Florida enables recording of HOA meetings:

FLORIDA STATUTE 718.112(2)(C) states: Board of administration meetings.—Meetings of the board of administration at which a quorum of the members is present are open to all unit owners. Members of the board of administration may use e-mail as a means of communication but may not cast a vote on an association matter via e-mail. A unit owner may tape record or videotape the meetings. The right to attend such meetings includes the right to speak at such meetings with reference to all designated agenda items. The division shall adopt reasonable rules governing the tape recording and videotaping of the meeting. The association may adopt written reasonable rules governing the frequency, duration, and manner of unit owner statements.

If the meeting is done through the phone, to avoid problems caused by COVID-19. Does recording over the phone create a conflict with Florida wire-tapping laws?

934.03 Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited.

Because Florida requires all parties to consent, if any party did not consent then this would veto the right of other owners to record.

Which statute would take precedent and why? Ideally there would be relevant cases to provide precedent.


There is no provision in Florida law that states that by becoming a member of an HOA you have consented to anything regarding recording. What is dispositive in this case is standard in all-party consent states, that a person cannot veto open recording. If the person does not participate in the communication, they are not a party. If recording is announced and obvious, then they have no reasonable expectation of privacy. Smiley v. Florida summarizes the legal situation.

Not all oral communications recorded without prior consentar subject to exclusion under the wiretap law. “The statute protects only those ‘oral communications’ uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation of privacy under circumstances reasonably justifying such an expectation.” State v. Inciarrano, 473 So. 2d 1272

This is because Fla. Stat. 930.02 says that

“Oral communication” means any oral communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation and does not mean any public oral communication uttered at a public meeting or any electronic communication.

This is a very standard quirk of these laws, that the "reasonable expectation of privacy" condition is encoded via the definition of the communication, and not as an exception to the general law.

| improve this answer | |

All parties have consented

By becoming members of the HOA they agreed that meetings would be recorded.

That said, to avoid future dispute, it’s probably best that the meeting be reminded of this and that a single recording be made and distributed as per the “reasonable rules” clause.

| improve this answer | |
  • Thanks for the response. Is there any case law to support your good arguement? I would appreciate a link to a reference that indicates a single recording be made and distributed as per the “reasonable rules” clause. – 411 May 31 at 18:24

Although I think the other answer provided may be correct, given the general understanding of HOA meetings being "in-person" and the language of the law as you've pasted it in your question, I certainly wouldn't risk doing the recording based on that explanation.

That said, all is not lost for the would-be recorder of the meeting... in fact, the law you linked to contains your answer!

(h) It shall not be unlawful under this section and ss. 934.04-934.09 for any person:

1. To intercept or access an electronic communication made through an electronic communication system that is configured so that such electronic communication is readily accessible to the general public.

| improve this answer | |
  • Phone calls are not "readily accessible to the general public." – Just a guy Jul 1 at 20:52
  • @Justaguy Of course they are if the information is provided publicly, as it is. – A.fm. Jul 1 at 20:53
  • The information is not "provided publicly" if it is only available to members of the HOA. "General public" means, "anyone." not just the members of the HOA. – Just a guy Jul 1 at 20:55
  • An "electronic communication" that "is readily accessible to the general public" means communications over open channels, such as police or fire radios. – Just a guy Jul 1 at 21:02
  • Feel free to substantiate your statements and submit an answer containing such substantiation. – A.fm. Jul 1 at 21:06

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.