This page is current through the 2026 regular session. Unlike Chapters 718, 719, 720 and 723, which saw no governance amendment in 2026, the Florida Fair Housing Act did change: Chapter 2026-179 modernized its terminology and waived sovereign immunity. The rules a board actually applies day to day, on assistance animals, screening and age-restricted communities, did not change. What follows runs newest first.
2026: Chapter 2026-179 changed the words, and one thing more
CS/HB 1389, Chapter 2026-179, was approved on June 26, 2026 and took effect July 1, 2026. It is primarily an affordable housing act, amending §§ 125.01055, 166.04151, 196.1978 and 420.615. It also amended three sections of the Florida Fair Housing Act: § 760.22, § 760.26 and § 760.35.
Two changes matter. First, the term "handicap" was replaced with "disability" throughout. Section 760.22 now defines disability as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a record of such an impairment, or being regarded as having one, and includes a developmental disability as defined in § 393.063. The substantive test did not change. The vocabulary did, and every association policy, application form and violation letter that still says "handicap" is now using the language of a superseded statute.
Second, § 760.35 now provides that in accordance with s. 13, Art. X of the State Constitution, the state, for itself and its agencies or political subdivisions, waives sovereign immunity for a cause of action based upon the application of that section. For a private association that waiver changes nothing directly. It matters where a community is entangled with a governmental body, for example a community development district, a municipal recreation lease, or a public housing authority that owns units in the community.
What the 2026 change does not do
Say this plainly to the board, because the opposite assumption causes trouble. Chapter 2026-179 did not change what an association may ask an applicant, did not change the assistance animal rules in § 760.27, did not change the housing for older persons exemption in § 760.29, and did not change anything in Chapter 718, 719, 720 or 723.
It also did not change federal law. The Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 and following, and HUD's implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. part 100 operate independently of the Florida act. An association that complies with the state statute and ignores the federal one has solved half the problem. Where the two differ, the more protective rule governs the association's conduct.
The reasonable accommodation and reasonable modification framework is federal at its core and is not going to be found by reading Chapter 720. Our guide to enforcement and fair housing covers how the two interact when a rule the board wants to enforce collides with an accommodation request.
Assistance animals: what § 760.27 lets you ask
Section 760.27 was created by Chapter 2020-76 and has not been amended since. It is the working rule for the most common accommodation request an association sees. It defines an emotional support animal as an animal that does not require training to do work, perform tasks, provide assistance, or provide therapeutic emotional support by virtue of its presence which alleviates one or more identified symptoms or effects of a person's disability.
Where the disability is not readily apparent, the housing provider may request reliable information that reasonably supports that the person has a disability, and, where the disability-related need for the animal is not readily apparent, information reasonably supporting that need. Supporting information is reliable when it comes from a health care practitioner or other source with personal knowledge of the person's disability, acting within the scope of the person's practice, and the statute reaches practitioners licensed in other states who have provided in-person care at least once.
Acceptable sources include a determination of disability from a federal, state or local government agency, receipt of disability benefits or services, and documentation from a health care practitioner or a similarly reliable third party who is not an internet registration service.
What § 760.27 does not let you ask
- You may not request information about the diagnosis or severity of the disability, or medical records relating to it.
- You may not require a specific form, a notarized statement, or any particular format as the only acceptable proof.
- You may not rely on, or require, a registration or certificate purchased from an internet-based animal registration site as the sole basis for granting or denying the request.
- Where the disability is readily apparent, you may not ask for supporting information at all.
- You may not charge a pet fee, pet deposit or pet rent for an approved assistance animal, because the animal is an accommodation and not a pet.
The last point is the one that generates liability, and it does not come from § 760.27. It comes from the federal framework, which treats a fee for an accommodation as a denial of the accommodation. An association whose rules impose a uniform pet deposit should have an express carve-out written into the rule rather than relying on the board to remember.
The other recurring error is timing. The statute does not give the association a deadline, but a request that sits unanswered for months functions as a denial, and it is the fact pattern that turns a routine request into a complaint to the Florida Commission on Human Relations or HUD. Decide, in writing, on the record, with a stated reason. Our guide to pet and animal restrictions covers how to run the request without stepping on the prohibitions.
§ 817.265: the criminal statute, and how not to use it
Section 817.265, also created by Chapter 2020-76, provides that a person who falsifies information or written documentation, or knowingly provides fraudulent information or written documentation, for an emotional support animal under § 760.27 commits a misdemeanor of the second degree. Within 6 months after conviction, the person must perform 30 hours of community service for an organization that serves persons with disabilities, or another organization the court finds appropriate.
Boards like this section more than they should. It is enforced by the state through a criminal prosecution, not by the association through a fine or a suspension. Threatening an owner with § 817.265 in a violation letter is a poor idea: it converts a documentation dispute into an accusation of a crime, and it is the sort of letter that appears as an exhibit in a retaliation claim.
The productive use of the section is narrow and indirect. Where the association has reason to doubt the documentation, the lawful response is to ask, within the limits of § 760.27, for reliable supporting information from a source with personal knowledge, and to document the response. If the documentation is a purchased internet certificate, the statute already tells you that you need not treat it as the sole proof.
Housing for older persons: § 760.29(4) and a registration that does not exist
Section 760.29(4) carries the state's housing for older persons exemption, which tracks the federal Housing for Older Persons Act. For the 55 and older exemption, at least 80 percent of the occupied units must be occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or older, the community must publish and adhere to policies and procedures demonstrating the intent to be housing for older persons, and it must comply with HUD rules under 24 C.F.R. part 100 for verification of occupancy, which provide for verification by reliable surveys and affidavits.
Here is the point to state plainly. Section 760.29(4) contains no requirement that the community register with the Florida Commission on Human Relations. Older checklists, management company forms and seminar handouts say otherwise, and some communities have paid for a filing that the statute does not require. If your files show an expired registration and someone is worried about it, read the section before paying anyone to renew it.
What the statute does require is maintenance. The 80 percent test is measured against occupied units and it moves as units turn over. Verification is not a one-time exercise; it is a survey the community must be able to produce, with affidavits, if the exemption is challenged. Our page on fair housing legislation tracks the session-by-session picture, and our guide on screening applicants lawfully covers the intake side.
HUD's disparate impact rule: proposed is not final
HUD's discriminatory effects regulation, 24 C.F.R. § 100.500, is the rule that allows a policy that is neutral on its face to be challenged because of its effect. It reaches association rules in the ordinary course: occupancy limits, leasing restrictions, criminal background screening criteria, guest policies.
On January 14, 2026, HUD published a proposed rule, docket FR-6540-P-01, RIN 2529-AB09, proposing to remove and reserve subpart G of 24 C.F.R. part 100, which consists of § 100.500, and to delete the second sentence of § 100.5(b). The comment period closed February 13, 2026. On August 10, 2026, HUD published a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking, docket FR-6540-P-02, addressing its Title VI regulations in 24 C.F.R. part 1 and continuing the same effort. The comment period on the supplemental proposal closes October 9, 2026.
State the consequence clearly to your board: a proposed rule is not a final rule. Nothing has been removed. Section 100.500 remains in force, disparate impact liability under the Fair Housing Act continues to be recognized by the courts independently of the regulation, and the Supreme Court's decision in Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project is not affected by a HUD rulemaking.
A board should not relax a screening policy, an occupancy limit or a leasing rule on the strength of a proposed rule. If the rule is eventually finalized, the analysis will change at the margins and litigation over the final rule is near certain. Until then, the correct posture is the one you had in 2025: apply rules consistently, keep the records that show consistency, and have counsel look at any criterion that screens out a protected class in practice.
What has not changed at all
The negatives are worth stating because they are what a board can rely on.
- Section 760.27 has not been amended since it was created in 2020.
- Section 817.265 has not been amended since it was created in 2020.
- Section 760.29(4) has not been amended since 2020 and still contains no Commission registration requirement.
- No 2026 bill amended Chapters 718, 719, 720 or 723 on screening, occupancy or leasing.
- 24 C.F.R. § 100.500 is still in force.
So the compliance work out of the 2026 session is a vocabulary change and a review of where your community touches a governmental body. Everything else on this page is a reminder that the rules boards most often break are five and six years old, not new.
Frequently Asked Questions About Fair Housing Updates
Do we have to change our documents because of the 2026 amendment?
You do not have to amend the declaration. You should update forms, rules, policies and letter templates that use the word "handicap," because § 760.22 now uses "disability." The legal test did not change, so a document using the old word is not void. It is simply out of date, and that is an easy thing to fix without a vote.
Can we require our own form for an assistance animal request?
You may offer a form, but you may not require it as the only acceptable proof. Section 760.27 prohibits requiring a specific form or notarized statement. You may request reliable information supporting the disability where it is not readily apparent, and supporting the disability-related need for the animal, from a source with personal knowledge acting within the scope of practice.
Can we charge a deposit for an emotional support animal?
No. An approved assistance animal is an accommodation, not a pet, and charging a pet fee, deposit or rent for it operates as a denial of the accommodation under the federal framework. Write the exception into the rule itself rather than relying on the board to remember it, and keep the approval documentation with the unit file.
Does our 55-and-older community have to register with the state?
Section 760.29(4) contains no registration requirement with the Florida Commission on Human Relations. What it requires is that at least 80 percent of occupied units have an occupant 55 or older, that the community publish and adhere to policies showing the intent to be housing for older persons, and that it verify occupancy under HUD's rules by reliable surveys and affidavits.
HUD is getting rid of disparate impact. Can we tighten our screening criteria?
No. HUD proposed to remove its disparate impact rule in January 2026 and published a supplemental proposal in August 2026 with comments closing October 9, 2026. Both are proposed rules. 24 C.F.R. § 100.500 is still in force, and courts recognize disparate impact liability under the Fair Housing Act independently of the regulation. Do not change practice on a proposal.
An owner gave us an internet registration certificate for a dog. Is that enough?
Section 760.27 says you may not rely on an internet-based registration as the sole basis for granting the request, and equally it is not automatically a basis for denial. Ask, within the limits of the statute, for reliable supporting information from a source with personal knowledge of the disability. Decide in writing and give a reason. Do not threaten the owner with § 817.265.
Contact Hamilton Mikes
Hamilton Mikes advises condominium, cooperative, HOA and mobile home community boards in Southwest Florida on assistance animal requests, accommodation and modification decisions, screening criteria and age-restricted community compliance, and defends associations in Commission and HUD complaints. Call 239-594-7227 or visit our Fair Housing page.
Statutes and authorities referenced
- § 760.22, Fla. Stat. (Fair Housing Act definitions; "disability" as amended by Ch. 2026-179)
- § 760.26, Fla. Stat. (prohibited discrimination in land use decisions, as amended by Ch. 2026-179)
- § 760.27, Fla. Stat. (assistance animals; what a housing provider may and may not request)
- § 760.29(4), Fla. Stat. (housing for older persons; 80 percent and 55 years; HUD verification rules)
- § 760.35, Fla. Stat. (civil actions; sovereign immunity waiver added by Ch. 2026-179)
- § 817.265, Fla. Stat. (false or fraudulent emotional support animal documentation; second degree misdemeanor; 30 hours community service)
- § 393.063, Fla. Stat. (developmental disability, referenced in § 760.22)
- 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq. (federal Fair Housing Act)
- 24 C.F.R. part 100, including § 100.5(b) and § 100.500 (discriminatory effects standard)
- Session laws: Ch. 2020-76; Ch. 2020-153; Ch. 2026-179 (CS/HB 1389, effective July 1, 2026)
- HUD rulemaking: 91 Fed. Reg., docket FR-6540-P-01 (proposed rule, Jan. 14, 2026); docket FR-6540-P-02 (supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking, Aug. 10, 2026); RIN 2529-AB09