Turmoil at Brickell condo complex over money and power

A group of unit owners at a two-tower condo on Brickell Avenue in Miami voted to oust their association president in late November, as they were fed up with a series of his and the board’s actions that included enacting a $21 million special assessment and eliminating electronic voting.

But Jacob Kassel, the board president who was ousted with zero votes, has held onto power.

Unit owners at 1060 Brickell late to make payments on increased dues are being threatened with foreclosure. A group of unit owners who say they have spent more than $500,000 on attorneys fees since late last year allege mismanagement and corruption under Kassel’s leadership.

They say the special assessment has resulted in nonstop construction that’s unwarranted for a property that was completed in 2008. The two-tower, 45-story complex at 1060 Brickell Avenue has 592 units, 16 of which are commercial units.

A messy legal battle has ensued — and the group of owners just notched a big win in their fight.

Earlier this year, unit owner James Duddey served the association with 304 valid recall ballots — by state law, 289 are needed to recall a director. An arbitrator found that 296 valid recall ballots were submitted.

On Tuesday, the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation issued a final order in Duddey’s petition, certifying the recall effort. The order, obtained by The Real Deal, determined that the current board must be removed and that the board turn over all records and association property, including check books, within 10 business days.

Unit owners Dorinda Spahr, Jermaine Jones and Javier Noriega are appointed to the board effective immediately. But the association can still appeal in the form of a trial de novo complaint, filed within 30 days.

The lawsuits

A lawsuit filed by Spahr and other unit owners in January alleged the condo association canceled the November election “on the incorrect and improper stated basis that there were an insufficient number of candidates to hold an election.”

Spahr, who was initially on the ballot, was removed because the association said she was delinquent in the payment of a monetary obligation due to the association as of the deadline, according to the lawsuit she, Duddey and Valeska Nuñez filed against the association. The complaint points to state law that says a person will be disqualified if they’re delinquent in the payment of any assessment, not a monetary obligation.

Spahr was late to pay a charge related to the use of common space storage, for which owners don’t receive invoices, court filings say.

An election was not held because the association disqualified the three candidates, so the existing board remained in power. In a separate arbitration petition filed with the state, Jones and Noriega allege they were improperly excluded from the ballot last year.

Unit owners instead held their own election, as previously scheduled on Nov. 30, with two volunteers from Florida’s Department of Business and Professional Regulation supervising it. More than 100 owners attended the meeting and more than 200 voted. Though the election was not recognized as valid, Spahr won with 192 votes. Pablo Lignarolo also received 192 votes to become vice president, and David Treiger received 179 votes to become treasurer. Lignarolo and Treiger were both already on the board.

Spahr, Duddey and Nuñez are suing with the financial support and consensus of about 180 unit owners, who represent about a third of the ownership at the two-tower development, according to the complaint.

“You have a board that’s sitting there that was not elected, that improperly disqualified people that should have been given a chance to be elected, holding over spending a $21 million assessment,” said Ariella Gutman, an attorney at Haber Law who is representing Spahr, Duddey and Nuñez, during a hearing earlier this year, court records show. Gutman was arguing that the assessment should be paused.

The special assessment

In a separate lawsuit, Jessica Bergman and Antonio Sevillano, a married couple, sued the condo association in December. Their class action complaint, amended in January, alleged that the board’s passage of the special assessment violated Florida law by failing to provide a description of the special assessment and by failing to allow unit owners to vote on it.

Bergman and Sevillano alleged that the board’s 2-1 vote on the assessment also violated the property’s condo declaration.

The assessment, as noticed in late October, includes:

$7.7 million for facade restoration of Tower II
$3.5 million for repair and restoration of the parking garage and basement
$2.5 million for general conditions
$1.7 million for repairs and restoration of the rotunda

The cost per unit owner comes out to an average of more than $35,000, though that varies based on the condo size or number of units owned by one entity or person.

Owners told TRD they have not seen a master plan for the work and feel their buildings are being torn apart without reason. Unit owners’ concerns include that the board didn’t inform them with enough time about the assessment, that the Structural Integrity Reserve Study did not mention “critical conditions,” that the engineering representative was not a licensed engineer, and overall frustration that the board wouldn’t respond to questions raised during the meeting, according to a copy of the meeting minutes, included in Bergman and Sevillano’s complaint.

The condo association’s attorney, Marc Halpern, said it is the board’s fiduciary duty to maintain the property and make necessary repairs. “While the reports did not use the term critical, it is the Board’s responsibility to address issues before they become critical,” the meeting minutes say. “[Halpern] emphasized that delaying repairs would not be in the association’s best interest.”

Kassel, a former real estate agent, told TRD last week that his priority is ensuring the property is safe.

“When you live in a condominium, you have the responsibility of everything being maintained 100 percent — versus when you live in a house and the roof caves in, you have that decision whether or not you want to maintain the roof or other [elements],” Kassel said. “We’re not going to allow another Champlain Towers collapse to happen in a building I live in or that I’m responsible for.”

The 2021 tragedy, which killed 98 people, led to condo safety law reform that forces condo associations of older buildings to fully fund their financial reserves and maintain and repair their properties.

But some unit owners disagree with Kassel’s approach and question his motives.

“Jacob Kassel took a catastrophic event and created an opportunity,” said one owner, referring to the collapse of Champlain Towers South in Surfside four years ago.

Recent amendments signed into law extend the deadline for condo and townhouse buildings of at least 30 years old and three stories tall to complete their structural integrity reserve studies (SIRS) by the end of this year. Associations are also required to begin to fully fund their financial reserves in their budgets beginning this year, based on their SIRS. Milestone inspections are also required once buildings turn 30 years old and every 10 years after.

House Bill 913 also cracks down on conflicts of interest. Licensed architects or engineers who bid on milestone inspection work are required to disclose in writing their intent to bid on future work, which may be recommended by the milestone inspection. Contractors or design professionals who bid to complete work tied to the milestone inspection can’t have an interest in the company providing the milestone inspection or be related by blood or marriage to the person or entity completing the inspection.

At 1060 Brickell, a 17-year-old development, owners are also frustrated with the speed of the process, especially late last year during the holiday season when many were traveling, and the requirement that they pay 25 percent of their share of the assessment upfront. Even though DBPR, the state agency that regulates condo associations, was present at the unit owners’ election in November, it was not recognized as a valid election.

Though the meetings are now being held on Zoom, they previously unraveled into name calling and near fights between owners and board members, according to video recordings posted on X.

Alleged intimidation tactics

Kassel has a litigious history.

More than a decade ago, in 2011, the Bentley Bay Condominium Association sued Kassel, who was a resident at the time. Bentley Bay alleged that Kassel hassled, intimidated, solicited and threatened unit owners, residents, employees, board members and vendors. The complaint listed well over a dozen examples of such alleged behavior between 2006 and 2011. A temporary injunctive order was filed against Kassel in 2012, effectively banning him from the property at 520 and 540 West Avenue in Miami Beach.

More recently, Kassel has been tied up in litigation against Tremble Brickell, a commercial tenant at 1060 Brickell. In March 2023, Kassel sued Tremble, a local chain of Pilates fitness studios, for $8,000 in damages in small claims court.

Kassel alleged that Tremble’s “excessive loud music” was depriving him of the quiet enjoyment of his home.

Tremble sued back, alleging that Kassell engaged in a harassment campaign by falsely claiming the noise coming from the studio was too loud. Kassel has allegedly abused the 911 system, walked into classes that are actively in session, parked himself in the lobby, stairwell and hallway, standing outside of Tremble’s front door and stalking employees and clients, the countersuit alleges.

“Mr. Kassel’s actions prevent and deter clients from coming to classes, as they feel threatened by encounters with Mr. Kassel and fear that Mr. Kassel’s threats and harassment will escalate,” according to the complaint.

In November 2023, the 1060 Brickell condo association also sued Tremble over the noise complaints dating back to April 2022. A month before the association sued, it demanded that Tremble stop playing loud music and stop using microphones during its classes. The demand letter included two noise complaints brought by HQ Dontics, another commercial tenant at the property, in October 2023.

The situation at the Brickell condo complex is nearing a breaking point, owners say, as legal fees mount amid ongoing construction, on top of the special assessment and regular monthly dues.

The condo association’s litigation is ongoing. And even with the state’s latest order, the association will likely try to appeal.

“DBPR has no authority. The courts take forever and a lot of money,” said another unit owner who declined to be named. “Where does the buck end?

Brickell condo board president ousted after passing $21M assessment