Many readers are likely aware of the Supreme Court of Florida's decision in Woodside Village which held that a condominium association had the ability to amend its declaration of condominium to limit leasing despite the fact that some of the unit owners had purchased their units with the intent to lease prior to the amendment. The amendment was held to apply to those owners despite their arguement that their right to lease was a vested right.

Even though that case concerned a condominium, the legal doctrine established in that case may be argued to be equally applicable to homeowners associations. Based on Woodside, generally speaking, with few exceptions, all unit owners are subject to the effect of amendments irrespective of when they bought their property. Apparently dissatisfied with the Woodside decision, the legislature amended the Homeowners Association Statute (Section 720.303) to freeze the rights of owners of properties in associations with fifteen (15) or fewer parcel owners to those they had when they bought. Effective October 1, 2004, a homeowners association of fifteen (15) or fewer parcel owners may enforce only the requirements of those deed restrictions established prior to the purchase of each parcel upon an affected parcel owner or owners. Since the statute does not prohibit amendments, but only prohibits the enforceability of amendments depending on when the lot owner purchased the property, it is entirely conceivable that the effect of the statute will be that some owners have rights that others do not. Since the amended statute only applies to communities of fifteen (15) or fewer parcel owners, it is unlikely that we will see any significant impact from the amendment, however, it is interesting and of significant concern that the legislature is putting itself in the business of dictating the kinds of restrictive covenants that a group of homeowners may decide they desire to live under. Arguably, the new statute undermines the ability of homeowners to determine how their community will bew governed.

The legislature also attempted to address the holding of the Woodside decision by adopting an amendment to 718.110 (13) of the Condominium Act. That new amendment, also effective October 1, 2004, provides that any amendment restricting a unit owner's rights relating to the rental of units applies only to unit owners who consent to the amendment and unit owners who purchase their units after the effective date of the amendment. Unlike the homeowners association statute which only affects communities of 15 or fewer, the amendment to the Condominium Act applies to all condominiums without regard to the number of units. The effect of the amendment to 718.110 (13) is that each individual unit owner may have different rights depending upon when they purchased their unit. Condominium associations will now need to keep much more detailed records concerning the names of those unit owners in existence at the time of amendments to the declaration and will likewise need to keep records of which unit owners voted for which amendment. Those records will need to become permenant parts of the association's official records so that the association may keep track of to which unit owners the rental restrictions apply.