting structure, normalize fees, and provide larger combined reserves, reducing the financial impact of individual building repairs.

Financial consolidation of the 6 West buildings/associations requires addressing 1) quarterly maintenance fees, 2) operating accounts, 3) reserve accounts and 4) the Declarations of Condominium:

1. Since each building has the same number of units (32), averaging the 6 individual maintenance fees into a new fee would resolve the maintenance fee issue.

2. Differences between income and expense for each building produces negative or positive fund balances. These imbalances within the operating accounts need to be addressed so that all 6 buildings have the same (or zero) fund balance.

3. Reserve account balances need to be brought in synch, either at the individual account level or in aggregate. The simplest approach is to pick a single reserve account, such as concrete restoration/spalling, and add special assessment funds from each building into this account so that total reserve balances are equal. This would impose a financial burden on West buildings with low reserves.

4. Making the individual Declarations the same may be the most difficult task since one of the associations (West C) has different provisions than the others. West C building has the following unique terms:
   • Lease period of at least 30 days. 10-day exception for Thanksgiving, Christmas & Easter.
   • Maximum of 3 rentals per calendar year.
   • Transfer fees of $100 for sale of unit, $75 for lease, and $25 for guest of owner unless relative or owner present.

Also, there's the issue of obtaining the necessary number of unit-owner votes to approve the merger. Florida Statute 718.110(7) says: The declarations, bylaws, and common elements of two or more independent condominiums of a single complex may be merged to form a single condominium, upon the:

• Approval of such voting interest of each condominium as is required by the declaration for modifying the appurtenances to the units or changing the proportion or percentages by which the owners of the parcel share the common expenses and own the common surplus;
• Approval of all record owners of liens; and
• Recording of new or amended articles of incorporation, declarations, and bylaws.

Declarations for the Jupiter Bay West buildings don't define voting interest approvals for changing the proportions by which owners share common expenses.  Because of this, approval by 100% of the owners would probably be required. (See above posting.)

Considerable effort will be needed to address the 4 items listed above and obtain approval of unit owners in each building. These owners will need to agree to pay special assessments to bring their building into synch with other buildings which have higher (or zero) fund balances and higher reserve account balances. Secondly, West unit owners will need to accept, or agree to give up, rental restrictions that are in the West C Declaration.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has released new flood zone maps effective December 20, 2024. Click on the following link to view FEMA's Online 2024 Flood Map for Palm Beach County: FEMA Online Flood Map.

Here's the key to the new flood zones:

1. A, AE, AH, AD - Special Flood Hazard Area
2. VE - Coastal High Hazard Area
3. X500 - Low Risk Areas
4. X, D - Minimal/Undetermined Risk Areas

According to the maps, Jupiter Bay is in flood zone X (formerly zone C), meaning that we are outside the 500-year floodplain with less than 0.2% annual probability of flooding.

This means that banks and other lending institutions will not require Jupiter Bay owners to acquire flood insurance when obtaining a mortgage on their condominium.

The Jupiter Bay Board of Directors announced that their infamous East C “repair” and renovation project has run out of reserve funds and will require a $303,732 special assessment to pay for Board-approved construction work and previously undisclosed engineering inspections of this work. This estimated $871,555 project equates to $21,789 per unit balcony “repaired”. According to the engineer’s report, extra work could overrun the $871,555 estimate by 25% or more requiring another special assessment.

Of the 40 East C building units, 15 of them (37.5%) were reported by Swaysland Engineering to have “minor” or “no” damage. This is $326,835 of East C reserve funds ($2,421 per owner) wasted on rebuilding balconies that are in relatively good condition. If only needed repairs in this building were addressed, the announced $2,250 special assessment would not have been required. Additionally, some of the $14,000 of engineering resources consumed on this work could have been applied to this year’s mandated Structural Integrity Reserve Study (SIRS) and milestone inspections, completing them on time.

Considering the efficiency of addressing 5-balcony stacks of condos at a time, be aware that the last 5 stacks in East C building had over 50% of units with “minor” or “no” damage. Contractor resources could have been redirected to stacks in East A, B, or D buildings to address more serious repairs. The entire East Association building repair project could have been completed with the available $567,823 reserve money and a small special assessment. Why the Board decided to do this East C all-unit restoration project, which did not result from a milestone inspection, remains a mystery.

East C building unit owners are concerned about the repairs and renovations of their balconies. Very little information has been provided by the Association regarding the impact of this mostly unnecessary work to their units particularly to their balcony upgrades. On April 29 I sent an Official Written Inquiry to the Board requesting answers to 7 questions. Following are the questions followed by the answers which I received from the Association attorney on July 1 (2 months latter):

1. Will all owner-installed balcony modifications be removed at the Association’s expense? Will owners be allowed to have them reinstalled? Who pays for the reinstallation?
   • Attorney Answer: The Board will rely upon the engineer regarding reinstallation requirements and removal requirements.

2. 36 units showed tile flooring on the balconies.  The bids did not estimate the cost for tile removal. Who is paying for the removal, and is the cost being charged back to the unit owners?
   • Attorney Answer: The Association, based upon governing document and incidental damage requirements. (Note: See the Repair page for a description of incidental damage)

3. What will be the patio floor finish? What if the owner would like stamped concrete, which is an approved finish?
   • Attorney Answer: Owners will have three options for finish.

4. What about the units that have had their frames and screens recently replaced?
   • Attorney Answer: Board will base decisions regarding existing screen enclosures on engineering advice, which considers if code requirements can be achieved to be put back on unit(s).

5. If a sliding glass door needs to be removed, can they be reinstalled without upgrading to hurricane glass. If upgraded, will the cost be charged back to the homeowner?
   • Attorney Answer: They will be replaced pursuant to the Town of Jupiter code. If necessary and removal is required, then the Board adheres to the incidental damage provision requiring replacement at Association cost.

6. The Swaysland Report says that the building will be pressure washed, primed, and painted with a 10-year warranty wind-driven warranty finish coat. What all will be painted? What about color matches with already-painted balconies?
   • Attorney Answer: Areas where work is performed and where there is a substantial area requiring paint. Yes, same color.

7. The Swaysland Report says: “install new perimeter sealant exterior doors and windows.” What doors and windows?
   • Attorney Answer: The excerpt from the report referenced in the question is referring to the sealing of windows and doors. The windows and doors, if this reference is applicable to any window and doors in the building, will be sealed as necessary.

It’s important for Jupiter Bay’s unit owners to understand what our Board is doing in addressing Milestone inspections/repairs and the implications of their actions.

Implications: By declaring that the East C building has “substantial structural damage” requiring every unit to be "repaired", Jupiter Bay’s Board is saying that the units in East C may be in danger of collapsing and “unfit for occupancy”. Here are the implications of this rarely used substantial structural deterioration designation:

• Jupiter Bay must report to the local (Jupiter) government enforcement agency that one of our 9 buildings over three-stories high has substantial structural damage, and its units may be unfit for occupancy. A summary engineering report must also be sent via US mail to the building's unit owners notifying them of the substantial structural damage to their building and units.

• If this is the case, then it’s likely that all of our 4 and 5 story buildings have similar substantial structural damage.

• If it takes $857,000 to “repair” this single building, then it would likely take at least $857,000 to “repair” each of the other two East buildings and $686,000 for each of the six West buildings.

• After consuming all available building restoration reserves, every Jupiter Bay unit owner (except for the Villas) would need to be assessed $15,000 to $18,000 (without considering inflation) to pay for the "needed" repairs.

• Per Florida Statute 718.503(2)(a): After December 31, 2024, the information that most Jupiter Bay buildings and units have substantial structural deterioration must be reported to anyone considering the purchase of a Jupiter Bay unit. Also, any pending special assessments will need to be disclosed.

• If the Board follows the East C remediation program, owner balcony improvements, excluding hurricane shutters and hurricane sliding glass doors, will be removed from all Jupiter Bay units in all buildings. This includes removal of floor tiles, glass enclosures, and non-hurricane proof shades.

Florida law is very clear on the definitions of structural deterioration and milestone inspections as defined below:

Structural Deterioration: Per Florida statute 553.899(2)(b):

• “Substantial structural deterioration” means substantial structural distress or substantial structural weakness that negatively affects a building’s general structural condition and integrity.

• The term does not include surface imperfections such as cracks, distortion, sagging, deflections, misalignment, signs of leakage, or peeling of finishes unless the licensed engineer or architect performing the phase one or phase two inspection determines that such surface imperfections are a sign of substantial structural deterioration.

Milestone Inspection: Milestone inspections are not just concrete restoration inspections like the one done for East C building. Per Florida statute 553.899(2)(a) “Milestone inspection” means a structural inspection of a building, including an inspection of load-bearing elements and the primary structural members and primary structural systems including (Per FL Statute 627.706):

1. Interior floor displacement or deflection which results in settlement-related damage to the interior such that the interior building structure or members become unfit for service or represents a safety hazard.

2. Foundation displacement or deflection more than acceptable variances which results in settlement-related damage to the primary structural members or primary structural systems that prevents those members or systems from supporting the loads and forces they were designed to support.

3. Damage that results in listing, leaning, or buckling of the exterior load-bearing walls or other vertical primary structural members.

4. Damage that results in the building, or any portion of the building containing primary structural members or primary structural systems, being significantly likely to imminently collapse because of the movement or instability of the ground supporting such building.

5. Damage that qualifies as “substantial structural damage” as defined in the Florida Building Code.

Unless you are concerned that your building, unit, or balcony is about to collapse, you should join your fellow homeowners in stopping this unnecessary "repair" insanity before it’s too late.

TO Jupiter Bay Board:

The East C building “repair” project is currently unfunded. There’s been no communication regarding funding, and there’s no published plan to do similar work in any other Jupiter Bay building. The Board cannot approve and begin work on an unfunded project.

I have read the Swaysland East C Concrete Restoration Inspection Report and believe that its content must be communicated and explained to the unit owners. The Report says that no units in this building have “severe” structural damage. The estimated $857,555 cost is for the following work on the East C building much of which has never been done before on any Jupiter Bay building:

• Remediate the 23 units with “moderate” damage and 9 units with “minor” damage.
• Replace balcony frames and screens in all 40 units.
• Tear out and not replace the tile floors in 36 units and waterproof all 40 balcony slab surfaces.
• Remove and reinstall 18 rail hurricane shutters.
• Remove and not reinstall 4 glass balcony enclosures.
• Remove and reinstall at least 4 sets of sliding glass balcony doors.

According to Swaysland’s engineer this $857,555 estimate is “likely to overrun by 25% or as much as 2-3 times the original estimate”. This will not only drain all the East building restoration/spalling reserves intended for use by all East unit owners but will require at least a $2,146 special assessment from each owner, including the 95 East owners in the other buildings who receive no benefit from this expenditure.

Similar work in all other Jupiter Bay East, West, and Villa buildings could cost every Jupiter Bay owner a $14,973 to $17,392 special assessment.

This work in a single building is being contemplated at a time when budgets and unit owner costs are skyrocketing and are expected to continue to rise:

Budgets

• Last year the Association overspent its operating budget (excluding insurance) by $175,078.
• Budgets have increased 16.74% last year and 17.24% this year. Inflationary increases in labor, material, and service costs will require further operating cost increases next year.
• Reserve balances decreased by 12.5% last year and reserve funding was reduced by $129,488 this year increasing the likelihood of future special assessments to cover shortfalls.
• Insurance rates increased 360% over the last 4 years requiring special assessments each year, and they are expected to continue to increase.

Future Expenditures

• A three-year property appraisal, required this year, is expected to increase property insurance premiums by 20% to 30%.
• The Association will soon have to pay for repairing any units with Phase II “Substantial Structural Deterioration” at a time when building restoration/spalling reserves are at 2021 levels. These costs are unknown, and information regarding plans and the status of community-wide Milestone Inspections and associated repair estimates has not been provided.
• Results of the Structural Integrity Reserve Study (SIRS) will require significant increases in reserve contributions to be reflected in the 2025 budget. No communication regarding SIRS status has been provided.
• The Association is planning to spend an unbudgeted $32,246 plus electrical installation costs for security surveillance cameras with ongoing expense of approximately $1,000 per month ($294 service cost plus Comcast internet).

The Board needs to improve its communication with Jupiter Bay owners regarding Milestone Inspections, SIRS, and the East C project, its total cost/funding, and plans for similar work on other buildings/units.

Paul St. Clair, LCAM

The Jupiter Bay Board of Directors voted at their 4/11/24 Board Meeting to accept an $857,555 bid from Daniello Construction for East C building concrete restoration.  This bid was in response to Swaysland Engineering's 1/24/24 East C building Concrete Restoration Inspection Report.

Following is a summary of the report's contents:

1. Inspection Date: Swaysland Professional Engineering Consultants, Inc. (SPEC) performed an inspection of the private balconies, public walkways, and building exterior during October 2023 and November 2023.

2. Purpose: The purpose of the inspections was to identify the types and estimated amounts of concrete deterioration and to determine the appropriate method of repair and protection.

3. Inspection Method: The inspection was performed by visual observation and acoustic emission where accessible from the walking surface. This report is based upon conditions that are observable via the inspection methods described above at the time of the inspection.

4. Concrete Deterioration: Concrete naturally has a protection layer when it is originally cast. Over a period, the natural protection is lessened, and the chloride content increases, and, eventually, the corrosion process starts. This typically takes twenty (20) to thirty (30) years and will continue for the building’s life span.

5. Balcony Inspections: All 40 of the total balconies were inspected. No visual inspection could be made of the private balcony concrete top surface at balconies with tile. The majority (36) of the balconies had a tile finish. No destructive testing was performed to conclusively determine the existence of deterioration beneath the tile finishes.

6. Project Scope: There is enough concrete deterioration present to perform a comprehensive concrete repair project.

7. Frames, Screens & Shutters: Screen enclosures and hurricane shutters will be removed. The screen enclosures are in a worn condition and will need to be replaced. For hurricane shutters to be reinstalled, they need to have been previously permitted with proof of permit and proper working condition.

8. Public Walkways: Concrete deterioration was observed at the public walkway slab top, bottom, and edge surfaces. The deterioration was in the form of spalling and cracks. Additionally, isolated areas of cracking and spalling were observed at building columns.

9. Recommended Repair: A comprehensive concrete repair project should include the removal of existing balcony finishes and include waterproofing the balcony slab surfaces to provide maximum protection for the building. You should be prepared to make additional repairs and paint within the next 7 to 10 years.

10. Cost Overruns: You can expect extra work and extra charges above and beyond the original contract price or estimate. These extras usually amount to about 25% or more of the original cost estimate but can be more depending on the severity of the deterioration. However, there have been instances where the cost of a concrete repair project has been double or triple the estimate even through a competent investigation was made. Since your project includes unknowns, i.e. coatings and tiles, you can expect that your cost will exceed the contract price or estimate, and contingency is necessary.

East C is a 5-story building with 8 units on each floor (40 units total). In general, balcony concrete restoration projects address a column (stack) of units at a time. Following is a summary of findings for each column of units (Note that 23 units are confirmed to have moderate damage and 87.5% need further investigation):

A complete copy of Swaysland Engineering's East C building Concrete Restoration Inspection Report is available in the "Bids & Contracts" folder of the Jupiter Bay Condominium Association website.

The following email was sent to Jupiter Bay's Board of Directors on 4/23/24.

TO: Jupiter Bay Board & Property Manager,

Florida law (553.899) requires an initial Milestone Inspection (Phase I) of all Jupiter Bay buildings three stories or higher to be completed by December 31, 2024. If the architect or engineer finds signs of “substantial structural deterioration” to any building components under visual examination, phase II of the inspection is required. Phase II repairs must commence within 365 days after receiving the Phase II report.

With a huge financial commitment and all contractor resources through November 2024 being utilized on remediation of the East C building, what if “substantial structural deterioration” is found in any of the other 8 buildings? Based on Swaysland’s 2020 inspection report, 6 West building units, 2 Villas, and one East unit (in East B) had severe concrete deterioration. Swaysland’s East C inspection report confirmed that no units in that building have severe damage, and a Phase II inspection wasn’t recommended.

I believe, without seeing a published plan, that the Board is trying to complete all required building inspections this year. I am concerned that there may be other units found with “substantial structural deterioration” and no contractor resources available to repair them. It is important to remediate as many moderately damaged units as possible before addressing the 15 units in the East C building with minor or no damage. Also, some resources assigned to replace all frames and screens in East C could be redeployed to replace frames that are more severely damaged in other buildings/units. With your announced East C remediation schedule, a small percentage of Jupiter Bay units with moderate (or possibly severe) repair issues will be addressed this year.

Please provide a response to these concerns before proceeding with East C repair work.

Thank You,

Paul St. Clair, LCAM

The following email was sent to Jupiter Bay's Board of Directors on 4/11/24.

Jupiter Bay Board,

Following is a quick analysis of the Association’s financial position and commitment:

Building Restoration

1. Jupiter Bay spent $4,577,291 on building restoration (spalling, roofs, elevators, painting & life safety) projects over the past 14-years.
2. We spent $2,817,965 on concrete restoration/spalling projects over the past 17 years.
3. The average annual expenditure for building restoration was $326,949 and for spalling was $165,763.
4. Our reserves grew to 2.8 million in 2022 and were at 2.5 million at the end of last year.
5. The Board is proposing to spend $857,555 for concrete restoration and screen/frame replacements in 2024 for one East building (Building C).
6. If the other East building restoration costs were the same, this would amount to 2,572,665 for the three 5-story East buildings and possibly $400,000 for East D, a total of almost $3.0 million. With 135 units, this is $22,222 per East unit without counting inflation over the repair period.
7. If the Board approves the $857,555 expenditure for a single building, the probable $22,222 special assessment would need to be divulged at each condominium sale.

Reserve Study

1. The Association is required to conduct a structural integrity reserve study by the year end 2024. The results of this study are to be reflected in next year’s budget.
2. This reserve study will introduce new reserve items including load-bearing walls, other primary structural members, plumbing, electrical, windows, exterior doors, and other items with replacement cost exceeding $10,000. Several of these items may need to be directly addressed by the unit owner.
3. The Association has not yet performed the required reserve study. The last Association reserve study (2014) required a 72% increase in reserve contributions.
4. Our 2024 reserve contributions will be $584,817 or $1,629 per owner (assuming each owner pays the same share). A 72% increase would increase this to $2,800 per owner. This would raise quarterly assessments by $292.75.
5. However, the new structural integrity reserve study could raise quarterly maintenance assessments by a much larger amount.

Conclusion

1. With skyrocketing insurance rates, multiple special assessments each year, and looming additional expected reserve funding, the Association cannot commit to spending $857,555 for a single East building addressing some non-essential items, particularly when major essential repairs are needed in other buildings.
2. Let’s conserve the money we have and be frugal going forward. We are already doing more than most associations in maintaining our buildings and assuring their structural soundness.

Regards,

Paul St. Clair, LCAM

Swaysland Professional Engineering Consultants, Inc. was contracted to perform an inspection of 50% of the private balconies and public walkways at all fourteen (14) building of the Association. The inspections were performed during June, July, September, October and November of 2020.

The purpose of the inspections was to identify the concrete deterioration occurring at the private balcony and public walkway slab top surfaces, bottom surfaces and edges, building walls and columns to determine an appropriate method of repair and protection. The purpose of inspecting 50% of the balconies was in order to provide a cross section of the damage at each building and identify trends in repair.

Swaysland's work culminated with publication of a Concrete Repair Project Investigation Report on December 4, 2020. Here's a summary of their findings:

The "Leasing" page of this website has been updated to include an analysis of 2022 rental data and show trends regarding condominium ownership.

It is important that all vehicles parked overnight on Association property have a parking permit and that the Association knows who is occupying our condominium units. To help comply with these requirements, the Board of Directors, at their February 16th meeting, revised the parking permit process. With this change, we now have four different parking passes:

1. Owner's Parking Pass -- This pass is issued for each new owner or new owner vehicle and requires a $25.00 fee.

2. Owner's Temporary Parking Pass -- This is a green placard issued to each condominium owner at no charge. It is kept by the owner and can be used or reused on any temporary vehicle (e.g., rental car) used by the owner.

3. Guest's Parking Pass -- This is a red placard that is registered to the owner and held at the Association office when not in use. The card is used by the owner's family members or other guests of the owner (as defined at the meeting), and it requires a $25.00 fee for the first time it is issued.

4. Renter's Parking Pass -- This pass is issued for each renter vehicle and requires a $25.00 processing fee.  It shows the time period that the vehicle is to be on premises, is only viable for this period, and is not reusable.

This change, together with the previously announced parking permit $25.00 fee resolution will better control parking on Association property while offsetting costs associated with parking pass administration.

The “Alterations” and “Insurance” pages of this website document approval requirements and responsibilities for altering and repairing common elements, limited common elements (e.g., owner balconies) and owner units. For repairs made by the association to an owner’s unit and balcony, responsibility for “incidental” damage is often questioned. Incidental damage is defined as: damage caused by the association’s exercise of its maintenance, repair, and/or replacement responsibility. Damage could include removal of owner alterations and improvements such as floor tile, hurricane shutters, glass enclosures, etc.

Answers to responsibility questions largely depend on whether the association’s governing documents include an “incidental damage" clause, how this clause is written, and the specific circumstances. The damage repair and replacement obligation of the association may be limited to damage caused to the unit and to the original developer-installed limited common elements (e.g., balconies) or it could include damage to any owner improvements including balcony alterations.

Paragraph 6.1(a)(3) of Jupiter Bay’s Declaration says, “All incidental damage caused to a unit by such work [association repairs/replacements] shall be repaired promptly at the expense of the Association.” This applies exclusively to damage caused by Association work within a unit repairing items that the Association is responsible for, such as drywall replacement. Paragraph 6.1(b)(1) says that the Unit Owner is responsible “To maintain, repair and replace at his expense, all portions of his unit except the portions of his unit to be maintained, repaired, and replaced by the Association.”

Since our governing documents contain incidental damage language specific to units and has no similar language for limited common elements, our Association is not responsible for incidental damage caused to owner modifications to limited common elements. In other words, when doing concrete restoration work, the Association is obligated to restore balconies to their original as-built condition, and the unit owner is responsible for all expenses associated with the removal and reinstallation of owner alterations. Similarly, the Association will likely not be responsible to repair any damage to any owner alteration to a unit where the declaration required association approval and the owner failed to obtain approval prior to the alteration.

Generally, the association’s repair obligation is limited to actual damage caused to the unit because of its maintenance, repair, and replacement obligation. If a unit owner is required to vacate their unit for the Association to effectuate repairs, the Association is not generally responsible to reimburse the owner for associated costs.

Finally, If the Association receives a report from an expert advising that certain repairs must be performed, and the Association fails to act, the Association may be responsible for the costs of any damage to the units caused by its failure to act.

Note that opinions expressed in this article are based on research and personal understanding. They do not reflect legal interpretation, and the Association should consult legal counsel for specific inquiries regarding the association’s responsibility for incidental damage.

A Palm Beach Post article by Ryan Poliakoff, co-author of "New Neighborhoods -- The Consumer's Guide to Condominium, Co-Op and HOA Living" pointed out problems caused when an association does not have rules defining acceptable owner behavior at meetings.  The Board removed on 9/22/21 the Association's "Recording & Speaking at Meetings" rule #41 and then added it back on 10/12/23 as rule #43.

Florida Statute 718,112(2)(c) says that "A unit owner may tape record or videotape the meetings. The right to attend such meetings includes the right to speak at such meetings with reference to all designated agenda items. The division shall adopt reasonable rules governing the tape recording and videotaping of the meeting. The association may adopt written reasonable rules governing the frequency, duration, and manner of unit owner statements."

Following are highlights of the Association's rule #43, based on Florida Administrative Code recommendations:

• Unit owners' right to participate in and speak at all board and owner meetings with reference to all designated agenda items.
• Board's right to limit each owner’s comments to 3 minutes and disallow subsequent comments from the same owner until others have the opportunity to express their viewpoint.
• Unit Owners' requirement to give advance notice to the board of their intention to videotape or tape record a meeting and to not move about the meeting room while recording.
• Unit Owners' restriction requiring audio and video equipment to be set up before the meeting starts and prohibiting distracting sound or light emissions from the equipment.

Without these provisions and several others, unit owners would be unrestricted on:

• How long and often they can speak at Association meetings,
• Whether they can deviate from the agenda items,
• Their ability to disrupt meetings with video recordings and other means, and
• Whether they can share meeting recordings and videos and post them on websites.

The Annual Meeting of the Jupiter Bay Condominium Association was held on Thursday, March 21, 2024, at 10:00 AM at the Twisted Tuna second floor. The term of three board members (Jim Kalec, Don Spieller and Frank Kania) was extended for another two years. Laurence Cochran and Jack McColgan will continue for the second year of their two-year term.

At the Board's Organizational Meeting, held immediately after the Annual Meeting, Don Spieller was appointed Vice President and Laurence Cochran was appointed Treasurer. The other three board members retained their prior positions.

This webpage provides information regarding board membership and the "Roles" page describes the functions of each position.

Paragraph 13(c) of the Twisted Tuna's lease with the Association contains the following parking provision:

Tenant understands that its parking lot is adjacent to Landlord's roadways and residential areas and will take commercially reasonable measures to help assure that its patrons do not park outside of Tenant's parking lot and additional parking areas agreed to by Landlord and Tenant. In addition to Tenant's parking lot, Tenant shall be permitted to:

1. Use some parking spaces on the back side of the West parking lot (Building F) for employee parking,
2. Allow customers to park on the grass of the entry road, and
3. Allow customers to park in the north lot in the Jupiter Bay East area.

Landlord shall allow Tenant to reconfigure the  parking  lot  on  the  North  side  of  the restaurant by removing the existing parking bumpers and permitting lawn parking in that area prior to the Scheduled Opening Date. A copy of the permitted parking to Tenant is attached hereto as Exhibit G. Tenant agrees, and acknowledges, that the other permitted parking (marked in orange on Exhibit G) besides its parking lot (marked in green on Exhibit G) is common area for the Landlord, and that Landlord is unable to guarantee that parking to Tenant, and that said parking is first come first serve. Additionally, Landlord will work with Tenant to explore additional parking alternatives.

Any repairs to Landlord's irrigation system and/or grass as a result of Tenant's grass parking shall be fixed and/or paid for by Tenant. Tenant shall take commercially reasonable efforts to ensure its employees and customers are not parking in non-designated areas. Tenant shall provide parking attendants/valets at Tenant's sole cost during seasonal months and during events where the customer parking is anticipated to exceed its parking lot in an effort to mitigate customers parking in non-designated areas.

Landscaping is very important to the residents of Jupiter Bay because it contributes to the attractiveness of the community, the value of their investments and the overall quality of life.

The condominium association is solely responsible for landscaping at Jupiter Bay.  This includes the trees, shrubs, flowers, lawns, mulch, irrigation systems and other landscaping items.  Maintenance responsibility for the property grounds requires the Association to assure that the overall appearance of the property is preserved, as much as possible, as it was initially designed and built.  This means that trees destroyed by hurricanes or trees classified by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Control Council as “nuisance and invasive exotic vegetation” need to be replaced.  It also means that shrubs, flowers and other landscaping throughout the community need to be maintained and replaced as necessary to preserve the area’s attractiveness.  Any landscaping improvements must be consistent with the overall landscaping theme.

Most homeowners value the grounds adjacent to their condominium unit.  In light of the Association’s limited landscaping budget, some homeowners, particularly those owning first floor units, have independently contributed to the beauty of our community by adding flowers, landscaping stones and other plants and materials to the areas adjacent to their units.  Some have funded the planting of memorial trees or shrubs or other special landscaping to beautify their area.

It has been suggested that all homeowners should be allowed to beautify the areas in proximity to their condo unit.  However, it is important that these landscaping enhancements are in compliance with our condominium documents and are compatible with existing landscaping.  The Association is obliged by its condominium documents to prevent any changes that could be considered common area material alterations as defined in Sections 2.5, 6.1(c), and 6.2 of our Declaration.  (Please reference the Alterations page of this website.)  Also, we must assure adherence to our Rule #44 which says “Owners who wish to contribute plants, materials, funds, or labor to common element landscaping areas/projects must receive approval from the Association”.

Because of the convenience and growing popularity of keypad locks, over 30 Jupiter Bay homeowners have replaced their conventional entrance door locks with keypads.  This has caused an issue with the Association being unable to access many of these units during the annual pest control treatment.  Many of these locks were installed without notifying the office or providing keys.

This episode has provoked a discussion among Board members as to how this change in door locks relates to the Association's Unit Owner Key Rule #5, which says "For pest control and emergency access, the Association must retain a pass-key to all units.  Whenever an Owner or agent alters any lock, or installs a new lock, the Unit Owner shall provide the Association with an additional key." Please reference the Rules & Regulations page of this website for more information.

A notice posted on the Jupiter Bay Condominium website reaffirms the Association's requirement to have a physical key for every condominium unit.  This, and the corresponding rule violation letter to various homeowners, was precipitated by an annual pest control treatment during which the Association was unable to access over 30 condominium units that had keypad locks installed.  Most were installed without notifying the office or providing keys.

The notice cited Florida statute 718.111(5) which says that “The association has the irrevocable right of access to each unit during reasonable hours, when necessary for the maintenance, repair, or replacement of any common elements or of any portion of a unit to be maintained by the association pursuant to the declaration or as necessary to prevent damage to the common elements or to a unit or units.”  This statute affirms the Association's "access rights" but does not provide a process or procedure for compliance.  It does not say that condo owners can decide on their own how they'll chose to comply with the statute - i.e., whether to give the Association a physical key, access code or other means of gaining entry to their unit.  But it does allow for Condo Associations to establish their own compliance rules and procedures.

Jupiter Bay already has a Rule #5 which says that “For pest control and emergency access, the Association must retain a pass-key to all units.  Whenever an Owner or agent alters any lock, or installs a new lock, the Unit Owner shall provide the Association with an additional key.”

Jupiter Bay's Board has reviewed and discussed this rule in light of the recent upgrading of many door locks to keypad units and has concluded that the Association will continue to require physical keys.  The primary reasons are as follows:

1. All door locks, both conventional key locks and keypad locks, include a set of keys for gaining entry.
2. Access codes may change frequently, possibly for each rental period, causing an administrative issue in obtaining, recording and protecting the most recent access code.
3. Access codes can be memorized and disclosed easily leading to unauthorized unit access.
4. Physical keys can be securely protected in a locked key-control safe in the Association office.
5. It's easier to administrate a single procedure applicable to all 359 condominium units.

For these reasons the Association will continue to enforce Rule #5.  Any owner who changes their lock and/or key without notifying the management office or does not provide a new key is in violation of this rule and is subject to $100 per day (maximum of $1,000) fine.  In imposing this fine the Association must provide at least 14 days written notice and an opportunity for a hearing held before a committee of other unit owners.

In a 9/6/22 email to a unit owner and the Association’s president, our Rosenbaum attorney said that FL statute 718.112(2)(a)1 and the Association’s Bylaws do not provide for appointment of an officer who is not a board member. This interpretation could limit participation by non-board members in special important roles (e.g., budget preparation, vendor negotiations, contract reviews, etc.)

A response was sent from the author of this website listing text from the FL statutes and our Bylaw 6.1 refuting the attorney’s opinion. The statute says: “Unless prohibited in the bylaws, the board of administration may appoint other (besides president, secretary & treasurer) officers and grant them the duties it deems appropriate”. The Association’s Bylaw 6.1 says:

• “The executive officers of the Association shall be a President, a Vice President, a Secretary, and a Treasurer, (none of whom need be Directors), all of whom shall be elected by the Board of Directors.
• The Board of Directors from time to time shall elect such other officers and designate their powers and duties as the Board shall deem necessary or appropriate to manage the affairs of the Association. Officers need not be Unit Owners.”

To confirm my understanding of the statute and bylaw text, I presented the “non-board member officer” question to a well-recognized FL condominium law expert and to an attorney (Ryan Poliakoff) who publishes a weekly article in the Palm Beach Post. The law expert said, “based on your documents and the statute, the board can appoint the person you mention as an officer of the corporation and bring that person under your D and O insurance if your insurance provider agrees.” Attorney Poliakoff said, “the vast majority [of governing documents] allow some or all officers to be non-owners” and that “an association could even hire a [non board member] person to serve as treasurer”. Click Here to obtain the full text of his response: Poliakoff response.

In summary, FL statutes and our Bylaw 6.1 says that the Board can elect officers, who are not board members (and even not unit owners), to assist in “managing the affairs of the Association”. Please reference the Roles & Functions page of this website for additional information on Association Officers.

So far, the Association’s attorney has not issued a correction to her erroneous legal opinion.

The Association's attorney attempted to clarify proposed truck parking changes to our Declaration in her April 30th letter. Following is a response from a concerned homeowner. The attorney has not responded to this nor the prior letter, which corrects her erroneous remarks at the 3/19 Board Meeting.

For those unit owners who were unable to attend our September 30, 2020 board of directors meeting, we wanted to provide a recap for you. The Jupiter Bay Board of Directors Organizational Meeting was held on August 28, 2020 and over that 32-day period many areas were evaluated.

The top priority was to review the property management company to ensure that our community was receiving the best possible service at a reasonable cost. Don Spieller and I [Jim Kalec] reached out to unit owners for feedback while conducting a review of Campbell Management services. Several unit owners complained that weekend coverage was insufficient. It involved calling an 800 number and waiting for a response for more than a couple of hours. There was an elevator breakdown in B East over Labor Day weekend and many calls were made to the 800 number. We received feedback about eight hours after the first call. During the month of September, we interviewed three property management companies: Triton, Castle and Campbell.

Our evaluation was completed a few days before the September 30, 2020 board of directors meeting. All three companies are exceptionally good property management firms. The most critical difference is that Triton has owners in senior management positions that are actively involved in the business. Paul Licata and Mark Wade have twenty years of experience in the industry and they will be at Jupiter Bay monthly to provide the necessary support for a property of our size. It was important that the size of this firm match the footprint of Jupiter Bay. This boutique firm has a 24/7 emergency response staff; no 800 number, just a rapid response team ready to assist Jupiter Bay residents during all 168 hours in the week 52 weeks a year. They have proven management systems and state of the art technology that includes the Tops One Connection which is a web service portal that offers both a homeowner and board member interface. This hands-on approach coupled with local ownership provides Jupiter Bay with top to top management communication that can address issues and concerns thoroughly and effectively in a short period of time.

Christopher Sands is our new property manager at Jupiter Bay. He has managed properties that are similar in size to ours. His extensive property management experience at Triton and Seacrest will serve us well in the critical months and years ahead. Jupiter Bay needs a lot of work on our landscaping, irrigation system, elevators, asphalt, and spalling. Chris will be working closely with the board and maintenance staff as we tackle our infrastructure issues.

In closing, let us welcome Triton Property Management and Chris Sands to Jupiter Bay! We have a beautiful property in Jupiter, Florida that is located only 800 yards from the beach and across the street from Harbourside. We pledge to work together with all unit owners to revitalize and reinvigorate this paradise we call home.

Jupiter Bay Board of Directors

Effective September 30, 2020, the Jupiter Bay Condominium Association announced cancellation of its contract with Campbell Property Management and the commencement of a new agreement with Triton Property Management.

The new 12-month agreement provides similar terms to the prior one, with fees of $1,000 per month and cost-plus pricing for staff members as follows:

• 25% for experienced fulltime Property Manager
• 25% for on-site Receptionist and Administrative Assistant
• 31% for 3 full-time and 1 part-time Maintenance Technicians.

The change provides Jupiter Bay with improved service, experienced property management, more senior-management participation, state-of-the art technology, 24/7 rapid emergency response, and an improved website. Triton is a smaller, locally owned company that provides individualized support.

Christopher Sands is the Association’s new Property Manager.  He is a licensed Community Association Manager (CAM) who has managed various Homeowners (HOA) and Condominium Association properties in Palm Beach County for both Triton and Seacrest. He has had responsibility for properties with over 1,100 units and budgets exceeding $3.0 million. Additionally, Chris has business startup experience and has held positions on the City of Palm Beach Gardens Police Department. We welcome Chris to Jupiter Bay.