We noticed that you're using an unsupported browser. The TripAdvisor website may not display properly.
We support the following browsers:
Windows: Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome. Mac: Safari.

Newspaper- Rental Ban Ok'd

Which Venice hotels are on sale?
mm/dd/yyyy mm/dd/yyyy
See hotels
Englewood, Florida
posts: 21
Newspaper- Rental Ban Ok'd

A contentious city ordinance that bans future short-term rentals within single family and residential-estate neighborhoods was pushed through Tuesday on first reading by city council. Final reading is July 14.

Council first considered the issue in 2006, when roughly a few dozen rentals were identified, and the city first started receiving complaints of noise, overparking, and strewn garbage. Since then, the number of short-term rentals within city limits has more than doubled.

The ordinance is designed to stop new ones from going into business while the city figures out a way to eliminate the existing rentals.

A separate ordinance will phase out existing rentals. The city split the issue when property owners and the city couldn't agree on an amortization schedule that would reimburse certain costs over the period of a year before being required to cease operations.

Last week the planning commission recommended minor changes to the ordinance but asked it be held for further consideration. Their key concerns: should subdivisions with homeowner associations fall under the new rental ban, and should the ban -- which effects short-term rentals that are less than 30 days in duration, rented up to a maximum three times per year -- be extended to cover rentals longer than 30 days.

Council debated the same issues for more than two hours on Tuesday. In the end, they agreed to adopt the ordinance in order to stop a growing number of property owners from converting their homes into short-term rentals, with the caveat they might make changes prior to second reading.

On the issue of applying the ordinance to planned unit development (PUD) districts, like the Waterford and Sawgrass subdivisions, outside attorney Andrea Zelman said the planning consultants had been "operating under the assumption that PUDs are subject to deed restrictions. If they don't currently have any restrictions on short-term rentals, they could."

Assuming the ability to ban short-term rentals, they were excluded in the ordinance adopted Tuesday.

While the ordinance bans new rentals, existing ones can continue operating if, and it's a big if, they are following existing laws.

City Attorney Bob Anderson wanted to know how the city would inventory the rentals "so we know who gets to continue on and who is precluded?"

Planning consultant David Depew said those property owners who already meet current codes and statutory requirements would be excluded from the ban if they:

* paid their state tourist tax and county bed tax

* have a state license qualifying the property as a "resort dwelling"

* have been inspected by the fire marshal, and

* meet current Florida building codes that require things like additional pavement to accommodate additional cars, have hard-wired fire alarms and exit signs, and have appropriate evacuation safety signage installed.

"For someone with an existing rental, absent (those) approvals you are out of business," Depew said.

Mayor Ed Martin asked if that is a "taking." No, said Zelman.

"They were required to get those licenses under state law, which should have been in effect," Zelman said.

Existing short-term rental owners who are unable to prove they already have the necessary building and fire and safety inspections, or have not paid the appropriate state or county taxes, will be treated as noncompliant and unable to be participate later on in the amortization program that is currently under review.

Ban long term rentals?

Council Member Sue Lang was the lone dissenting vote, unhappy council shot down two major changes she authored.

Lang offered last-minute amendments from a sheet of paper she distributed to council members at the dais.

She sought to change certain definitions and expand the ordinance to limit rentals of longer than one month to no more than three times in a calendar year.

Council Member Kit McKeon said he was uncomfortable with the changes, which would redefine "resort dwelling" in a way that would not be consistent with the state's definition, and potentially could ban monthly rentals up to 12 times a year.

"If you want to rent for six months you should have that capability," McKeon said.

Lang said without the change, it guts the entire ordinance.

"Those homes will not have to go and get permitted, (will be) exempted out, and not be inspected," Lang said. Nor will they have to meet the building or safety codes, she said.

"The problem is it's very difficult to prove who is renting or has the intention of renting more than three times a year. It opens a loop hole you could drive a truck through," Lang said.

Council Member Vicki Noren Taylor agreed it will be difficult to monitor, but said that's also true under current state law.

She called for the question, forcing an end to debate, after two hours but was defeated in a procedural move that required a two-thirds vote. But the haggling continued and within five minutes Martin gave in called for the final vote.

ggiles@venicegondolier.com

By Greg Giles

News Editor

Return to Top of story

Wigan
posts: 168
1. Re: Newspaper- Rental Ban Ok'd

This is very interesting reading for home owners who bought proeprty to rent.

Does this apply to ALL of Florida?

Have you heard what happeded on the final reading July 14th.

Englewood, Florida
posts: 21
2. Re: Newspaper- Rental Ban Ok'd

This is what I found on a Google search:

In suit on rentals, an offer is made

By Kim Hackett

Published: Friday, July 24, 2009 at 1:00 a.m.

Last Modified: Thursday, July 23, 2009 at 11:18 p.m.

VENICE - A property owner would be allowed to offer weekend rentals for 15 years under a proposed settlement in the short-term rental lawsuit.

CorrectionCorrection published July 25, 2009: A story Friday about settling a short-term rental lawsuit incorrectly described a private meeting Venice City Council members will have with attorneys Tuesday. The council will discuss a complaint filed by the Venice Jet Center. In the afternoon, council members will vote on a settlement in the lawsuit.

The city would also pay $300,000 for property owner Stephen Milo's legal fees, bringing the city's tally of legal fees to more than $1 million this year -- more than three times what it budgeted.

Residents who complained that short-term rentals disrupt neighborhood tranquility are not happy that the rentals may continue for years.

"It's like polluting the neighborhood," said Bruce Lebedun, president of the Golden Beach neighborhood association, where many weekend rentals are located. "It's a practice that should have never been allowed in the first place."

Council members are scheduled to meet privately with attorneys Tuesday to discuss the settlement before voting on it during their meeting.

"As a Venice property owner and taxpayer, I am hopeful that three years of litigation over property rights will be ended," said Milo in an e-mail message.

If the council approves the settlement, it will end years of contention that began in 2005 when Milo began advertising rentals on the Internet. Neighbors complained about noise and trash and the city tried to stop the practice. But rather than draft an ordinance, the council maintained Milo was operating a commercial lodging establishment, which was not allowed under the code.

But Judge Robert Bennett last year ruled that the city improperly interpreted its zoning code.

A few months ago, he ordered the city to pay Milo's legal bills.

While the case dragged on, Milo accused the city of selective enforcement and said it violated his civil rights. He also claimed he lost money when the city was illegally enforcing a rental ban.

If the city does not approve the settlement with Milo, a judge will consider damages and hear the civil rights arguments in an October trial.

The Milo settlement will not affect other vacation rentals in single-family neighborhoods. The city passed an ordinance last week prohibiting anyone who did not already have a state, county and local license to rent their property for less than 30 days. It also requires property owners to adhere to commercial building and safety standards and hire a contractor to obtain the necessary permits.

But the ordinance did not address how to phase out short-term rentals.

"That was put on hold," because of the Milo case, said Zoning Director Tom Slaughter. The city is hiring a real estate expert to put a value on the rentals and then develop an amortization schedule.

It is a contentious, precedent-setting issue that Florida courts have not ruled on. A similar case in Brevard County has been in the courts for three years.

For the Rental Owner's in other Towns:

10 Ways to Defend Against Vacation Rental Bans in Your Area :

Tips for staying one step ahead of short-term rental bans.

1) Collect and pay sales tax.

2) Be a good neighbor.

3) Be active in your HOA.

4) Stay on top of current events in your area by subscribing to the local paper or reading it online. Google Alerts are also useful.

5) Know the zoning laws in your area.

6) Make sure that you (and your renters) are following the local ordinances to a tee. Complaints from permanent residents about noise, trash, and parking issues are what usually get the ball rolling on rental bans.

7) Screen your renters.

8) Band together with other vacation rental owners and property managers in your area.

9) Educate yourself about what's happened in other markets.

10) Show your face by participating in area community activities when you're in town.

3. Re: Newspaper- Rental Ban Ok'd

-:- Message from TripAdvisor staff -:-

This topic has been closed to new posts due to inactivity. We hope you'll join the conversation by posting to an open topic or starting a new one.

To review the TripAdvisor Forums Posting Guidelines, please follow this link: http://www.tripadvisor.com/pages/forums_posting_guidelines.html

We remove posts that do not follow our posting guidelines, and we reserve the right to remove any post for any reason.

Removed on: 12:16 am, January 28, 2010