Can condo board scrap election results just because several residents didn't sign ballot?
Question: Our recent election was stopped by the board and the association's attorney because "too many election packages" were being rejected due to owners' failure to sign the exterior of the outside envelope. We have 65 units; it was reported that we had 53 responses: 35 were OK and 18 had no owners' signature. I believe we only needed 13 clean ballots to have a legal election.
The board president, who was attending by Zoom from Canada, said that we needed to redo the election because those 18 owners needed a second chance. While the meeting was still going on some of those 18 were called and asked to come to meeting and amend their ballot package. After realizing that the vast majority of the 18 were not available to correct their ballot they told us that there would be a new election.
I am one of the four candidates for two open seats, and I am under the impression that there are no "do overs" for ballot packages missing the owners' signature. Information from ballots and envelopes are being kept secret from all the owners except for the board members. Signed, K.W.
Dear K.W.,
I cannot think of a legitimate reason that a properly conducted election could be abandoned because more envelopes were invalid than the board preferred. I think you have excellent grounds to challenge this decision, but you need to act quickly.
The Condominium Act and Florida's Administrative Code contains very detailed election procedures and provides that if an outer envelope is not signed by the voter it must be disregarded. Such an envelope would not count towards the mandatory 20% participation requirement. But, based on your numbers, there were more than enough valid ballots to conduct a legal election, and the decision to abandon the election was improper.
The only reason I can think of that such a decision would be valid is if for some reason the voting package gave owners incorrect instructions, leading to owners failing to sign their envelopes. But otherwise, the simple fact that owners don't follow directions is not a reason for a do-over.
You have only 60 days to file an election complaint, and so you either need to contact the Division of Condominiums or file a petition for arbitration (after sending the required pre-arbitration demand) right away—particularly because the board could improperly discard the original election materials (that would create an entirely different problem for them, but it would also prevent the original results from being counted). I would do one or the other as soon as possible—an attorney can help you decide the pros and cons of both options.
Question: I live in a condominium, and the unit above me was bought, remodeled and flipped without the owner ever living in the unit. As soon as a new owner bought the flipped property I noticed the noise was so bad that I brought it to the attention of the new owner and board of directors. It was determined that the incorrect underlayment was approved by the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) and installed by the flipper.
The board simply said they would do nothing and on advice of counsel would not speak about it. What can I do? Signed, D.R.
Dear D.R.,
The Board has a problem here. You say that the approved underlayment was 'incorrect,' and so I'm going to assume that there was some existing specification that was not followed or was ignored by the ARC, and not just that there are no guidelines of any kind.
If the ARC just made a mistake and approved a flooring installation that should never have been approved, they could very well have liability to the new owner, but that also doesn't mean that the violation is automatically grandfathered, particularly because it is creating an active nuisance.
The Condominium Act, at Section 718.303, Fla. Stat., provides that every owner is governed by the statute and the governing documents, and that any owner can bring an action against any other owner to enforce those documents. That would include any nuisance provisions, as well as any flooring guidelines that might be contained in the declaration.
I agree that the association itself would have a difficult time pursuing this owner after they gave the owner permission to install the flooring. However, that does not necessarily prevent you from bringing your own action, particularly one based on the nuisance caused by the excessive noise (I am assuming that the noise is in fact excessive, but that's something that would require sound testing and some detailed analysis of the types of noises you are experiencing). What would happen is that you would sue the neighbor, and then the neighbor would likely bring in the association, arguing that they detrimentally relied on the association's approval of the flooring, and that if they are obligated to remove or modify the flooring, the association should be responsible for the cost.
The association has created a complicated dispute, but that shouldn't leave you without any options. I recommend consulting with an attorney so they can advise you of your rights and potentially bring a lawsuit to correct the nuisance.
Ryan Poliakoff, a partner at Poliakoff Backer, 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." Email your questions to condocolumn@gmail.com. Please be sure to include your location.
This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: Can condominium board require election do-over when vote was valid?

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Politico
3 days ago
- Politico
The state that's really sweating the megabill Medicaid cuts
NOT SO BEAUTIFUL — It isn't every day that a two-term Republican senator like Thom Tillis surrenders his reelection bid with a cri de coeur about poor people losing their government-financed health coverage. He called President Donald Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill,' which is now on its way to the president for his signature, a promise-breaker that will 'hurt people who are eligible and qualified for Medicaid,' including in his home state of North Carolina. His purple state gets outsized attention because its health policies are innovative and, highly unusually these days, bipartisan. Much of what North Carolina has achieved on health, however, is now threatened by the megabill. That includes coverage losses in traditional Medicaid, the state's entire Medicaid expansion, and its ambitious 'Healthy Opportunities' pilot program that links Medicaid and social needs like housing and healthy food. The pilot isn't directly affected by the Washington legislation, but it's part of the endangering fiscal and political background noise. 'It will be a crisis … A devastating loss,' said Democratic Gov. Josh Stein, summing up the overall impact of the legislation on his state during a Zoom press briefing this week. Tillis also sees the massive Medicaid cuts as a gargantuan political gaffe. Republicans will pay for it at the polls next year, he predicted, much like voters lashed out at Democrats in the bumpy early years of the Obamacare rollout. Obamacare, aka the Affordable Care Act, eventually got popular. Uninsured people got insured. As Medicaid has grown to include more people and services, it too has gotten more popular across party lines, according to polls from KFF, a health care policy and research organization. Before entering politics, Tillis became wealthy as a management consultant. But he grew up poor and lived for a time in a trailer park. He hasn't spoken about whether he was ever uninsured and his office didn't respond to an emailed question about that. Nowadays, families in similar economic straits can get covered, in his state and beyond. But over the next decade, a staggering 16 million people across the country will become uninsured, through changes in Medicaid and the ACA in this bill, plus related federal regulatory changes, according to a Congressional Budget Office forecast. In North Carolina, where more than 3.1 million people receive Medicaid, state officials project more than 900,000 will lose coverage. And getting and staying enrolled, even for those who remain eligible, will be more cumbersome, so the total number of people losing health benefits could well climb. Rural hospitals, already on shaky economic ground, could close — many have across the country in recent years. A fund that the Senate added to bolster them is nowhere near enough, N.C. health officials say. That's a big deal in North Carolina, which the Census Bureau says has the second biggest rural population in the country after Texas. It's not only Democrats who are concerned about the far-reaching impact. State Senate President Phil Berger, a Republican who has struck deals with Democrats on Medicaid and health innovation, backs President Trump's legislation and reassuringly said on X, formerly Twitter, that the 'legislature will work through any implementation issues.' But some Republican legislators — even solid pro-Trump conservatives — who play a key role in health policy openly worry about coverage losses and the effect on hospitals and other health providers. State Rep. Timothy Reeder, an emergency physician in the rural east of the state and a member of the House Health Committee, spoke to Nightly after the Senate voted on the megabill but while the House was still in flux, so he didn't want to get specific about the legislature's possible next moves. But he backs Medicaid expansion and wants to give Healthy Opportunities at least a few more years to experiment and collect data. If the pilot ends, people won't lose their Medicaid coverage but they will lose services — including in the western part of the state still struggling to recover from Hurricane Helene. As an emergency room doc, Reeder knows that uninsured patients often put off care until they end up in the E.R. That's not good for patients or providers. 'The economics of rural health are just not sustainable unless there's some public support,' he said. State Sen. Jim Burgin, chair of the Senate Health Care committee, voiced similar concerns. He's pro-Trump and pro-work requirement, but he would support using state dollars for education and training — even child care — so people can go to school and get job training. 'I tell people I don't like safety nets. I like trampolines,' he told Nightly. 'I want to bounce people back. I don't want to let them fall in a safety net and get stuck there.' But he was an early GOP supporter of expansion and played a role in ultimately getting it enacted. He has embraced Healthy Opportunities and is looking for a deal to keep it going. All aspects of Medicaid, which is funded jointly by Washington and the states, are at risk. The state estimates that about 255,000 people will lose coverage because Medicaid will now have work requirements. Two GOP-led states have tried them in the past and some of the people dropped from Medicaid were actually employed – but the online verification systems were so flawed that they couldn't document it. Medicaid expansion is on the brink. About a dozen states that expanded Medicaid included some form of 'trigger.' That means if Washington scales back its 90 percent share of the cost, they would kill expansion. Conservatives failed to lower the federal payment in the megabill — but North Carolina's trigger would kick in anyway, because of new restrictions on how the state finances the program, explained Kody Kinsley, who oversaw expansion during his three years as state health secretary until January 2025. Because the state law says if North Carolina has to pick up any expansion costs at all, expansion unwinds. Unless the legislature comes up with a solution that is not now easily apparent, more than 670,000 people will lose coverage. North Carolinians may lose health coverage by the hundreds of thousands, but 'they're not going to stop getting sick,' Stein said. 'It's just going to be way more expensive to take care of them.' Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at nightly@ Or contact tonight's author on X (formerly known as Twitter) at @JoanneKenen. What'd I Miss? — The megabill will soon be megalaw: House Republicans passed their domestic policy megabill Thursday after nearly 24 hours of nonstop angst, discord and hands-on pressure from President Donald Trump and allies — ultimately uniting to deliver his top legislative 218-214 final vote is a major victory for congressional Republicans who pledged to send the bill to Trump's desk before July 4. Speaker Mike Johnson muscled the bill through in the early-morning hours after a full day of meetings with holdouts, huddles on the House floor and gatherings of different factions at the White House. — Hakeem Jeffries breaks the House record for longest floor speech: Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries delivered the longest speech in House history today, holding the floor for well over eight hours to delay passage of Republicans' domestic policy megabill. His so-called 'magic minute,' as the unlimited speaking time granted to party leaders is known, breaks a record set by Republican Kevin McCarthy in 2021, which in turn exceeded the mark set by Nancy Pelosi in 2018. All were serving as minority leader at the time. The speech was Democrats' last option to slow down the megabill ahead of a final passage vote. — Judge blocks 'sweeping' asylum crackdown after Trump declared 'invasion' at southern border: President Donald Trump's effort to crack down on asylum claims by immigrants crossing the southern border vastly exceeded his legal authority and must be halted, a federal judge ruled Wednesday. U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss said Trump's Jan. 20 proclamation declaring an 'invasion' of southern border-crossers cannot be used to justify the 'sweeping' unilateral restrictions he sought to impose, including severe limits to asylum applications and the ability to seek protection from torture. Under Trump's proclamation, people who crossed the southern border between 'ports of entry' are barred from seeking asylum or invoking other legal protections that would allow them to temporarily remain in the U.S. while their claims are processed. — Supreme Court will decide whether states can ban transgender girls from girls' sports: The Supreme Court will decide whether states can ban transgender girls from girls' sports teams, plunging the high court back into the national debate around the rights of trans people. The court today added a pair of cases to next term's docket about state laws in Idaho and West Virginia that ban people assigned male at birth from competing on school teams for women and girls. About half the states have similar laws, according to court papers. The justices announced they will hear appeals from Idaho and West Virginia against lower-court orders that blocked the bans from taking effect. An appeals court ruled that Idaho's law violates the Constitution's equal protection cause by targeting transgender people, while another appeals court concluded that the West Virginia law violates Title IX, the federal law banning most sex discrimination by schools. — Supreme Court lets Trump admin deport men detained in shipping container for 6 weeks to South Sudan: The Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for the Trump administration to deport eight men to South Sudan who have been detained in a shipping container on a U.S. military base in Djibouti for six weeks after becoming caught up in a legal tug-of-war between the White House and a federal judge in Boston. By an apparent 7-2 vote, the justices lifted an order from U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy that had blocked the men's deportation. Murphy took that step despite a Supreme Court ruling last week that put a hold on an earlier, nationwide injunction he issued requiring the administration to give deportees advance notice of their destination and a 'meaningful' chance to object if they believed they'd be in danger there. AROUND THE WORLD COOLING OFF — Iran does not plan to respond further to the U.S. strikes on its nuclear program, the Iranian deputy foreign minister said today — but the country still pledges to forge ahead with its nuclear development program despite the attack. Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi said Iran had 'already responded' to the U.S. attack on its three nuclear enrichment facilities late last month, telling NBC News that the country had no plans for additional retaliation in a signal of a temporary calm between the U.S. and Iran following a 12-day war between Iran and American ally Israel. UNITED FRONT — The European Union is striving to project unity as it races to negotiate a high-stakes trade deal with Washington, but backstage, national divisions threaten to weaken its negotiating hand. 'Nobody in Europe wants to escalate,' European Council President António Costa said last weekend. 'Nobody wants a conflict.' That's also a message EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič will be keen to convey as he meets with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer on Thursday for a potentially decisive round of talks. Away from the diplomatic dance, however, EU countries don't always see eye-to-eye on how best to deal with the White House. And as so often, the diversity of views held by the bloc's 27 national leaders — all catering to domestic interest groups and voters — is making it difficult for Šefčovič to drive a hard bargain. Nightly Number RADAR SWEEP LOST IN TRANSPORTATION — If you ever lost something on a plane, train, or bus, it's probably at a store in Alabama. After a 90-day waiting period, clothes, iPhones, watches, and the like are sold to Unclaimed Baggage, a warehouse in Scottsboro which boasts 7,000 lost items and covers a full city block. Beyond the mundane, lie the valuable and sentimental. Wells Tower finds car keys, wedding dresses and baby's combs on a trip to the store. He writes on the strange feeling of reveling in and buying people's lost items for The Cut. Parting Image Jacqueline Munis contributed to this newsletter. Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.


Chicago Tribune
6 days ago
- Chicago Tribune
Elected bodies in Indiana now must livestream meetings
Lake Station city council members voiced concern last week over a Tuesday deadline requiring them to livestream their public meetings. The city didn't join the trend during the COVID-19 pandemic when many city councils and school boards began offering their meetings online via YouTube, Facebook Live, or Zoom technologies. Despite Lake Station council members' worry, Mayor Bill Carroll said the city was prepared and its meetings would appear on YouTube. State lawmakers passed the new law in 2023, deliberately giving elected bodies two years to prepare. It requires state and local agencies like county commissions, town and city councils and school boards, to livestream public meetings beginning July 1. The law also requires any public body, like a plan commission, which meets in a space where the council or school board meets, to also livestream meetings. Putting meetings online was one of Portage Mayor Austin Bonta's goals when he took office in 2024. Some were already online, but he wanted to include all meetings. Accomplishing it meant expanding the contract to provide that service. It isn't as easy as just flipping a switch. Someone has to be there to make sure everything is being recorded, that microphones work properly and that when developers, attorneys and others have a laptop to plug in, there is a trouble-shooter on hand so presentations can show on the screen. The Portage Township School Board already had been putting meetings online. The board likes to hold its meetings at various schools throughout the district to showcase programs at those schools, so the technology has to be transported from place to place, not just permanently installed in the administration building. Porter County government used American Rescue Plan Act money to upgrade the audiovisual setup in the commissioners' chamber, the large meeting room where most county meetings are held. In 2023, lawmakers said the goal of the measure was to increase transparency. If a government body doesn't comply, a citizen can file an open-door law complaint with Indiana's public access counselor. If upheld, elected officials would have to hold another meeting. If governments don't have livestreaming capabilities, a recording must be archived and available online for 90 days and include links to the meeting's agenda and minutes. The law's author, state Rep. Ben Smaltz, R-Auburn, said the legislation encourages civic engagement. 'Hoosier taxpayers deserve to have access to public meetings, and government works best when accountability and transparency are at the forefront,' Smaltz said in a 2023 release. 'The pandemic really demonstrated how widespread and inexpensive livestreaming technology has become,' Smaltz said. He said governing bodies can also utilize free livestreaming on social media platforms or host it on their existing websites.


New York Post
26-06-2025
- New York Post
Andrew Cuomo sexual harassment accusers call for end to his taxpayer-funded legal defense after NYC mayoral primary defeat
ALBANY – Dime's up. Andrew Cuomo's sexual harassment accusers called on state Comptroller Tom DiNapoli to cut off the former governor's taxpayer-fueled legal defense fund Thursday after his Big Apple mayoral run bellyflopped. The accused sex pest, who resigned as governor in 2021 while facing misconduct allegations from over a dozen women, has since received a whopping $60 million from taxpayers while battling scandals that ensnared his administration. Andrew Cuomo conceded defeat in the New York City Democratic primary for mayor Tuesday night. Luiz C. Ribeiro for New York Post Roughly $18 million of that largesse went toward the three-term Democratic governor aggressively defending himself against the women who accused him of sexual harassment. 'Survivors and whistleblowers shouldn't have to live in fear of being dragged through the legal system simply for telling the truth,' said Erica Vladimer, founding director of the group Harassment-Free Albany. Vladimer was joined via Zoom by some of the former state staffers who spoke out against Cuomo, including Charlotte Bennett, an ex-aide who had sued over alleged sexual harassment. 'It has been an excruciating time and the joy of the outcome on Tuesday was quickly followed by fear of what the next piece of this means for me,' Bennett, who supported Cuomo's main opponent Zohran Mamdani in the Democratic primary, said while holding back tears. Cuomo in April filed and renewed a notice of claim that he intended to pursue a defamation lawsuit against Bennett — in what she alleged was a deliberate effort to keep her quiet during the primary race. 'I don't feel like I've been able to respond to his narrative,' Bennett said. Cuomo, who has denied the allegations, went on the offensive against Bennett after she dropped her federal lawsuit against him late last year, shortly before she was expected to be deposed in the case. Cuomo's lawyers filed a notice of claim that he intends to sue Bennett for defamation in December. AP Bennett, fellow Cuomo accuser Lindsey Boylan and Vladimer called for DiNapoli to seriously scrutinize the legal bills that the former governor has been submitting for reimbursement. They also urged state lawmakers to pass the Speak Your Truth Act, a piece of legislation to protect survivors from excessive harassment by their accusers through the legal system. A spokesperson for Cuomo — who was bested by Mamdani in the primary election Tuesday — slammed the claims as 'false accusations.' 'People have a right to defend themselves against false accusations. This is still America, as much as Erica wants it to be otherwise,' Rich Azzopardi wrote in a statement to The Post. A spokesperson for DiNapoli declined to comment.