January 29, 2025 • 33 mins
Our last episode of Take It To The Board involved a discussion with an owner in a luxury high-rise who had become disenchanted with some of the governance issues in his community. Today's episode takes us further on that path as host Donna DiMaggio Berger sits down with Spencer Hennings, who brings firsthand knowledge as Florida’s former Condominium Ombudsman about the types of owner complaints he saw time and again while serving in that role. Appointed by Governor Ron DeSantis in 2020, Spencer served in this critical role until 2023, resolving thousands of condominium disputes, acting as the state’s liaison during the Miami-Dade Surfside condo collapse, and helping to draft impactful condominium legislation at both local and state levels.
During their conversation, Spencer shares how he transformed the ombudsman’s office into a more accessible resource for Floridians and reflects on his crucial involvement during and after the Surfside tragedy. Together, Donna and Spencer explore the potential establishment of a state ombudsman for Homeowners Associations (HOAs), discussing the potential complexities of such a role and the importance of fair and balanced representation.
Spencer also addresses the common misconception that the ombudsman’s office exclusively advocates for unit owners, emphasizing the critical need for impartiality. The discussion further examines the evolving challenges in community association management, particularly in the wake of disasters, outdated processes, and the increasing trend of condo terminations in vulnerable areas like Florida.
As they wrap up, Spencer reflects on the emotional toll of working in the Ombudsman's Office and offers candid advice for those who may follow in his footsteps, leaving listeners with a deeper understanding of the challenges and rewards of this vital oversight role.
This episode covers everything from legislative hurdles to the personal journey of navigating public service in Florida’s complex association landscape, and is one you don’t want to miss!.
Conversation Highlights Include:
- What inspired Spencer to pursue the role of Condominium Ombudsman
- The most common complaints from condo owners
- Balancing the interests of owners, board members and other stakeholders
- Common misconceptions about the role of the Condominium Ombudsman
- Spencer’s advice to every condo owner and every board member
- Do Florida HOAs need their own Ombudsman?
Related Links:
- Online Class: Dealing with Difficult People
- Article: Implementing Condominium Restrictions
- Podcast: Alternative Dispute Resolution with Jeffrey Streitfeld, Mediator
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Hi everyone, I'm attorney Donna DiMaggio-Berger,
and this is Take it to the Board, where we speak condo and HOA.
Today, we're taking a closerlook at one of the most unique
and important roles in Florida'scondominium landscape the
condominium ombudsman.
My guest is someone who knowsfirsthand what it's like to be
the bridge between condo ownersboards and the state Florida's
(00:23):
former condominium ombudsman,spencer Hennings.
In 2020, spencer was appointedby Governor DeSantis to serve as
Florida's condominium ombudsman.
From 2020 to 2023, he resolvedthousands of issues in
condominium associations, servedas the state's liaison to those
affected by the Miami-DadeSurfside condo collapse and
helped draft new condominiumlegislation at the local and
(00:46):
state levels.
Spencer left the ombudsman'soffice in 2023 and is now a
member of the real estatepractice group at Schutzen Bowen
in Fort Lauderdale, and he wasjust named vice president of the
Miami Beach Bar Association.
I'm excited to have theopportunity to talk to Spencer
about the challenges, lessonsand surprises he learned during
his tenure as Florida'scondominium ombudsman and get
(01:07):
his take on the future of thecondominium lifestyle.
So, spencer, welcome to Take itto the Board.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
Thanks for having me, Donna.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
You were very young when you took on the role of
condominium ombudsman.
What inspired you to like seekout that role?
Speaker 2 (01:21):
Yeah, it was right before my 28th birthday.
You know it's not a role that Iwas really seeking out, it sort
of found me.
At the time the secretary ofthe DVPR was named Halsey
Beshears.
He did a great job as thesecretary of DVPR and when he
was appointed by the governor hestarted getting all these condo
complaints and there was noombudsman at the time.
(01:43):
So he was looking for a waythat the state could do better
to help our condo complaints andthere was no ombudsman at the
time.
So he was looking for a waythat the state could do better
to help our condo owners andespecially these people that
were sending him letters everyday complaining about things
happening in their condoassociation.
So he, being up in Tallahassee,thought I think I need to hire
someone down in South Floridawhere a lot of these complaints
are coming from and all thecondos are concentrated.
(02:03):
So he started this statewidesearch and a professional
contact of mine knew him andrecommended me to him and when I
heard about the job and I readthe statute that describes what
the duties are, I kind of feltthat I was born for this role.
So I worked really hard toconvince Halsey Beshears, who's
the secretary that I was theright guy and at the time he
(02:27):
couldn't just hire me becausethe statute required that the
governor appointed the ombudsman.
So once he signed off on me, hehad to then present me to the
governor's office and that tookabout a year of just going back
and forth to Tallahassee andmeeting with the governor's
chief of staff as a 27-year-oldlawyer and eventually.
(02:47):
Eventually COVID hit also andthat, you know, really threw a
wrench in things.
That's why it took so long andit almost fell apart.
But right before my 28thbirthday the appointment came
through and it was an absoluteroller coaster, but it was.
You know, I had a great timewith that role and I'm just so
thankful to have had thatopportunity.
At that point you're 27 yearsold, had you lived in a
(03:09):
condominium up until that point,or a homeowners association.
I lived in condos, yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
Now, had you ever served on a board?
Speaker 2 (03:16):
No.
Speaker 1 (03:17):
Had you ever gone to a board meeting?
Speaker 2 (03:19):
Yes, I didn't know what was happening at the board
meeting Didn't really make senseto me.
But yeah, I mean I had lookedat a set of condominium
documents before and I knewloosely how condominiums worked
because I was a real estatelawyer and I had taken a class
by Bill Sklar at the Universityof Miami Law School, who is a
(03:40):
great, great condominium lawyer.
That's a mutual friend of oursand I learned a little bit about
condos, but it was a realeducational experience.
I'll tell you that.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
I was going to say three years.
Okay, I'm guessing you didn'treally know what you were
getting yourself fully into atthat point.
Speaker 2 (03:57):
I had no idea what I was getting myself into and it
ended up being amazing and superrewarding.
But I just didn't know what toexpect and I think part of that
is because my predecessors thatwere the former ombudsman or
buds people.
They were not as visible.
I don't think they.
They didn't really do podcastseven like this Right.
(04:24):
Like future ombudsman or ombuds, people are going to be able to
listen to this podcast andunderstand what the office is
about and what I did with theoffice.
But this didn't exist for mewhen I was going through that
process.
So there really was no exampleto go off of and that was kind
of cool because it was a blankslate, but yeah, there was not
much of an example to go off ofthat I could find.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
And we've had quite a gap in time between your
departure and we're taping today, in early 2025.
You're right, the ombudsman'soffice was kind of shrouded in a
little bit of mystery.
I think people didn't reallyunderstand.
What do they do?
Do they have an enforcement arm?
Are they there to educate?
How did most people, spencer,contact you?
(05:01):
Was it calling?
Was it showing up when you wentout to events?
Was it emailing you?
What were most of thecommunication channels for you
to hear from people out in condoland?
Speaker 2 (05:13):
So there was a lot of calls and a lot of emails, but
throughout those three years oneof my main goals was to make
the office as visible aspossible and I think I was
probably unique as a governmentworker saying that I want as as
visible as possible, and I thinkI was probably unique as a
government worker saying that Iwant as much work as possible.
Speaker 1 (05:28):
When you were young, so you still had a lot of energy
.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
Right, I had a lot of energy exactly.
So, yeah, I would go to everyexpo I could.
I would go to the condoelections personally and I knew
that the more people that knewabout the office, the more
people that we could help, thebetter it was going to look for
the state, for my office, forthe DBPR, and then I thought
that's really the key to thelegislature.
(05:52):
You know, giving us moreemployees, give us more funding,
and then that will just be thislike exponential growth of
positivity for the office.
So making the office as visibleas possible was a big goal of
mine and the numbers reallydoubled and tripled and
quadrupled throughout thosethree years.
Speaker 1 (06:09):
What's your budget when you first started?
Speaker 2 (06:11):
I believe it was around half a million dollars.
Yeah, around half a milliondollars, I believe.
Speaker 1 (06:18):
And how many staff?
Speaker 2 (06:19):
at that point would you say so we had seven
full-time staff members, but wealso had the election monitor
program, and those people thatserved as election monitors
throughout the state were notemployees, they were independent
contractors and we'd haveanywhere between 20 to 30 of
those at a time.
(06:40):
So generally I was overseeing25 to 30 people.
Speaker 1 (06:44):
But those election monitors were not paid by the
state, they were paid by theassociations that were being.
These elections were beingmonitored, correct.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
Exactly so.
That's what Florida lawprovides is that, when enough
unit owners send a petition tothe ombudsman's office saying,
hey, we want the state to comein and monitor the election for
my condo this year, theassociation is then required to
pay for that service to theperson that the ombudsman
appoints.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
So we've got a lot of people listening all over.
Can you explain why the stateof Florida needed to have a
process whereby elections couldbe monitored by an outside party
?
Speaker 2 (07:23):
Well, I think that condo elections and the ability
to vote for the board and have afair election is like the most
sacred right for condo owners.
So making sure that thosehappen correctly the first time
go around is going to saveeveryone headaches, time, money,
energy.
So that was what thelegislature decided.
(07:43):
One of the roles of theombudsman's office was going to
be to you know, travel aroundand appoint people to go out and
conduct these elections, and itwas really really effective.
I mean, there were so manytimes where we had great results
where unit owners would come upto me after after the election
and they would say you know, Inever thought we were having
(08:05):
fair elections.
I always thought somethingsketchy was happening behind the
scenes.
And this is, you know, thefirst year I heard about the
ombudsman's office, and then thefirst year that we had an
election monitor, and this isthe first year we were actually
able to change the board.
So that felt really good.
I had so many success storieslike that.
Speaker 1 (08:23):
You know the reverse is also true.
So I've been out to a lot ofmeetings where they've had an
outside election monitor,because a number of owners have
petitioned for it and the boardwas reelected and it was a free
and fair election and it kind oflaid to rest the feeling that
there was something sketchygoing on.
It's why I do recommend theboards embrace that.
(08:45):
You should.
You should want to haveoversight into the process 100%.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
You know, for these associations where there's a lot
of animosity and the boardknows that no matter what
happens in the election, there'sgoing to be people that are
upset and they may have to, youknow, go to arbitration and have
a mediator, arbitrator, look atthe election afterwards.
That's going to cost time andmoney and frustration.
Well, just having a monitorthere kind of cuts down on the
(09:16):
potential of future complaints.
So yeah it just makes sure thateverything goes smoothly, and
then people are generally prettyhappy with the result.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
I made a tongue in cheek comment years ago on a
blog that we should just have.
We should just implement a juryduty style for board membership
.
Everybody gets a number.
When your number gets called,you're on the board, you can.
You know, you can say I can'tdo it because I've got X, y or Z
going on in my life.
People didn't like that, theydidn't like that suggestion and
(09:44):
I really didn't make it.
It wasn't really a serioussuggestion, but the issue with
these elections is often peoplewho feel like they're being
precluded from joining the board.
Were election issues one of themost frequent complaints you
got when you served as ombudsman.
Speaker 2 (09:59):
Definitely Election issues were really common,
Record requests very common.
And then I think probably halfthe condo owners in Florida
think that someone is getting akickback or stealing money.
So that was also super commonof an allegation, I should say.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
How did you handle the kickbacks?
Somebody calls you and they sayI think my board president's
taking a kickback when you wereombudsman.
What was the process when thatcomplaint came in?
Where does it go from there?
Speaker 2 (10:27):
Yeah, I mean, if you ask law enforcement, they'll
tell you that it's really hardto prove kickbacks and theft.
Embezzlement is, as you know, acriminal matter that the DBPR
does not have jurisdiction overbecause they only handle civil
matters.
So when people came to me, Iwould generally tell them you
know, I'm happy to talk with you, tell you what the law says,
(10:49):
tell you if I think this couldbe illegal or not, but at the
end of the day you're going tobe responsible for putting
together some proof of that.
And then I mean, heck, I'll gowith you to the police, I'll go
with you to the state attorney'soffice and talk to them and
explain you know what they needto do here and what I can do
here, and I did that plenty oftimes.
(11:11):
But kickbacks and a lot ofother things in condos are very
hard to prove.
Speaker 1 (11:17):
So when you served as ombudsman, one of the
responsibilities or rights ofthe ombudsman's office is to
kind of advocate for legislation.
What did you advocate forduring your three years in terms
of, you know, perhaps newresources or even more
enforcement?
Did you ever get into the, youknow, giving the office a little
more enforcement?
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Definitely.
I had a lot of conversationswith legislators over the years
and a lot of them, especiallyfrom South Florida felt that the
ombudsman's office would bebetter suited to have some sort
of, you know, detailed subpoenapower, detailed power, maybe, to
remove board members proposedsome legislation.
(12:00):
Senator Ana Maria Rodriguez hadproposed some really good bills,
I believe.
I believe at one point we weretalking about moving the
ombudsman's office to theattorney general's office and
giving it some teeth.
That never happened and I don'tknow if it ever will happen.
But I remember that during someconversations with legislators
(12:21):
they would say well, I know thatyou would love this and I think
you'd be great and you'd be,you know, you would do a great
job if the office had that.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
But what about the next ombudsman?
Speaker 2 (12:31):
Right, like we don't want to give the ombudsman's
office all this power and thenwho knows who the next person is
going to be, and that couldcreate problems.
So I heard that a bunch oftimes.
Speaker 1 (12:40):
Oh, that's interesting because they are
actually well, it was thegovernor appointing.
Now there's a bill pending inFlorida where they would change
that.
I think the appointment, ifthat bill passes, will be made
by the secretary of the DPPR.
And there's another billpending, that's already been
drafted, that would create anoffice of the ombudsman for
homeowners associations.
(13:01):
How do you feel about that?
Do you think?
Speaker 2 (13:05):
HOAs need their own ombudsman, so the first one.
I thought that was passed lastyear.
I believe it's already the casethat the secretary appoints the
ombudsman.
Speaker 1 (13:11):
Right about that.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
Yeah, I think that they snuck that in one of the
huge condo bills last year, andI'm probably the only person
that saw it.
Yeah, I mean, I think theyprobably had a hard time finding
a replacement for whateverreason.
Maybe because condos are such adifficult topic now, with
everything going on, thereweren't as many people that
wanted to take the job I reallydon't know.
I'm just speculating.
(13:32):
So you know, whatever theyneeded to do, they needed to do.
I liked the fact that thegovernor appointed it because it
meant the ombudsman was alittle more independent than the
DBPR.
Although I was, you know, inthe DBPR, I felt like I really
reported to the governor.
That gave me a little moreindependence.
And regarding your secondquestion with the HOAs, I think
(13:53):
an HOA ombudsman can't hurt.
It's just a question of wherethe funding is going to come
from, because if you'relistening to this, you may or
may not know that condo ownersin Florida pay $4 for their unit
to the state to fund thedivision of condos, timeshares
and mobile homes, and that thenfunds the ombudsman's office.
But there's no such charge forHOAs.
(14:15):
So I suppose the legislaturewould have to charge HOA owners
a couple of dollars to supportthat office.
It probably wouldn't make senseto have, in my opinion, to have
the condo owners paying for anHOA ombudsman.
That's just my opinion.
Speaker 1 (14:32):
So not to combine it?
The bill I saw the HOAombudsman would still have the
requirement that he or she be anattorney, a Florida licensed
attorney, which is what you work, but the condo ombudsman no
longer has that requirement, toyour point probably because they
(14:55):
needed a larger net forcandidates.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
Yeah, I think that's probably the case, and I think a
lot of times what they do isthey recycle bills, and I think
that's why the HOA ombudsmanbill still requires the
ombudsman to be attorney isbecause it's recycled old
language.
That's just a guess then.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
Do you think it's helpful to be an attorney in
that role?
Speaker 2 (15:12):
Of course.
I mean I think that the jobrequires some sort of legal
understanding, Like you'reworking in the Condo Act,
Chapter 718, Florida Statutesevery day, so to have that legal
background is really useful.
Now, it's not to say you can'tdo a great job if you're not a
(15:33):
lawyer.
There's a lot of things you cando that would be great for the
office and there were a lot ofthings that I did that I felt
like I didn't even need to be alawyer for, but I feel like if
possible, it would even need tobe a lawyer for, but I just I
feel like, if possible, it wouldbe great to have a lawyer in
there, but I'm sure that the newombudsman, who's not a lawyer,
is going to do a great job andchange my mind on that.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
There is the perception, spencer, in many
communities that the ombudsmanis there on behalf, solely on
behalf, of the unit owners, theangry mob, and not the board.
Speaker 2 (16:04):
Did you hear from boards?
Speaker 1 (16:06):
Was your office also a resource for board members.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
It was A lot of times the board members would come to
us trying to save money onattorney bills because they
wanted us to give some sort oflegal opinion, and I would then
just refer them to their counselbecause, as I would tell the
same thing to the unit ownersthat I can't represent anyone.
I can't give you legal advice.
I can tell you what the lawsays, but I can't take a step
(16:33):
forward than that and startinterpreting your condominium
documents and giving you legalopinions about recommendations.
Can't really do that.
So, yeah, there were times thatI definitely referred people
just said you know, listen, thisis something you need a lawyer
for.
I can't represent you here.
Speaker 1 (16:50):
Balance the competing interest, because there are
competing interests in all ofthese associations the owners,
the management and the board.
Yeah, I mean, I never tooksides right.
Speaker 2 (17:00):
The whole point of the office was to be neutral.
So I always felt like my jobwas just to make sure that, or
do my best to make sure thatpeople were able to have a
(17:21):
conversation.
And it's harder to ignorepeople when a state official
just request a meeting and then,you know, pop in on Zoom and
just try to get both sides tohear each other out, and if that
didn't work then it's like allright, I guess now you got to
call a lawyer, but I did my bestto facilitate some
communication here.
Speaker 1 (17:35):
So the episode that was released today, the day
we're taping your episode itactually kind of dovetails
nicely because it's aconversation the first of the
year on the podcast and it'swith a unit owner and this unit
owner is a retired attorney andhe lives in relatively new
construction.
They're undergoing a 558 claim.
(17:57):
He's a retired corporateattorney and he has made some
really salient points about thechallenges he's had with his
condo board living in thisbuilding with some of the more
persnickety rules andregulations, but he did it in a
very respectful way.
So I think sometimes owners aredismissed if they're not, you
(18:18):
know, if they're a littlecritical of their boards.
But on the flip side, I imagineyou got to know some owners who
called you all the time abouteverything, because we see that
in some communities Sometimes Ido refer to them as recreational
complainers because they doseem to be filing a lot of
complaints.
Was there any cutoff at somepoint where you thought somebody
(18:39):
was making frivolous complaints?
Speaker 2 (18:41):
There were the DBPR called those people the frequent
flyers.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
Oh, okay, I like that .
Speaker 2 (18:47):
Yeah.
So there would be times whereone of the paralegals in the
office would be trying to assista unit owner and she would
assist that unit owner and tellthem all the information that we
had, what the statute says, soon and so forth, and they still
wouldn't be happy.
So it would get escalated to anoffice supervisor and then it'd
(19:09):
get escalated to me and at acertain point I'd have to say,
listen, this is, you know, myopinion on the matter.
This is what it is, it's notgoing to change.
And you know we're trying toassist people here.
We can't just go over the samething with you over and over
again.
You know, if the facts change,feel free to email or call, but
you know, respectfully, I'mgoing to have to end this call
(19:30):
because there's a lot of otherpeople that we need to assist
today.
That was pretty rare though,but it happened a couple of
times.
Speaker 1 (19:37):
But you mentioned the $4 per door fee per door fee.
So you you know I imagineyou've got your frequent flyers
are sucking up a lot more ofthose resources than the people
who are not calling you all thetime.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
Yeah, sometimes people just want to feel heard.
Yeah, so I put on my therapisthat sometimes when I was the
ombudsman.
Speaker 1 (19:57):
Yeah, we did that too , as the association council.
I'm sure the managementcompanies do as well.
What do you think the biggestmisperception was about your
office when you were theombudsman?
Speaker 2 (20:09):
I think people assumed that it had more power
than it did.
People assumed that it had morepower than it did.
The way it's written now in thelaw it's sort of a toothless
tiger, except with regard to theelections, that there is some
power to conduct the elections.
But it's not like theombudsman's office can throw
people in jail or remove boardmembers.
And there were a lot of timeswhere that was the wish of
(20:29):
people.
They thought, oh, if I, youknow, schedule a meeting and
then voice my concerns that thebig bad ombudsman is going to
show up and take the boardmembers off, and you know I'll
be, I'll be smiling watchingthem leave the board.
But that doesn't work like that.
So I think that's probably thebiggest misconception.
Speaker 1 (20:47):
Do you think the office should have that kind of
authority, assuming you couldcreate, you know, some due
process?
Speaker 2 (20:55):
Yeah, that'd be great .
You're just yes, absolutely, weshould do this, absolutely,
absolutely.
No, I fought for that.
I mean, I had a lot ofconversations with legislators
and they saw what I was doingwith the role.
They saw that there may be some, at that time, holes in the
DBPR with regard to enforcement,and we worked on it.
But it's hard to change the lawand there were competing
(21:16):
interests there, so I did thebest with what I had.
I think I'd like to change thename of the ombudsman's office
something more menacing, maybelike the condominium attorney
general or something like thatwould have been good.
Speaker 1 (21:26):
Oh, my gosh Okay.
Speaker 2 (21:28):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (21:29):
Also ombudsman's hard to pronounce sometimes.
Yes, yeah, my dad still can'tsay it Are there other states
that have offices of condominiumombudsman or HOA ombudsman.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
There are.
I remember getting calls overthe years from some of those
offices.
I think Illinois had one, maybeVirginia, I don't really
remember, but there were acouple other ones.
Speaker 1 (21:51):
Listen, I hear you when you say you wanted to have
more teeth to the office becausethere is a lot, of, a lot of
messes that need to be mocked up.
Granted, there's also a lot ofhighly functioning communities
as well.
I do think you know and we'veseen the.
I want to ask you about thetrends you've seen over the last
couple of years Condo 3.0,we're seeing there's going to be
(22:11):
a condo 4.0.
3.0.
We're seeing there's going tobe a condo 4.0.
So we always have legislators inFlorida, and I imagine other
states as well, who make sharedownership issues their platform.
Right, I do think thelegislature needs to take into
account when associations aregrappling with a disaster.
I mean, we're here taping thison January 15th.
(22:33):
The wildfires are still ragingout in Los Angeles.
We have a six month hurricaneseason here in Florida.
A lot of times I think weforget about what it's like for
a community association, themanagement team and the
volunteer directors to bedealing with a casualty event
and then have somebody come upand say I want to see all the
(22:53):
documents during that timeperiod.
I think there needs to be someacknowledgement that there's a
time and place for owners to sayI want to have this or that and
dealing with a tragedy or acasualty.
I don't think that's the timeor place.
What do you think about that?
Speaker 2 (23:10):
Yeah, I mean I think that the record request system
right now is kind of antiquated.
I was a fan of just having allassociations put everything
online so that you wouldn't haveto deal with sending a record
request through certified mailand then showing up with your
own scanner.
If it's online, it's just easy.
You know, it could be threeo'clock in the morning.
(23:30):
You can pull up your condodeclaration and read it.
So I thought that would solve alot of problems that I was
seeing.
And, yeah, like you said, youknow it's a really interesting
time in the world of condos.
I think we're starting to seesome more condo terminations,
which I know is something thatyou've spoken about on the
podcast, and I'm thankful tohave the opportunity to work
with real estate developers and,you know, be working on some
(23:52):
condo terminations now withattorneys like Sandra Crumbine
and Peggy Rolando, who I knowyou know great, great condo
attorneys here at Schutz, and Ithink that's a trend that's
probably going to uptick in thecoming years.
Speaker 1 (24:05):
You think we're going to see even more condo
terminations?
Speaker 2 (24:08):
I think so.
I mean, it's not going to getcheaper to live in a condo, and
sometimes termination is justwhat makes financial sense for
the association.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
Yeah, I mean, I agree , I think the decades old belief
that living in a condo was aturnkey experience right, I just
go.
Everything else is maintained.
It's not that simple and Ithink people overlook the fact
that you don't just maintain thewhite box.
You know the white box, yourunit, you have to maintain
everything and living in Floridain a geographically vulnerable
(24:40):
area like we do, it takes itstoll.
So I agree with you and, yeah,you have some great attorneys at
Becker.
I know both of the women you'venamed and they're fantastic and
I think there are going to be Ithink there are going to be
more condo terminations.
I am concerned about the mediareports on the state of the
condo market in Florida rightnow.
(25:01):
What impact do you think themedia is actually having on our
condo market right now?
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Are you referring to like like scare tactics?
Speaker 1 (25:09):
Some of it is just, I think they're trying to set a
kind of caveat emptor theme outthere, which is you know, when
you go look at a condo, don'tjust look at the view and the
layout of your unit Really maybedig into it, maybe become more
of an informed consumer.
I think in that regard, themedia is doing a good job, but I
do think that we're having animpact.
(25:31):
Having an impact.
There's been a number ofarticles over the last couple of
months that didn't sound sogood, as the deadlines for
engineering and reserve fundingwere nearing the end of 2024.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
Yeah, no one knows how it's going to play out.
We could be on the edge of acliff or things could be
completely normal for the nextfive years and the prices can
continue to go up.
No one has a crystal ball, butyeah, I think there's some scare
tactics happening with theheadlines these days in condos
and you know that's that sells.
People like to read those sortof articles and there may be
(26:02):
truth to some of it.
But you know, we'll see whathappens in the next.
Maybe we can do another episodein three years and we can look
back.
Speaker 1 (26:09):
Maybe you'll.
Maybe you'll go back intopublic service at some point.
What do you think?
You were the youngestcondominium ombudsman.
Is there perhaps agubernatorial run in your future
?
I don't think so.
Speaker 2 (26:20):
I like being a lawyer .
I do really like the idea ofshaping policy and helping
people, and I miss that aspect.
But right now I'm just focusedon being the best lawyer that I
can be and providing for mylovely wife, Victoria.
Shout out to Victoria and we'llsee.
I mean maybe later in life, butthere's some things I want to
(26:43):
do first.
Speaker 1 (26:44):
Fair enough, I'll have you back on if you do go
back into public service at somepoint.
There's a new ombudsman, Ithink, in place.
What advice do you have for him?
Speaker 2 (26:53):
Yeah, he called me.
We had a couple of really goodconversations.
I think that he needs to learnthe landscape of condos first
and foremost and I think he'sdoing a good job at that and
then he needs to make a plan andfigure out what sort of
ombudsman he's going to be.
I know that his background ismore on the policy side than on
(27:14):
the legal side he's not a lawyer, but he worked shaping policy
for a nonprofit organization, Ibelieve and yeah, it's going to
be interesting to see how itplays out.
I think he's kind of justgetting started now, but he
needs to figure out what hisvision is, because that could be
different than my vision.
But I will say that I am happythat there's someone that's
(27:35):
driven there and someone thathas the energy to make a
difference and actually helppeople, and I think that's the
type of person that we need inthat role.
Speaker 1 (27:45):
I agree.
So if you were serving in thatrole today, after the
experiences, after everythingwe've experienced the last
couple of years in Florida, whatwould your top priorities be?
Speaker 2 (27:57):
Yeah well, the rule completely changed when Surfside
happened.
The type of complaints changed,the job changed, the politics
changed, everything changed andyou know that because you've
been in condos, so you know thecondo landscape changed.
Today I still think there's alot of ambiguity in the law
(28:17):
about milestone inspections andstructural integrity reserve
studies.
There's confusion, there'sambiguity and I think the
legislature is still ironingthat out right.
They've done like glitch billsto fix certain things in the
past two years.
I think probably my prioritywould be education and then do
(28:38):
my best to create educationalresources for people so that
they actually understand whatthe law requires, and it's
confusing.
I mean, I know there'sattorneys and managers out there
that are still confused andstill debate this all the time
what's actually required versuswhat's not required.
So I think I'd probably want tosit down with legislators and
(28:58):
sit down with the majorstakeholders and try to
establish what the law actuallysays.
Speaker 1 (29:04):
Yeah, I mean, listen, that should be a top priority.
The bill that passed last yearrequires mandatory four-hour
education for board members.
I think that's a great start.
I don't know how much peopleare retaining, because I will
tell you, I agree wholeheartedlythat there's mass confusion out
there.
There's even confusion amongstthe professional advisors that
(29:26):
these boards are hiring.
I mean, think about this.
These are volunteers and I'vecome across advice being given
by engineers, other attorneys,reserve specialists.
That does not completely matchup with what the law says, what
the requirements are.
So we do have more work to do.
I think things go look, I thinkthe ideas are good, and if the
(29:48):
goal was to have the safesthousing stock in the country,
that's great.
But these bills go into billdrafting and then I don't.
I don't know, but these billsgo into bill drafting and then I
don't know what happens when itgets into bill drafting.
I mean it'd be great to be ableto peek behind that curtain and
see what's really going on andif they're going through the
statute as a whole and whothey're reaching out to in terms
of advice when it comes todrafting that stuff.
Speaker 2 (30:10):
Yeah, only the legislature knows.
I was happy last year I went upthere and did a panel for the
regulated industries for theSenate and that was really
productive.
But yeah, I mean it's.
You have to be like anexperienced condo lawyer to
understand what's going on inthe law these days.
Maybe you can get up toTallahassee and work on some of
(30:31):
these bills this year, thanks.
Speaker 1 (30:32):
Now I'm going to leave that to some of my
partners to get up toTallahassee and work on some of
these bills this year, thanks.
Now I'm going to leave that tosome of my partners to get up to
Tallahassee, I think.
But I mean I wouldn't beopposed to doing it.
I remember back in the day weused to take board members up to
Tallahassee.
It was quite the experienceshepherding them around the
halls up there.
So if you could give one pieceof advice, spencer Hennings, to
(30:53):
every condo owner and everyboard member, what would it be?
Speaker 2 (30:57):
Easy Get involved, go to the meetings, run for the
board, pay attention to what'sgoing on, care about what's
going on in your condo.
I think that's like the key,you know.
Get involved and don't justcomplain, right?
If you don't like what's goingon, run for the board, right.
Anyone can sit back and pointtheir finger and say, oh, that's
(31:19):
wrong.
Um, and don't just complain,right?
If you don't like what's goingon, run for the board, right.
Anyone can sit back and pointtheir finger and say, oh, that's
wrong.
But it takes, you know, ittakes courage to run for the
board and stick up for somethingand, and, uh, make positive
changes.
Speaker 1 (31:26):
So I asked you at the outset if in 2020, when you
were appointed, you had lived ina condo and you said you had,
but you hadn't served on theboard today in 2025.
Condo HOA.
Speaker 2 (31:38):
I'm in a condo, but I will say when you've seen
enough nightmare stories like Ihave, you want to get out.
So as soon as I can afford it,I'm going to be in a house
hopefully not in an HOA and I'llbe in complete control of my
domain.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
But listen.
Speaker 2 (31:53):
I think condos are good, I think HOAs are good, I
think they're net positive.
I work with developers tocreate them and they're really
positive and for a lot of peopleit's the right move.
So I think, just I'm scarred,I'm scarred.
Speaker 1 (32:08):
I'm sure you're scarred.
I'm absolutely certain thatsome of these things remain in
your head.
Is there a lot of housing stock, though?
In South Florida that is,outside the walls of a community
association.
Speaker 2 (32:21):
No, it's.
I mean, real estate in SouthFlorida has become insanely
expensive.
Yeah, I think that's, you know,going to keep pushing people in
condos, keep pushing people inHOA communities, and that's good
.
I mean.
They're really a positive thing.
You know HOAs and condos.
They're good at usually keepingyour property value, making
(32:42):
sure that your next doorneighbor isn't going to do
something crazy and keepingorder, and you know great
amenities and locations.
So I think there's a lot ofreally great things about condos
and HOAs.
Like I said, I'm just scarred,you know.
I think if you have that jobfor three years and you just see
the nightmare stories day afterday, it's like OK, the last
thing I want to see when I gohome is another condo.
Speaker 1 (33:04):
Yeah, I hear you.
I mean some of the complaintswe do hear, though, from people
who don't want to live in acondo or HOA, but they're saying
there's not a lot of housingstock that's outside the scope
of a mandatory association.
So I don't know.
I guess we'll see.
I want to thank you for joiningus and I'm going to keep an eye
on your career because I have afeeling that wasn't the last
(33:26):
public office you were going tohold.
I don't know, We'll see.
Speaker 2 (33:29):
We'll see, but I appreciate it.
Dawn, thanks so much for havingme on.
Speaker 1 (33:35):
Thanks.
Thanks so much for having me on.
Thanks, thank you for joiningus today.
Don't forget to follow and rateus on your favorite podcast
platform, or visittakeittotheboardcom for more
ways to connect.
Hi everyone, I'm attorney Donna DiMaggio-Berger,
and this is Take it to the Board, where we speak condo and HOA.
Today, we're taking a closerlook at one of the most unique
and important roles in Florida'scondominium landscape the
condominium ombudsman.
My guest is someone who knowsfirsthand what it's like to be
the bridge between condo ownersboards and the state Florida's
(00:23):
former condominium ombudsman,spencer Hennings.
In 2020, spencer was appointedby Governor DeSantis to serve as
Florida's condominium ombudsman.
From 2020 to 2023, he resolvedthousands of issues in
condominium associations, servedas the state's liaison to those
affected by the Miami-DadeSurfside condo collapse and
helped draft new condominiumlegislation at the local and
(00:46):
state levels.
Spencer left the ombudsman'soffice in 2023 and is now a
member of the real estatepractice group at Schutzen Bowen
in Fort Lauderdale, and he wasjust named vice president of the
Miami Beach Bar Association.
I'm excited to have theopportunity to talk to Spencer
about the challenges, lessonsand surprises he learned during
his tenure as Florida'scondominium ombudsman and get
(01:07):
his take on the future of thecondominium lifestyle.
So, spencer, welcome to Take itto the Board.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
Thanks for having me, Donna.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
You were very young when you took on the role of
condominium ombudsman.
What inspired you to like seekout that role?
Speaker 2 (01:21):
Yeah, it was right before my 28th birthday.
You know it's not a role that Iwas really seeking out, it sort
of found me.
At the time the secretary ofthe DVPR was named Halsey
Beshears.
He did a great job as thesecretary of DVPR and when he
was appointed by the governor hestarted getting all these condo
complaints and there was noombudsman at the time.
(01:43):
So he was looking for a waythat the state could do better
to help our condo complaints andthere was no ombudsman at the
time.
So he was looking for a waythat the state could do better
to help our condo owners andespecially these people that
were sending him letters everyday complaining about things
happening in their condoassociation.
So he, being up in Tallahassee,thought I think I need to hire
someone down in South Floridawhere a lot of these complaints
are coming from and all thecondos are concentrated.
(02:03):
So he started this statewidesearch and a professional
contact of mine knew him andrecommended me to him and when I
heard about the job and I readthe statute that describes what
the duties are, I kind of feltthat I was born for this role.
So I worked really hard toconvince Halsey Beshears, who's
the secretary that I was theright guy and at the time he
(02:27):
couldn't just hire me becausethe statute required that the
governor appointed the ombudsman.
So once he signed off on me, hehad to then present me to the
governor's office and that tookabout a year of just going back
and forth to Tallahassee andmeeting with the governor's
chief of staff as a 27-year-oldlawyer and eventually.
(02:47):
Eventually COVID hit also andthat, you know, really threw a
wrench in things.
That's why it took so long andit almost fell apart.
But right before my 28thbirthday the appointment came
through and it was an absoluteroller coaster, but it was.
You know, I had a great timewith that role and I'm just so
thankful to have had thatopportunity.
At that point you're 27 yearsold, had you lived in a
(03:09):
condominium up until that point,or a homeowners association.
I lived in condos, yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
Now, had you ever served on a board?
Speaker 2 (03:16):
No.
Speaker 1 (03:17):
Had you ever gone to a board meeting?
Speaker 2 (03:19):
Yes, I didn't know what was happening at the board
meeting Didn't really make senseto me.
But yeah, I mean I had lookedat a set of condominium
documents before and I knewloosely how condominiums worked
because I was a real estatelawyer and I had taken a class
by Bill Sklar at the Universityof Miami Law School, who is a
(03:40):
great, great condominium lawyer.
That's a mutual friend of oursand I learned a little bit about
condos, but it was a realeducational experience.
I'll tell you that.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
I was going to say three years.
Okay, I'm guessing you didn'treally know what you were
getting yourself fully into atthat point.
Speaker 2 (03:57):
I had no idea what I was getting myself into and it
ended up being amazing and superrewarding.
But I just didn't know what toexpect and I think part of that
is because my predecessors thatwere the former ombudsman or
buds people.
They were not as visible.
I don't think they.
They didn't really do podcastseven like this Right.
(04:24):
Like future ombudsman or ombuds, people are going to be able to
listen to this podcast andunderstand what the office is
about and what I did with theoffice.
But this didn't exist for mewhen I was going through that
process.
So there really was no exampleto go off of and that was kind
of cool because it was a blankslate, but yeah, there was not
much of an example to go off ofthat I could find.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
And we've had quite a gap in time between your
departure and we're taping today, in early 2025.
You're right, the ombudsman'soffice was kind of shrouded in a
little bit of mystery.
I think people didn't reallyunderstand.
What do they do?
Do they have an enforcement arm?
Are they there to educate?
How did most people, spencer,contact you?
(05:01):
Was it calling?
Was it showing up when you wentout to events?
Was it emailing you?
What were most of thecommunication channels for you
to hear from people out in condoland?
Speaker 2 (05:13):
So there was a lot of calls and a lot of emails, but
throughout those three years oneof my main goals was to make
the office as visible aspossible and I think I was
probably unique as a governmentworker saying that I want as as
visible as possible, and I thinkI was probably unique as a
government worker saying that Iwant as much work as possible.
Speaker 1 (05:28):
When you were young, so you still had a lot of energy
.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
Right, I had a lot of energy exactly.
So, yeah, I would go to everyexpo I could.
I would go to the condoelections personally and I knew
that the more people that knewabout the office, the more
people that we could help, thebetter it was going to look for
the state, for my office, forthe DBPR, and then I thought
that's really the key to thelegislature.
(05:52):
You know, giving us moreemployees, give us more funding,
and then that will just be thislike exponential growth of
positivity for the office.
So making the office as visibleas possible was a big goal of
mine and the numbers reallydoubled and tripled and
quadrupled throughout thosethree years.
Speaker 1 (06:09):
What's your budget when you first started?
Speaker 2 (06:11):
I believe it was around half a million dollars.
Yeah, around half a milliondollars, I believe.
Speaker 1 (06:18):
And how many staff?
Speaker 2 (06:19):
at that point would you say so we had seven
full-time staff members, but wealso had the election monitor
program, and those people thatserved as election monitors
throughout the state were notemployees, they were independent
contractors and we'd haveanywhere between 20 to 30 of
those at a time.
(06:40):
So generally I was overseeing25 to 30 people.
Speaker 1 (06:44):
But those election monitors were not paid by the
state, they were paid by theassociations that were being.
These elections were beingmonitored, correct.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
Exactly so.
That's what Florida lawprovides is that, when enough
unit owners send a petition tothe ombudsman's office saying,
hey, we want the state to comein and monitor the election for
my condo this year, theassociation is then required to
pay for that service to theperson that the ombudsman
appoints.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
So we've got a lot of people listening all over.
Can you explain why the stateof Florida needed to have a
process whereby elections couldbe monitored by an outside party
?
Speaker 2 (07:23):
Well, I think that condo elections and the ability
to vote for the board and have afair election is like the most
sacred right for condo owners.
So making sure that thosehappen correctly the first time
go around is going to saveeveryone headaches, time, money,
energy.
So that was what thelegislature decided.
(07:43):
One of the roles of theombudsman's office was going to
be to you know, travel aroundand appoint people to go out and
conduct these elections, and itwas really really effective.
I mean, there were so manytimes where we had great results
where unit owners would come upto me after after the election
and they would say you know, Inever thought we were having
(08:05):
fair elections.
I always thought somethingsketchy was happening behind the
scenes.
And this is, you know, thefirst year I heard about the
ombudsman's office, and then thefirst year that we had an
election monitor, and this isthe first year we were actually
able to change the board.
So that felt really good.
I had so many success storieslike that.
Speaker 1 (08:23):
You know the reverse is also true.
So I've been out to a lot ofmeetings where they've had an
outside election monitor,because a number of owners have
petitioned for it and the boardwas reelected and it was a free
and fair election and it kind oflaid to rest the feeling that
there was something sketchygoing on.
It's why I do recommend theboards embrace that.
(08:45):
You should.
You should want to haveoversight into the process 100%.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
You know, for these associations where there's a lot
of animosity and the boardknows that no matter what
happens in the election, there'sgoing to be people that are
upset and they may have to, youknow, go to arbitration and have
a mediator, arbitrator, look atthe election afterwards.
That's going to cost time andmoney and frustration.
Well, just having a monitorthere kind of cuts down on the
(09:16):
potential of future complaints.
So yeah it just makes sure thateverything goes smoothly, and
then people are generally prettyhappy with the result.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
I made a tongue in cheek comment years ago on a
blog that we should just have.
We should just implement a juryduty style for board membership
.
Everybody gets a number.
When your number gets called,you're on the board, you can.
You know, you can say I can'tdo it because I've got X, y or Z
going on in my life.
People didn't like that, theydidn't like that suggestion and
(09:44):
I really didn't make it.
It wasn't really a serioussuggestion, but the issue with
these elections is often peoplewho feel like they're being
precluded from joining the board.
Were election issues one of themost frequent complaints you
got when you served as ombudsman.
Speaker 2 (09:59):
Definitely Election issues were really common,
Record requests very common.
And then I think probably halfthe condo owners in Florida
think that someone is getting akickback or stealing money.
So that was also super commonof an allegation, I should say.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
How did you handle the kickbacks?
Somebody calls you and they sayI think my board president's
taking a kickback when you wereombudsman.
What was the process when thatcomplaint came in?
Where does it go from there?
Speaker 2 (10:27):
Yeah, I mean, if you ask law enforcement, they'll
tell you that it's really hardto prove kickbacks and theft.
Embezzlement is, as you know, acriminal matter that the DBPR
does not have jurisdiction overbecause they only handle civil
matters.
So when people came to me, Iwould generally tell them you
know, I'm happy to talk with you, tell you what the law says,
(10:49):
tell you if I think this couldbe illegal or not, but at the
end of the day you're going tobe responsible for putting
together some proof of that.
And then I mean, heck, I'll gowith you to the police, I'll go
with you to the state attorney'soffice and talk to them and
explain you know what they needto do here and what I can do
here, and I did that plenty oftimes.
(11:11):
But kickbacks and a lot ofother things in condos are very
hard to prove.
Speaker 1 (11:17):
So when you served as ombudsman, one of the
responsibilities or rights ofthe ombudsman's office is to
kind of advocate for legislation.
What did you advocate forduring your three years in terms
of, you know, perhaps newresources or even more
enforcement?
Did you ever get into the, youknow, giving the office a little
more enforcement?
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Definitely.
I had a lot of conversationswith legislators over the years
and a lot of them, especiallyfrom South Florida felt that the
ombudsman's office would bebetter suited to have some sort
of, you know, detailed subpoenapower, detailed power, maybe, to
remove board members proposedsome legislation.
(12:00):
Senator Ana Maria Rodriguez hadproposed some really good bills,
I believe.
I believe at one point we weretalking about moving the
ombudsman's office to theattorney general's office and
giving it some teeth.
That never happened and I don'tknow if it ever will happen.
But I remember that during someconversations with legislators
(12:21):
they would say well, I know thatyou would love this and I think
you'd be great and you'd be,you know, you would do a great
job if the office had that.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
But what about the next ombudsman?
Speaker 2 (12:31):
Right, like we don't want to give the ombudsman's
office all this power and thenwho knows who the next person is
going to be, and that couldcreate problems.
So I heard that a bunch oftimes.
Speaker 1 (12:40):
Oh, that's interesting because they are
actually well, it was thegovernor appointing.
Now there's a bill pending inFlorida where they would change
that.
I think the appointment, ifthat bill passes, will be made
by the secretary of the DPPR.
And there's another billpending, that's already been
drafted, that would create anoffice of the ombudsman for
homeowners associations.
(13:01):
How do you feel about that?
Do you think?
Speaker 2 (13:05):
HOAs need their own ombudsman, so the first one.
I thought that was passed lastyear.
I believe it's already the casethat the secretary appoints the
ombudsman.
Speaker 1 (13:11):
Right about that.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
Yeah, I think that they snuck that in one of the
huge condo bills last year, andI'm probably the only person
that saw it.
Yeah, I mean, I think theyprobably had a hard time finding
a replacement for whateverreason.
Maybe because condos are such adifficult topic now, with
everything going on, thereweren't as many people that
wanted to take the job I reallydon't know.
I'm just speculating.
(13:32):
So you know, whatever theyneeded to do, they needed to do.
I liked the fact that thegovernor appointed it because it
meant the ombudsman was alittle more independent than the
DBPR.
Although I was, you know, inthe DBPR, I felt like I really
reported to the governor.
That gave me a little moreindependence.
And regarding your secondquestion with the HOAs, I think
(13:53):
an HOA ombudsman can't hurt.
It's just a question of wherethe funding is going to come
from, because if you'relistening to this, you may or
may not know that condo ownersin Florida pay $4 for their unit
to the state to fund thedivision of condos, timeshares
and mobile homes, and that thenfunds the ombudsman's office.
But there's no such charge forHOAs.
(14:15):
So I suppose the legislaturewould have to charge HOA owners
a couple of dollars to supportthat office.
It probably wouldn't make senseto have, in my opinion, to have
the condo owners paying for anHOA ombudsman.
That's just my opinion.
Speaker 1 (14:32):
So not to combine it?
The bill I saw the HOAombudsman would still have the
requirement that he or she be anattorney, a Florida licensed
attorney, which is what you work, but the condo ombudsman no
longer has that requirement, toyour point probably because they
(14:55):
needed a larger net forcandidates.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
Yeah, I think that's probably the case, and I think a
lot of times what they do isthey recycle bills, and I think
that's why the HOA ombudsmanbill still requires the
ombudsman to be attorney isbecause it's recycled old
language.
That's just a guess then.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
Do you think it's helpful to be an attorney in
that role?
Speaker 2 (15:12):
Of course.
I mean I think that the jobrequires some sort of legal
understanding, Like you'reworking in the Condo Act,
Chapter 718, Florida Statutesevery day, so to have that legal
background is really useful.
Now, it's not to say you can'tdo a great job if you're not a
(15:33):
lawyer.
There's a lot of things you cando that would be great for the
office and there were a lot ofthings that I did that I felt
like I didn't even need to be alawyer for, but I feel like if
possible, it would even need tobe a lawyer for, but I just I
feel like, if possible, it wouldbe great to have a lawyer in
there, but I'm sure that the newombudsman, who's not a lawyer,
is going to do a great job andchange my mind on that.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
There is the perception, spencer, in many
communities that the ombudsmanis there on behalf, solely on
behalf, of the unit owners, theangry mob, and not the board.
Speaker 2 (16:04):
Did you hear from boards?
Speaker 1 (16:06):
Was your office also a resource for board members.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
It was A lot of times the board members would come to
us trying to save money onattorney bills because they
wanted us to give some sort oflegal opinion, and I would then
just refer them to their counselbecause, as I would tell the
same thing to the unit ownersthat I can't represent anyone.
I can't give you legal advice.
I can tell you what the lawsays, but I can't take a step
(16:33):
forward than that and startinterpreting your condominium
documents and giving you legalopinions about recommendations.
Can't really do that.
So, yeah, there were times thatI definitely referred people
just said you know, listen, thisis something you need a lawyer
for.
I can't represent you here.
Speaker 1 (16:50):
Balance the competing interest, because there are
competing interests in all ofthese associations the owners,
the management and the board.
Yeah, I mean, I never tooksides right.
Speaker 2 (17:00):
The whole point of the office was to be neutral.
So I always felt like my jobwas just to make sure that, or
do my best to make sure thatpeople were able to have a
(17:21):
conversation.
And it's harder to ignorepeople when a state official
just request a meeting and then,you know, pop in on Zoom and
just try to get both sides tohear each other out, and if that
didn't work then it's like allright, I guess now you got to
call a lawyer, but I did my bestto facilitate some
communication here.
Speaker 1 (17:35):
So the episode that was released today, the day
we're taping your episode itactually kind of dovetails
nicely because it's aconversation the first of the
year on the podcast and it'swith a unit owner and this unit
owner is a retired attorney andhe lives in relatively new
construction.
They're undergoing a 558 claim.
(17:57):
He's a retired corporateattorney and he has made some
really salient points about thechallenges he's had with his
condo board living in thisbuilding with some of the more
persnickety rules andregulations, but he did it in a
very respectful way.
So I think sometimes owners aredismissed if they're not, you
(18:18):
know, if they're a littlecritical of their boards.
But on the flip side, I imagineyou got to know some owners who
called you all the time abouteverything, because we see that
in some communities Sometimes Ido refer to them as recreational
complainers because they doseem to be filing a lot of
complaints.
Was there any cutoff at somepoint where you thought somebody
(18:39):
was making frivolous complaints?
Speaker 2 (18:41):
There were the DBPR called those people the frequent
flyers.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
Oh, okay, I like that .
Speaker 2 (18:47):
Yeah.
So there would be times whereone of the paralegals in the
office would be trying to assista unit owner and she would
assist that unit owner and tellthem all the information that we
had, what the statute says, soon and so forth, and they still
wouldn't be happy.
So it would get escalated to anoffice supervisor and then it'd
(19:09):
get escalated to me and at acertain point I'd have to say,
listen, this is, you know, myopinion on the matter.
This is what it is, it's notgoing to change.
And you know we're trying toassist people here.
We can't just go over the samething with you over and over
again.
You know, if the facts change,feel free to email or call, but
you know, respectfully, I'mgoing to have to end this call
(19:30):
because there's a lot of otherpeople that we need to assist
today.
That was pretty rare though,but it happened a couple of
times.
Speaker 1 (19:37):
But you mentioned the $4 per door fee per door fee.
So you you know I imagineyou've got your frequent flyers
are sucking up a lot more ofthose resources than the people
who are not calling you all thetime.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
Yeah, sometimes people just want to feel heard.
Yeah, so I put on my therapisthat sometimes when I was the
ombudsman.
Speaker 1 (19:57):
Yeah, we did that too , as the association council.
I'm sure the managementcompanies do as well.
What do you think the biggestmisperception was about your
office when you were theombudsman?
Speaker 2 (20:09):
I think people assumed that it had more power
than it did.
People assumed that it had morepower than it did.
The way it's written now in thelaw it's sort of a toothless
tiger, except with regard to theelections, that there is some
power to conduct the elections.
But it's not like theombudsman's office can throw
people in jail or remove boardmembers.
And there were a lot of timeswhere that was the wish of
(20:29):
people.
They thought, oh, if I, youknow, schedule a meeting and
then voice my concerns that thebig bad ombudsman is going to
show up and take the boardmembers off, and you know I'll
be, I'll be smiling watchingthem leave the board.
But that doesn't work like that.
So I think that's probably thebiggest misconception.
Speaker 1 (20:47):
Do you think the office should have that kind of
authority, assuming you couldcreate, you know, some due
process?
Speaker 2 (20:55):
Yeah, that'd be great .
You're just yes, absolutely, weshould do this, absolutely,
absolutely.
No, I fought for that.
I mean, I had a lot ofconversations with legislators
and they saw what I was doingwith the role.
They saw that there may be some, at that time, holes in the
DBPR with regard to enforcement,and we worked on it.
But it's hard to change the lawand there were competing
(21:16):
interests there, so I did thebest with what I had.
I think I'd like to change thename of the ombudsman's office
something more menacing, maybelike the condominium attorney
general or something like thatwould have been good.
Speaker 1 (21:26):
Oh, my gosh Okay.
Speaker 2 (21:28):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (21:29):
Also ombudsman's hard to pronounce sometimes.
Yes, yeah, my dad still can'tsay it Are there other states
that have offices of condominiumombudsman or HOA ombudsman.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
There are.
I remember getting calls overthe years from some of those
offices.
I think Illinois had one, maybeVirginia, I don't really
remember, but there were acouple other ones.
Speaker 1 (21:51):
Listen, I hear you when you say you wanted to have
more teeth to the office becausethere is a lot, of, a lot of
messes that need to be mocked up.
Granted, there's also a lot ofhighly functioning communities
as well.
I do think you know and we'veseen the.
I want to ask you about thetrends you've seen over the last
couple of years Condo 3.0,we're seeing there's going to be
(22:11):
a condo 4.0.
3.0.
We're seeing there's going tobe a condo 4.0.
So we always have legislators inFlorida, and I imagine other
states as well, who make sharedownership issues their platform.
Right, I do think thelegislature needs to take into
account when associations aregrappling with a disaster.
I mean, we're here taping thison January 15th.
(22:33):
The wildfires are still ragingout in Los Angeles.
We have a six month hurricaneseason here in Florida.
A lot of times I think weforget about what it's like for
a community association, themanagement team and the
volunteer directors to bedealing with a casualty event
and then have somebody come upand say I want to see all the
(22:53):
documents during that timeperiod.
I think there needs to be someacknowledgement that there's a
time and place for owners to sayI want to have this or that and
dealing with a tragedy or acasualty.
I don't think that's the timeor place.
What do you think about that?
Speaker 2 (23:10):
Yeah, I mean I think that the record request system
right now is kind of antiquated.
I was a fan of just having allassociations put everything
online so that you wouldn't haveto deal with sending a record
request through certified mailand then showing up with your
own scanner.
If it's online, it's just easy.
You know, it could be threeo'clock in the morning.
(23:30):
You can pull up your condodeclaration and read it.
So I thought that would solve alot of problems that I was
seeing.
And, yeah, like you said, youknow it's a really interesting
time in the world of condos.
I think we're starting to seesome more condo terminations,
which I know is something thatyou've spoken about on the
podcast, and I'm thankful tohave the opportunity to work
with real estate developers and,you know, be working on some
(23:52):
condo terminations now withattorneys like Sandra Crumbine
and Peggy Rolando, who I knowyou know great, great condo
attorneys here at Schutz, and Ithink that's a trend that's
probably going to uptick in thecoming years.
Speaker 1 (24:05):
You think we're going to see even more condo
terminations?
Speaker 2 (24:08):
I think so.
I mean, it's not going to getcheaper to live in a condo, and
sometimes termination is justwhat makes financial sense for
the association.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
Yeah, I mean, I agree , I think the decades old belief
that living in a condo was aturnkey experience right, I just
go.
Everything else is maintained.
It's not that simple and Ithink people overlook the fact
that you don't just maintain thewhite box.
You know the white box, yourunit, you have to maintain
everything and living in Floridain a geographically vulnerable
(24:40):
area like we do, it takes itstoll.
So I agree with you and, yeah,you have some great attorneys at
Becker.
I know both of the women you'venamed and they're fantastic and
I think there are going to be Ithink there are going to be
more condo terminations.
I am concerned about the mediareports on the state of the
condo market in Florida rightnow.
(25:01):
What impact do you think themedia is actually having on our
condo market right now?
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Are you referring to like like scare tactics?
Speaker 1 (25:09):
Some of it is just, I think they're trying to set a
kind of caveat emptor theme outthere, which is you know, when
you go look at a condo, don'tjust look at the view and the
layout of your unit Really maybedig into it, maybe become more
of an informed consumer.
I think in that regard, themedia is doing a good job, but I
do think that we're having animpact.
(25:31):
Having an impact.
There's been a number ofarticles over the last couple of
months that didn't sound sogood, as the deadlines for
engineering and reserve fundingwere nearing the end of 2024.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
Yeah, no one knows how it's going to play out.
We could be on the edge of acliff or things could be
completely normal for the nextfive years and the prices can
continue to go up.
No one has a crystal ball, butyeah, I think there's some scare
tactics happening with theheadlines these days in condos
and you know that's that sells.
People like to read those sortof articles and there may be
(26:02):
truth to some of it.
But you know, we'll see whathappens in the next.
Maybe we can do another episodein three years and we can look
back.
Speaker 1 (26:09):
Maybe you'll.
Maybe you'll go back intopublic service at some point.
What do you think?
You were the youngestcondominium ombudsman.
Is there perhaps agubernatorial run in your future
?
I don't think so.
Speaker 2 (26:20):
I like being a lawyer .
I do really like the idea ofshaping policy and helping
people, and I miss that aspect.
But right now I'm just focusedon being the best lawyer that I
can be and providing for mylovely wife, Victoria.
Shout out to Victoria and we'llsee.
I mean maybe later in life, butthere's some things I want to
(26:43):
do first.
Speaker 1 (26:44):
Fair enough, I'll have you back on if you do go
back into public service at somepoint.
There's a new ombudsman, Ithink, in place.
What advice do you have for him?
Speaker 2 (26:53):
Yeah, he called me.
We had a couple of really goodconversations.
I think that he needs to learnthe landscape of condos first
and foremost and I think he'sdoing a good job at that and
then he needs to make a plan andfigure out what sort of
ombudsman he's going to be.
I know that his background ismore on the policy side than on
(27:14):
the legal side he's not a lawyer, but he worked shaping policy
for a nonprofit organization, Ibelieve and yeah, it's going to
be interesting to see how itplays out.
I think he's kind of justgetting started now, but he
needs to figure out what hisvision is, because that could be
different than my vision.
But I will say that I am happythat there's someone that's
(27:35):
driven there and someone thathas the energy to make a
difference and actually helppeople, and I think that's the
type of person that we need inthat role.
Speaker 1 (27:45):
I agree.
So if you were serving in thatrole today, after the
experiences, after everythingwe've experienced the last
couple of years in Florida, whatwould your top priorities be?
Speaker 2 (27:57):
Yeah well, the rule completely changed when Surfside
happened.
The type of complaints changed,the job changed, the politics
changed, everything changed andyou know that because you've
been in condos, so you know thecondo landscape changed.
Today I still think there's alot of ambiguity in the law
(28:17):
about milestone inspections andstructural integrity reserve
studies.
There's confusion, there'sambiguity and I think the
legislature is still ironingthat out right.
They've done like glitch billsto fix certain things in the
past two years.
I think probably my prioritywould be education and then do
(28:38):
my best to create educationalresources for people so that
they actually understand whatthe law requires, and it's
confusing.
I mean, I know there'sattorneys and managers out there
that are still confused andstill debate this all the time
what's actually required versuswhat's not required.
So I think I'd probably want tosit down with legislators and
(28:58):
sit down with the majorstakeholders and try to
establish what the law actuallysays.
Speaker 1 (29:04):
Yeah, I mean, listen, that should be a top priority.
The bill that passed last yearrequires mandatory four-hour
education for board members.
I think that's a great start.
I don't know how much peopleare retaining, because I will
tell you, I agree wholeheartedlythat there's mass confusion out
there.
There's even confusion amongstthe professional advisors that
(29:26):
these boards are hiring.
I mean, think about this.
These are volunteers and I'vecome across advice being given
by engineers, other attorneys,reserve specialists.
That does not completely matchup with what the law says, what
the requirements are.
So we do have more work to do.
I think things go look, I thinkthe ideas are good, and if the
(29:48):
goal was to have the safesthousing stock in the country,
that's great.
But these bills go into billdrafting and then I don't.
I don't know, but these billsgo into bill drafting and then I
don't know what happens when itgets into bill drafting.
I mean it'd be great to be ableto peek behind that curtain and
see what's really going on andif they're going through the
statute as a whole and whothey're reaching out to in terms
of advice when it comes todrafting that stuff.
Speaker 2 (30:10):
Yeah, only the legislature knows.
I was happy last year I went upthere and did a panel for the
regulated industries for theSenate and that was really
productive.
But yeah, I mean it's.
You have to be like anexperienced condo lawyer to
understand what's going on inthe law these days.
Maybe you can get up toTallahassee and work on some of
(30:31):
these bills this year, thanks.
Speaker 1 (30:32):
Now I'm going to leave that to some of my
partners to get up toTallahassee and work on some of
these bills this year, thanks.
Now I'm going to leave that tosome of my partners to get up to
Tallahassee, I think.
But I mean I wouldn't beopposed to doing it.
I remember back in the day weused to take board members up to
Tallahassee.
It was quite the experienceshepherding them around the
halls up there.
So if you could give one pieceof advice, spencer Hennings, to
(30:53):
every condo owner and everyboard member, what would it be?
Speaker 2 (30:57):
Easy Get involved, go to the meetings, run for the
board, pay attention to what'sgoing on, care about what's
going on in your condo.
I think that's like the key,you know.
Get involved and don't justcomplain, right?
If you don't like what's goingon, run for the board, right.
Anyone can sit back and pointtheir finger and say, oh, that's
(31:19):
wrong.
Um, and don't just complain,right?
If you don't like what's goingon, run for the board, right.
Anyone can sit back and pointtheir finger and say, oh, that's
wrong.
But it takes, you know, ittakes courage to run for the
board and stick up for somethingand, and, uh, make positive
changes.
Speaker 1 (31:26):
So I asked you at the outset if in 2020, when you
were appointed, you had lived ina condo and you said you had,
but you hadn't served on theboard today in 2025.
Condo HOA.
Speaker 2 (31:38):
I'm in a condo, but I will say when you've seen
enough nightmare stories like Ihave, you want to get out.
So as soon as I can afford it,I'm going to be in a house
hopefully not in an HOA and I'llbe in complete control of my
domain.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
But listen.
Speaker 2 (31:53):
I think condos are good, I think HOAs are good, I
think they're net positive.
I work with developers tocreate them and they're really
positive and for a lot of peopleit's the right move.
So I think, just I'm scarred,I'm scarred.
Speaker 1 (32:08):
I'm sure you're scarred.
I'm absolutely certain thatsome of these things remain in
your head.
Is there a lot of housing stock, though?
In South Florida that is,outside the walls of a community
association.
Speaker 2 (32:21):
No, it's.
I mean, real estate in SouthFlorida has become insanely
expensive.
Yeah, I think that's, you know,going to keep pushing people in
condos, keep pushing people inHOA communities, and that's good
.
I mean.
They're really a positive thing.
You know HOAs and condos.
They're good at usually keepingyour property value, making
(32:42):
sure that your next doorneighbor isn't going to do
something crazy and keepingorder, and you know great
amenities and locations.
So I think there's a lot ofreally great things about condos
and HOAs.
Like I said, I'm just scarred,you know.
I think if you have that jobfor three years and you just see
the nightmare stories day afterday, it's like OK, the last
thing I want to see when I gohome is another condo.
Speaker 1 (33:04):
Yeah, I hear you.
I mean some of the complaintswe do hear, though, from people
who don't want to live in acondo or HOA, but they're saying
there's not a lot of housingstock that's outside the scope
of a mandatory association.
So I don't know.
I guess we'll see.
I want to thank you for joiningus and I'm going to keep an eye
on your career because I have afeeling that wasn't the last
(33:26):
public office you were going tohold.
I don't know, We'll see.
Speaker 2 (33:29):
We'll see, but I appreciate it.
Dawn, thanks so much for havingme on.
Speaker 1 (33:35):
Thanks.
Thanks so much for having me on.
Thanks, thank you for joiningus today.
Don't forget to follow and rateus on your favorite podcast
platform, or visittakeittotheboardcom for more
ways to connect.
Popular Podcasts
Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes present: Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial
Introducing… Aubrey O’Day Diddy’s former protege, television personality, platinum selling music artist, Danity Kane alum Aubrey O’Day joins veteran journalists Amy Robach and TJ Holmes to provide a unique perspective on the trial that has captivated the attention of the nation. Join them throughout the trial as they discuss, debate, and dissect every detail, every aspect of the proceedings. Aubrey will offer her opinions and expertise, as only she is qualified to do given her first-hand knowledge. From her days on Making the Band, as she emerged as the breakout star, the truth of the situation would be the opposite of the glitz and glamour. Listen throughout every minute of the trial, for this exclusive coverage. Amy Robach and TJ Holmes present Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial, an iHeartRadio podcast.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!