How Florida Condominium and HOA Boards Should Conduct Meetings, Shape Decisions, and Delegate Financial Authority
Strong community governance is not defined by the speed of a decision, but by the transparency and discipline of the process that produces it.
Florida condominiums and homeowners’ associations both operate within open meeting frameworks, though the statutory structures differ. Understanding where those frameworks diverge — and where the principles of deliberation, decision-making, discussion and financial delegation ultimately converge — is essential to protecting both the association and its directors.
We will first examine each statutory structure independently, then unify the discussion where the shared governance standards intersect.
Condominiums — Board Meetings Under Chapter 718
Florida condominiums operate under Florida Statutes Chapter 718, which establishes a structured transparency model for board governance.
Under §718.112(2)( c ), the board of administration must meet at least once each quarter. Meetings of the board at which a quorum is present must be open to all unit owners, except for limited statutory exceptions, including certain attorney-client privileged discussions and specified personnel matters.
Unit owners have the right to attend all board meetings and to speak on designated agenda items. Boards may adopt reasonable rules governing the frequency, duration, and manner of owner statements. To ensure meaningful participation, meeting notices and agendas must contain sufficient detail to inform owners of the subjects to be considered. Items not included on the posted agenda may not be acted upon by the board.
In addition, at least four times each year, the meeting agenda must include an opportunity for unit owners to ask questions of the board, including questions relating to reports on the status of construction or repair projects, the status of revenues and expenditures during the current fiscal year, and other issues affecting the condominium.
Adequate notice of all board meetings, which must specifically identify all agenda items, must be posted conspicuously on the condominium property at least 48 continuous hours before the meeting, except in an emergency. For associations required to maintain a website under §718.111(12), notice and the agenda must also be posted on the association’s website within the statutory time frame. If the board is voting to approve a contract at the meeting, the contract must be provided with the notice.
Written notice of a meeting at which a nonemergency special assessment or an amendment to rules regarding unit use will be considered must be mailed, delivered, or electronically transmitted (if the owner has consented to electronic notice) and posted conspicuously on the condominium property and website at least 14 days before the meeting. If the meeting concerns a proposed amendment to rules regarding unit use, the proposed rule language must be provided with the notice. Notice of any meeting at which regular or special assessments are to be considered must specifically state that assessments will be considered and provide the estimated cost and description of the purposes for such assessments.
A board meeting may be conducted in person or by video conference. If the meeting is conducted via video conference, the notice must include the hyperlink and conference telephone number and must also include the address of the physical location where unit owners may attend in person.
Any board meeting using video conferencing must be recorded and the recording maintained as an official record of the association.
Homeowners’ Associations — Board Meeting Under Chapter 720
Under Chapter 720 Under §720.303(2)(b), Florida Statutes, members of a homeowners’ association have the right to attend all meetings of the board of directors, except for meetings between the board and its attorney with respect to proposed or pending litigation, and meetings held for the purpose of discussing personnel matters. §720.303(2)(c) requires that notice of all board meetings must specifically identify all agenda items. Members have the right to speak on all designated agenda items, subject to reasonable written rules adopted by the board governing the frequency, duration, and manner of member statements, which may include the use of a sign-up sheet.
Notice of all board meetings must be posted in a conspicuous place in the community at least 48 hours in advance, except in an emergency. The notice must specifically identify all agenda items to be considered. If the association is required to maintain a website pursuant to statute, the notice must also be posted on the website within the applicable statutory time frame.
An assessment may not be levied at a board meeting unless the notice includes a statement that assessments will be considered and the nature of the assessments. Written notice of any meeting, the agenda, and any other document required for such meeting at which special assessments will be considered or at which amendments to rules regarding parcel use will be considered must be mailed, delivered, or electronically transmitted to the members and parcel owners and posted conspicuously on the property and website (or broadcast on closed-circuit cable television) not less than 14 days before the meeting.
Additionally, if at least 20 percent of the total voting interests petition the board to address a specific item of business, §720.303(2)(d) requires the board to place the item on the agenda of its next regular or special meeting, which must occur no later than 60 days after receipt of the petition. Each member has the right to speak for at least three minutes on each matter placed on the agenda by petition, provided the member complies with reasonable rules adopted by the board.
“Executive Session” — A Limited Exception
Boards sometimes attempt to address sensitive matters in what they call “Executive Session.” In Florida HOAs or condominiums, there is no broad authority to close meetings simply because the topic is uncomfortable. Closed meetings are limited to circumstances authorized by statute, such as meeting with the association attorney regarding proposed or pending litigation for the purpose of seeking or rendering legal advice, or held for the purpose of discussing personnel matters.
Operational decisions, vendor contracts, budget strategy, and assessment increases generally belong in noticed meetings open to the membership. The substance of the discussion — not the label — determines whether closure is appropriate.
Closed meetings are exceptions to openness and should be narrowly limited to the circumstances authorized by law.
Transparency, Quorum & the Difference Between Discussion and Deliberation
Confusion often arises around open meeting requirements, particularly when boards are advised that directors “cannot gather” or “cannot speak to one another” if enough members are present to constitute a quorum. That advice, while usually well intentioned, oversimplifies the statutory framework. The presence of a quorum is not itself prohibited. Florida law does not prevent directors from being in the same room, attending the same workshop, or receiving the same presentation. What the law regulates is not the gathering — it is the manner in which collective decisions are formed.
Open meeting provisions under both Florida Statutes Chapter 718 and Florida Statutes Chapter 720 apply when a quorum of directors conducts association business. For governance education purposes, it is helpful to distinguish between permissible discussion, deliberation, and formal decision-making. Boards are permitted — and expected — to gather information. Directors may receive reports from management, hear presentations from engineers or vendors, ask clarifying questions, request additional documentation, and conduct individual research. Information gathering, even when a quorum is present, is not inherently improper. Oversight is a core board responsibility. The statutes do not prohibit learning; they regulate how collective direction is shaped.
The line is crossed when discussion becomes deliberation. Deliberation, in a governance context, may be understood as the exchange of viewpoints among a quorum of directors for the purpose of influencing or forming a collective decision. The shift occurs when directors move from asking questions to expressing positions — indicating how they intend to vote, advocating for a particular option, testing arguments with one another, or signaling alignment before a properly noticed meeting. Transparency principles attach at the point where collective direction begins to form, not merely when a motion is made.
A decision, by contrast, is the formal act of the board — a motion, a second, a vote, and a recorded outcome. However, many governance disputes do not stem from the vote itself. They arise from the perception that the outcome was effectively determined before the noticed meeting occurred. If quorum-level viewpoints are exchanged and consensus forms privately — whether during an informal gathering, through email responses, or via sequential conversations — the noticed meeting risks becoming a procedural formality rather than the place where the board truly deliberates.
The practical governance standard is straightforward. Boards may gather information freely. They should shape collective positions transparently in properly noticed meetings. They should vote visibly and document clearly. The distinction is not between talking and voting; it is between learning and influencing. When directors reserve collective position-shaping for the open meeting process, they protect not only statutory compliance but also the legitimacy of their governance.
Financial Delegation
Financial administration is another area where structure prevents governance risk. Directors frequently ask whether they must approve every invoice to fulfill their fiduciary duty. The answer lies in policy. In a properly noticed meeting, the board may adopt a financial authorization policy that delegates authority to management to pay routine, budgeted operating expenses and establishes defined thresholds for board approval of larger or non-budgeted expenditures.
By approving the annual budget and delegation policy openly, the board conducts its deliberation transparently. Routine invoice payment thereafter becomes execution, not new decision making. Oversight occurs through regular review of financial statements, accounts payable reports, and bank reconciliations rather than invoice approvals.
Boards should approve systems — not light bulbs.
Conclusion
Governance discipline is not a procedural burden—it is a protection. Whether operating under Chapter 718 or Chapter 720, meeting cadence, agenda specificity, member participation rights, and limited closed-meeting exceptions exist to preserve legitimacy and reduce risk. Boards are not prohibited from gathering information or acting decisively; they are expected to do so. The discipline is ensuring that collective direction is shaped in properly noticed meetings, and that financial authority is delegated through transparent policy rather than informal consensus.
When boards deliberate openly, vote visibly, and execute through clearly adopted systems, they protect not only statutory compliance, but also the trust and stability of the communities they serve.