A Call for Federal Structural Inspection Laws in the Aftermath of the Surfside Condominium Collapse

The building collapse started when a part of an unprotected concrete slab fell in Champlain South’s parking garage. Within minutes, the east wing of the 13-story tower collapsed, killing 98 people in an unprecedented disaster in the United States. Officials and engineers said that it is unlikely that just one issue within the building brought it down by itself, but rather that the cumulative effects of the flaws in design and construction ultimately doomed the structure. Officials searched rubble for nearly 14 days before calling off the search; they had removed almost seven million pounds of concrete while using dogs, sonar, and cameras in hopes of finding survivors. The collapse was described as a “pancake collapse,” where the building floors collapsed directly on one another, leaving little to no space for someone to survive. No one had been pulled alive from the rubble for the duration of the formal survivor search. The search for survivors soon turned into a search for human remains as rescuers worked tirelessly to peel away layers of rubble. Pathologists and rescuers alike had to balance the rigors of their duties with the victims’ loved ones’ desperate need for closure. Updating the families consisted of delivering bad news of their discoveries, with bodies rarely found intact.

The collapse triggered the most significant non-hurricane-related emergency response in the history of the state of Florida. The victims reflected the area’s rich cultural diversity, and the tragedy reached an international scope as it touched members of a tight-knit Jewish community and families as far away as Argentina, Paraguay, and Colombia. The victims’ ages were as old as 92, and the youngest victim was just one year old when she perished along with the rest of her family. Many of the victims’ families spoke out following the collapse, and after the release of chilling security footage from a building nearby that showed the moment of the collapse. Some of the building’s residents expected to see their families just days before the collapse.

Many people blamed systemic issues in the condominium and cooperative housing industries in Florida and beyond. The main issues brought to the discourse were the need for reserve fund requirements for shared building repairs and the lack of laws requiring structural checks of aging buildings. This article includes an overview of building structural inspection laws in states such as New York and California, where many people live in community development–type buildings such as condominiums or cooperatives. New York City, specifically, has some of the most high-rise buildings in the world. Los Angeles, California, and New York City are the most populous cities in the United States. Some states, such as California, have strict laws regarding structural checks of buildings; however, other states need to catch up to the curve, leaving millions of people at risk, frequently in disaster-prone areas. For example, New York arguably needs more specific requirements for interior structural checks of buildings because many buildings were constructed decades ago, and historically, Florida’s structural inspection laws have not always been strictly enforced by officials. Damage to buildings can be reduced by adopting and enforcing strong building codes that help people keep their homes and businesses following a natural or manmade disaster. More robust codes would also reduce the need for public and private disaster aid and preserve the built environment.

Background/History and Aftermath of Surfside Collapse

Calls for Action to Repair Champlain Towers South Ignored

Prior to the collapse, the president of the association of the Surfside condominium complex previously wrote to residents that the building was in desperate need of repair. The letter stated that a $15 million assessment was needed because Florida law required buildings to be recertified for electrical and structural safety 40 years after construction. Following a structural report in 2018, it was noted that any surface-level issues within buildings are often indicators of extensive interior problems. Government building officials came under scrutiny because of their close involvement and reassurances that the building was in good shape, even though those same officials previously evacuated buildings with similar issues.

The ocean is a constant source of danger for beachfront buildings made from reinforced concrete, like the Champlain Towers. Akin to a steel skeleton, rebar rods run through concrete columns and slabs. Saltwater seeping through concrete can cause the steel to rust and expand, causing the concrete to start to crack and increasing the risk of structural failure.

Critical Moments Prior to the Collapse

An engineering firm’s 2018 structural report of the building revealed a systemic issue that allowed water to pool at its base. The engineering firm that was hired by the condominium board, Morabito Consultants, also found inconsistent waterproofing against saltwater of concrete slabs throughout the building. However, Morabito Consultants later released another report that gave the Surfside building a top grade on several measures, even though some repairs were still required. Local government officials claimed to have never received the troubling report. The conflicting reports were not addressed until after the collapse. The cause of the collapse remained largely unclear because the building did not present problems as a first-rate luxury high rise when it was first constructed; academics and professionals from around the country noted that the cause of the collapse was likely from multiple issues in conjunction with one another. Investigations into the structure of the building have proven difficult because it was built decades ago by people who are now deceased or by people who cannot recall the construction process.

Issues like a lack of waterproofing or too little concrete cover are common for South Florida condominiums built in the early 1980s because this was a time when building codes were laxer and engineering science less advanced. The risks of some of the choices made four decades ago during the construction of the Champlain Towers South were well known at the time, but building codes generally gave developers broad leeway. In the 1970s and 1980s, skimping on construction materials when building residential condominiums was an easy way to save money, and developers could easily hide the shortcuts they had taken. These past shortcuts taken in haste to get a building completed can lead to catastrophic domino effects decades later when a building’s interior structure fails.

Aftermath of the Collapse and the Status of Florida’s Community Building Inspection Laws

Following the collapse, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) opened an investigation to determine the cause. The mission of NIST is to promote US innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards, and technology to enhance economic security and improve quality of life. The National Construction Safety Team (NCST) Act authorizes NIST to establish teams to investigate the failure of a building that resulted in substantial loss of life or posed a significant potential for substantial loss of life.

About one week following the collapse of the Champlain Towers South in Surfside, another large condominium building seven miles away was evacuated, and officials who performed the recertification cited similar issues of water intrusion problems that plagued Champlain. Among the problems was water intrusion, which weakens a building’s structure, decreasing the load that it can internally bear. People were on high alert when checking buildings due to the Champlain collapse. Subsequently, another set of buildings in Surfside, which were 70 years old, were voluntarily evacuated following an inspection that showed 15 compromised support columns.

A task force was created in response to the Champlain collapse, aiming to examine all aspects of Florida condominium-board law and laws regarding construction, operations, and maintenance. The task force consisted of lawyers and was confirmed by the office of Florida governor Ron DeSantis; its purpose was to recommend evidence-driven changes to regulations and legally mandated disclosures involving condominium buildings. Even before the task force convened, it was noted that the policy of recertification that buildings undergo 40 years after construction was only a requirement in two Florida counties, was very hands-off, and often was not enforced.

Florida has passed a new law that is one of the strictest in the United States, requiring new condominium inspection and reserve fund requirements. This new law, formerly known as Senate Bill 4-D, was signed into law by Governor Ron DeSantis on May 26, 2022. The new law sharply decreases the time a building can stand without an inspection, from the previous 40-year recertification process to a 30-year “milestone inspection.” The law requires a twofold inspection process for added security in the inspection process, and it must be conducted in specificity by a licensed architect or engineer authorized to practice in Florida. The dual-phase inspection only reaches Phase 2 if signs of substantial structural deterioration are present, which are revealed in Phase 1, a visual examination of both habitable and nonhabitable areas of the building. The testing within Phase 2 is at the inspector’s discretion, and they are also held to reporting requirements to community associations.

Under Senate Bill 4-D, community associations will also be required to conduct structural integrity reserve studies on the funds an association must hold in case necessary repairs arise. These reserve studies must be completed every 10 years, with the first needing to be completed by a licensed engineer by December 31, 2024. The studies must be completed for almost every part of a building three stories or higher in height. Condominium associations will also be prohibited from waiving the collection of reserve funds to pay for maintenance and repairs as of December 31, 2024, a practice that had been common prior to the Surfside collapse. If an association fails to complete a structural integrity reserve study, such failure breaches an officer’s and director’s fiduciary relationship with the unit owners. Lawmakers have compared the significance of this new law to the transformational building code changes for the state that were put in place after Hurricane Andrew hit South Florida in 1992.

Within 22 hours of the collapse, a proposed class of all condominium owners in the Champlain Towers South filed the first complaint. While that first lawsuit named only the condominium association as a defendant, subsequent suits added the property manager, engineers, architects, inspectors, and the owner of the adjacent building. Over 40 cases were filed and then compiled into a single class action proceeding.

As the consolidated litigation evolved, the proposed class grew to include not only condo owners but also the families of victims. This expansion led to a settlement of approximately $1.02 billion, which includes approximately $96 million to compensate condominium unit owners for property loss and approximately $100 million for legal fees, with the remainder of the settlement amount being distributed to survivors and their families as compensation for injuries and wrongful death. Many factors likely contributed to the defendants’ willingness to settle at such a high number, including the profusion of personal and property damage, the national attention paid to the collapse, the cost of discovery, and the relatively accelerated trial schedule.

The Status of New York’s Community Building Inspection Laws

In New York State, condominiums are governed by Article 9B of the Real Property Act. It provides a framework for the formation, operation, and management of condominiums in New York and is intended to provide the basis for which the offering plan is prepared. It is the responsibility of the boards of each building to determine the building’s needs and make repairs and replacements consistent with those needs, as well as enact budgets and policies regarding the same, subject to the specific language of its governing documents.

In New York, it was noted by commentators that there is currently no law, in New York City or elsewhere in New York State, that mandates inspection or repair of the interior structural elements of any building. A common theme in many states and jurisdictions, as well as New York, is that individual building owners and cooperative apartment associations have to assume the burden and responsibility of implementing any actions necessary to ensure the continued structural stability of buildings. However, there are laws in states such as New York that require landlords or condominium associations to have sufficient reserve funds for repairs; an example of this is New York City’s Reserve Fund Law, which mandates that sponsors seeking to convert residential tenants to condominium ownership provide sufficient funds necessary for repairs, improvements, and safety items. More often than not, though, many condominium associations lack reserve funds to perform essential repairs. Champlain Towers South only had $700,000 in reserves, while the cost of necessary repairs was over $15 million. A way to remedy this issue would be to encourage condo associations to amend bylaws to be less restrictive on owners for early detection of potential structural failure.

Currently, in New York, laws primarily focus on specific building features such as boilers, cooling towers, elevators, and facades. Certain construction elements are also required, including many enforceable items in inspections by the N.Y. Fire Department. N.Y. officials increasingly assign the inspection of buildings to third parties while only charging a fee to file any new inspection reports, however. In the end, landlords and independent condominium associations are still held responsible for repairs by New York’s Multiple Dwelling Law, which can lead to collective action issues if residents in a development are on a low or fixed income.

The Status of California’s Community Building Inspection Laws

In California, many building regulations focus on protecting the state’s natural beauty and resources instead of developing large urban areas. These stringent building regulations make it very difficult to develop within California. The so-called suburban mindset is prevalent because of the severe effects of climate change, such as wildfires, land erosion, and seismic activity, all of which are considered to preserve people’s lifestyles. However, challenges arise when regulations restrict forms of beneficial housing that would relieve congestion or create affordable housing. The California Code of Regulations may worsen housing pressures in the state because it contains almost three times more restrictive terms than other codes nationally.

The Status of Illinois’s Community Building Inspection Laws

In Chicago, residents fear a building collapse similar to the Miami Surfside condominium collapse could happen because of worries about inspector corruption, shoddy building materials, and weather concerns. A cooperative effort launched in 2007 between the city’s Inspector General Office, the US Postal Inspection Service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the US Attorney’s Office resulted in the convictions of 22 people, including 16 current or former city employees. Officials were accepting bribes in exchange for pushing through certain projects in the construction and processing of buildings in the city’s buildings and zoning departments. Following the collapse in Miami, it was noted by Chicago’s Department of Buildings that Chicago has some of the most strict building codes in the country. The real cause for concern is not that strict building codes are good laws but whether or not they were enforced when a particular building was constructed. Nevertheless, the building codes of Chicago were touted to be robust in the wake of the tragedy of the Surfside collapse.

On March 13, 2019, Chicago’s former mayor, Rahm Emanuel, and the Chicago Department of Buildings introduced to Chicago City Council a major update to the Chicago Building Code to better align the city’s construction requirements with up-to-date model codes and national standards. The new code represents the first comprehensive revisions to the building code in 70 years and will reduce barriers to cost-effective construction by expanding options to design and build with a broader range of materials and technologies. The new code will improve, enhance, and spur new building projects of all sizes in neighborhoods throughout Chicago. It will further streamline the permitting process and add more flexibility and options for construction materials while maintaining many of the unique life safety features of the existing Chicago Building Code.

International Community Building Inspection Laws

England and Wales have their own sets of laws and regulations regarding the inspection of buildings; the European Union also has had similar trends throughout the years in building quality control. An increasingly noticeable trend in the European Union is that building quality control has become more privatized, and the statutes can be unbalanced. Privatization of building regulations has been increasingly desired in countries such as the Netherlands because it is believed to streamline building processes and diminish the administrative burden on all parties. Around the world, new regulations and problems emerge when a major building disaster or tragedy occurs. A significant event in England that revealed issues in building regulations was the Grenfell Tower disaster of 2017, where improper cladding material caused a fire to envelop the structure. In response to this disaster, the government reached out to local authorities to ascertain if more buildings contained the defective material. The collected data showed which buildings were in violation, requiring owners to confirm that no combustible materials were in their properties.

Building Control Boards within the United Kingdom ensure all building regulation provisions are followed. A key concern with builders in the United Kingdom is their lack of knowledge of building codes; however, reliable evidence of complaints or noncompliance is unavailable from any public source. Evidence suggests that many noncompliant cases were due to shortcomings in workmanship instead of violating the rules to preserve material or labor costs. It was noted by the results of interviews with building inspectors that the regulations are clearly codified and easily ascertainable. Other input on building inspection quality in England looked to underground drainage, site management, skills, training, and workload.

The current quality control framework of building inspections for countries in the European Union is the result of decades of traditions, government structures, regulations, and enforcement practices. Transferring one system from one country to another has proved to be difficult. Insight is needed into the specifics of a country’s regulatory systems to understand unique best practices and policy approaches. Generally, quality control systems of buildings in the European Union focus on newly built construction.

Legal Issues Regarding Current Inspection Requirements for Community Buildings

Florida Laws

The Miami-Dade County Grand Jury released a report following the Champlain Towers South collapse that investigated the policies, procedures, protocols, systems, and practices of people who design and ensure that community buildings are safe. They also investigated whether residents of community buildings effectuate timely and appropriate maintenance of their buildings to ensure they are habitable and whether officers and officials exercise appropriate oversight of all of the abovementioned duties. There were failings at every level and for everyone involved with respect to the Champlain Towers South. The main recommendations highlighted by the Grand Jury were that the 40-year recertification period for constructed buildings should be reduced, owners of buildings must conduct regular and routine maintenance, and there needs to be an advance notice to building owners of upcoming recertification. They also focused on raising the bar on the standard of qualifications for people inspecting buildings and how to further protect concrete from being exposed to saltwater.

The structural inspection team for the Champlain Towers South condominium did not do a thorough job in addressing pressing structural issues, and such issues can likely be remedied in some fashion to prevent building failures if contractor duties are clarified and warning signs are taken seriously. Florida recently passed a law allowing a virtual inspection of buildings instead of an in-person inspection. This law authorizes inspectors to perform building code inspections based on pictures from contractors or having live videoconferences with them in the building. The COVID-19 pandemic caused a backlog of inspection requests, and legislators hope to streamline the inspection process to help building officials catch up. The purpose of electronic inspection requests and virtual inspections is to promote a more efficient process for obtaining inspections and building permits. The new law has broad applications to buildings in Florida, but the threshold does not extend to structural inspections of buildings. Implementation of the law can vary by jurisdiction, so builders and contractors need to be cognizant of evolving laws. New liability questions also can arise, further adding to difficulties in different bodies of law. However, an interesting point to note, which this piece will not delve deeper into because of the scope, is that artificial intelligence may be able to detect and alert people when concrete is showing signs of deterioration, thus preventing problems with early detection.

New York Laws

In New York, similar to the issues of the Champlain Towers South, reserve requirements are implemented. Sponsors in New York City seeking to convert a rental building into a condominium or a co-op are required to establish a fund, “The Reserve Fund,” in order to make appropriate repairs and improvements for the health and safety of residents. The New York reserve fund law requires that reserves be at least three percent of the “total price” of the complex, or the sum of all the units offered for sale at the last price offered to existing tenants in occupancy before the condominium/co-op offering plan. A recent case, Board of Managers of 150 E. 72nd St. Condo. v Vitruvius Estates, examined vital issues with New York’s reserve fund law that could raise valuable considerations for state reserve fund laws internationally. The Supreme Court of New York and the First Department of New York reached differing opinions on the issue of reserve funds, but ultimately the total price to be used when calculating the fund would be lower for public policy considerations of existing tenants. After Vitruvius, a sponsor can retroactively lower the prices offered to the tenants in occupancy and lower its reserve funding obligations, thus convoluting a straightforward law. The current reserve fund law in New York leaves many unanswered questions about what a capital repair requirement is, how the funds should be used, on what repairs, and if commercial units are included. A problem arises when new residents move in, or a new controlling association for the condominium/co-op takes the reigns and unwittingly retains a plan that may have unintended financial consequences. Collective action issues are sure to result due to the need for professional intervention in such associations, but no action is taken to retain such counsel. An already implemented plan may comply with the law but be realistically imprudent.

In New York, the case of Fitzgerald v. 667 Hotel Corp. illustrates how liabilities played out when a building inspection in New York City yielded little meaningful change in building codes or proper recommendations for repairs. The City of New York and the 667 Hotel Corporation were aware of numerous deficiencies in a building over the years but ultimately failed to act upon them, leading to four people being killed, many injured, and several businesses incurring substantial property damage. However, once the case reached the Court of Appeals, New York’s highest court, it was held that liability may not be imposed on a municipality in the absence of a duty to exercise care for the benefit of particular individuals. Thus, New York City escaped liability for failure to enforce a statute or regulation, even though the building inspectors were aware of glaring structural deficiencies. This case is an early illustration of the lack of controls implemented at the New York State level, which could save lives even after similar events transpired at the Champlain Towers South decades later.

California Laws

In California, no government agency is required to inspect the structural integrity of aging infrastructure to ensure it is safe. Once a certificate of occupancy is issued, the final step in the building process, the government steps away almost entirely. Ensuring that residential complexes are safe is left to building owners and residents. The price of such maintenance can reach upwards of $100,000, which has proved to be shocking to residents. However, some city inspectors visit buildings in cities such as Irvine, California, to spot glaring issues that must be swiftly remedied. Nevertheless, much more needs to be done in the wake of the Champlain Towers South collapse.

An issue is that residential buildings in California must comply with state building regulations, but the rest is up to the state’s 58 county planning departments and 480 cities. This system has the potential to become problematic because so many cities and counties would encounter friction in an attempt to streamline all of their building inspection laws.

Illinois Laws

The State of Illinois has not adopted statewide building codes. The Illinois Condominium Property Act does not contain any provision requiring regular or periodic inspections of a condominium building of any size. Instead, local government units such as cities and counties can adopt codes of their choice. The best and most accurate answers to building code questions must be answered by city, village, or county code officials. Regulation of structural and aesthetic conditions of a building falls to individual municipalities and is accomplished through local building codes and other ordinances.

Many municipalities in Illinois have a department that periodically inspects the exterior of buildings. Those inspections usually identify and address dangerous conditions but may include aesthetic issues like painting. Some municipalities will also inspect interior common areas in multifamily residential buildings. Those inspections are usually to identify and address life safety issues, as well as any other hazardous conditions.

Some municipalities in Illinois require regular inspections of buildings or specific aspects of them. The City of Chicago has what is commonly referred to as the Chicago Façade Ordinance. That ordinance mandates that owners of high-rise buildings over 80 feet tall prepare a written condition assessment report regarding the exterior of the building and file that report with the City. In other words, the City requires building owners to inspect the safety of the façades of their buildings regularly.

State law in Illinois requires condominium associations to maintain reasonable reserves for building repairs and sets forth factors for association boards to consider when determining what constitutes reasonable reserves. Hundreds of condo associations in Chicago have become insolvent, leading them to be turned into apartment buildings.

Laws in the European Union

In the European Union, the quality of most building construction is not controlled or only partly controlled. The process to determine if a building is compliant is usually only monitored in the beginning for an initial building permit. This is problematic because the current regulatory systems are not adequately geared toward nonprofessionals. Statutory models in all European Union countries focus on controlling structural and fire safety issues in complex buildings, meaning that less attention is paid to the control of simpler construction, such as residential homes. Concrete laws requiring builders to ensure structurally sound construction are yet to be made in most European countries, and this causes friction with the reality that the building sector in Europe usually complains that building regulations put a heavy administrative and financial burden on them.

Proposed Solution to Improve Inspection Requirements for Community Buildings

Considerations for Congress

In light of the issues noted above, congressional action may be necessary to protect residents living in condominium or similar community housing settings in the United States. Five points that should be considered for a congressional bill are (1) strengthening building regulations and mandating strict enforcement of the same, (2) requiring maintenance of sufficient reserve funds, (3) ensuring that reserve studies are conducted at regular intervals by licensed professionals, (4) compelling condominium associations to publicize reserve studies, and (5) mandating condominium associations to consider climate change–related infrastructure challenges. General recommendations resulting from studies of building inspections within the European Union involve ensuring that (1) the building is safe for its users and building maintenance staff, (2) the building is being properly maintained, (3) essential risk factors are evaluated during the use of the building, and 4) relevant improvement measures are carried out per the results of technical surveys.

Developers should maintain certain requirements at the turnover of a building to residents or before residents move in. Stringent inspections must take place soon after the construction of a new building and at periodic intervals. Such inspections should be done by licensed professionals in their field and reported to the local jurisdiction immediately.

Congress needs to examine, understand, and acknowledge how roles in community association governance affect adequate funding of reserves for condominium associations. Owners, board members, community managers, and consulting professionals can positively influence the outcome of discussions regarding funding reserves adequately. Owners need to become educated about funding for future repairs. Community association boards of directors need to be committed to upholding certain duties, one of which is to make prudent, business-like decisions in the association’s financial management. Community managers must direct boards toward best practices in the industry and educate them on the possible consequences of their actions or inactions.

Implementation by Congress

Congress has the power to take heed of the recommendations above, even those that appear in trends within jurisdictions such as the European Union. A federal law would be ideal for addressing issues and ensuring wide adoption by all states because each state would be bound to it. Once a new law is passed, states would be bound to comply once it is codified in the Code of Federal Regulations and enforced by an administrative agency.

Congressional Action in Progress

Two bills have been introduced into Congress that address and respond to some problems that plagued the Champlain Towers South. The two bills are Securing Access to Financing for Exterior Repairs (SAFER) in Condos Act of 2022 and Rapid Financing for Critical Condo Repairs Act of 2022. SAFER would allow condo owners to obtain long-term loans to finance their share of special assessments for building repairs. The Rapid Financing for Critical Condo Repairs Act would allow community associations to obtain 30-year Federal Housing Administration–insured loans to finance critical building repairs, reducing the need for special assessments to fund those expenses. As currently proposed, the loans could be used for the “rehabilitation, alteration, repair, improvement or replacement” of an association’s common systems, infrastructure, and facilities.

Additionally, in response to the collapse, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac issued additional requirements that lenders must meet to make mortgage loans eligible for sale to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac on the secondary market. The new requirements address deferred maintenance, structural integrity, and special assessments for condominium associations. These requirements are in addition to existing guidelines, not a replacement of current requirements. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac also issued bulletins requiring banks counting on the Federal National Mortgage Association and Freddie Mac insurance to look for “Deferred Maintenance” in the buildings where the mortgaged unit is located. The results affect individual borrowers and underlying loans to co-op and condo associations.

Recommendations for a New or Amended Congressional Bill

The SAFER Act and Rapid Financing for Critical Condo Repairs Act of 2022 are good starts to ensure community associations have access to financing for repairs. However, Congress needs to act swiftly so that buildings nationwide are checked by qualified engineers (as required under Senate Bill 4-D in Florida). The national average of the cost for a structural engineer is a small cost to a major city government with numerous condominiums or cooperatives. The revenue of major cities such as Miami, New York City, and Los Angeles reaches heights of millions, even billions, of dollars, so hiring a qualified engineer to follow the steps and trends prescribed by Florida’s Senate Bill 4-D and the European Union will allow for each state to have safe community developments to live in. After all, over 70 million people live in community associations in the United States, and this trend will likely continue to grow. The new law also should include a requirement to report to the government when and how often the inspections take place, which will be efficient to ensure that all states are following the law, and efficiency in law is something that Congress is capable of enacting. All states nationwide should have to follow this law and report their findings, and this should be feasible for any city because most have budgets of hundreds of millions of dollars.

The SAFER Act only amends a portion of the Section 203(k) Rehabilitation Mortgage Insurance and Title I Property Improvement Loan Programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development to authorize such loans to be made to low-income families residing in condominium units to cover the costs of special assessments imposed for repair or replacement of common areas, systems, and features, and for other purposes. Adequate access to loans for improvements for condominium associations nationwide is the bill’s primary goal. However, the increase in loan access only raises it from $25,000 to $55,000, and the repairs to the Champlain Towers South and other condominiums can reach well into the hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars. Heightened access to these types of loans does not fix the problem that many condominiums in the nation need more adequate reserves or skirt around the requirements to keep adequate reserves. This leads to the same issues that plagued the Champlain Tower South and is not an appropriate response to the scope of the issue nationally.

The Rapid Financing for Critical Condo Repairs Act of 2022 does more for condominium associations to ensure they have finances for lifesaving construction. The bill authorizes the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to insure loans made to condominium associations to finance the repair or replacement of common areas, systems, and features for other purposes. Some portions of the bill are worth noting and should be promoted by Congress in another comprehensive statute. One such portion purports that any such mortgage to a condominium association is secured by future lien-based mandatory unit-owner payments required pursuant to state statute, a recorded declaration of covenants, or lawful rule, by-law, or guideline adopted by the governing body of the condominium project, real property, or a combination thereof. This would give power to states to create a law and rule that work to their specific needs and wants for their community association environment without preempting or contradicting a federal mandate passed by Congress. However, the states have already shown themselves to be ill-equipped to handle such problems themselves, and a solution at the federal level is needed in this realm that has traditionally only been within the purview of the states.

This article proposes that Section 718.112(g) of Senate Bill 4-D passed by Florida be amended. That section, which is called “Structural integrity reserve study,” reads in pertinent part as follows: “An association must have a structural integrity reserve study completed at least every ten years after the condominium’s creation for each building on the condominium property that is three stories or higher in height. . . .” This article proposes that the structural integrity reserve study be completed every five years instead of 10 years. This is a good starting place for Congress to implement in a bill. Requiring all buildings to perform a structural reserve study and having them do so are essential so that buildings have the funding to make repairs. However, a new bill also must include stringent requirements for community buildings to examine the structural integrity of their buildings.

A condominium or community association would not be faced with a heavy burden by being required to perform such a study every five years. The study can be done virtually and performed by a licensed architect or engineer or viewed by someone qualified remotely or after footage is captured. After such time, the professional may visit the site in person should they believe it needs a closer physical inspection. The virtual inspection combined with the as-needed in-person physical inspection of the structural integrity of a building will significantly streamline the process. It will not be such a burden to community buildings and has the power to save lives.

If, after such physical inspection, an even closer look via destructive or nondestructive means into the integrity of the building is needed, then the inspection may be as extensive or as limited as necessary to fully assess areas of structural distress in order to confirm that the building is structurally sound and safe for its intended use and to recommend a program for thoroughly assessing and repairing distressed and damaged portions of the building.

The virtual inspection, which can lead to an in-person inspection and then finally an intrusive inspection of a building, if needed, is the progression that must be implemented nationally. Such a technique of checking on buildings would allow people to gain knowledge of issues in particular buildings. It would only sometimes require in-person or invasive means of examining a building’s structure.

The results of such inspections must culminate for this congressional bill to effectively oversee all condominiums and community association buildings in the United States. The bill should include a provision that reports of virtual, in-person, and invasive inspections be sent to the US Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD). HUD can collect such data and then determine the type and level of enforcement needed on buildings that are not compliant with their inspections or repairs. HUD’s programs aim to increase safe and affordable rental options, reduce chronic homelessness, fight housing discrimination by ensuring equal opportunity in the rental and purchase markets, and support vulnerable populations. The agency is also responsible for national policy and programs addressing America’s housing needs, improving and developing the nation’s communities, and enforcing fair housing laws. The department could enforce the new bill’s structural inspections and clarify the processes for which community associations may use them. Creating these processes and giving the information to HUD will yield the results Americans need to live safely in aging buildings across the country.

Simply amending access to finances or increasing reserve requirements alone will not save lives. Although inspection requirements in a new congressional bill may be burdensome to administrative institutions that will be in charge of carrying out such plans, as remarked in the European Union, the necessity of saving lives from careless builders that cut corners makes it all worthwhile. These additions would also address the laws of states such as New York and Illinois that primarily only call for exterior building inspections and aid in remedying the many jurisdictions of California that may implement differing or conflicting laws for buildings.

Conclusion

The Surfside Champlain Towers South collapse is something that should never be allowed to happen again. However, it usually takes a tragedy to get the government to act on an issue that was suppressed for many years. It would benefit the nation and countries internationally to put many minds together on this issue for an efficient resolution. The internal structural inspection process that this article proposes should be of paramount concern to every community that has condominiums or cooperative-type buildings. A new or amended bill by Congress that mandates all community association buildings to start with a virtual inspection every five years and then potentially move on to an in-person and intrusive look at structures will save lives. Even if readers of this article do not agree with this proposed solution or the agency that should amalgamate the data, all should agree that more oversight and processes are needed at the federal level because the states have proven to be unable to handle the issue on their own. Policymakers must keep working to ensure that associations have time to meet the proposed changes and that new processes are practically workable for associations while making sure they are fiscally sound and physically safe.