We have told you before that City Code Enforcement Director Catherine Harding knowingly and willingly selectively enforces the law. Her general failure to stop the widespread practice of illegally renting houses and apartments here like hotel rooms is another example. This issue has divided the community. Those who have purchased real estate here for investment purposes say they need to rent out their units to finance their investments. They say they're contributing to the economy of the island.
But neighbors, who are bothered by the late night noise and parking problems caused by some of the vacationers who rent these units, don't agree. They want short-term rentals banned in residential neighborhoods.
Other critics blame the shortage of affordable housing here, in part, on the proliferation of short-term rentals.
If your memory is long enough, you may recall that the City Commission passed City Ordinance 98-31 back in 1998. This law banned unlicensed, short-term rentals of 28 days or less in all residential neighborhoods, including gated communities and condominium complexes.
The law was approved by the State Dept. of Community Affairs (DCA)— the agency that oversees growth management here— in January of 1999 and upheld by an administrative law judge last September. DCA Secretary Steve Seibert is expected to hand down a final ruling next month— although transient rental landlords are expected to appeal if Seibert rules against them.
In the meantime, enforcement of the new law is on hold. And the transient rental business continues unfettered. In essence, that constitutes a victory for the transient rental landlords. And they are hopeful that this strategy of delay will keep the new law from going into effect indefinitely.
If you've been watching this issue develop, you also know that City officials don't seem to be trying very hard to change the status quo. And there's a reason for that. You will recall that Mayor Jimmy Weekley's 1999 election campaign was financed to a great extent by the transient rental landlords. Weekley is linked so closely to the pro-transient-rental people (Fausto's, his family's grocery store, generates considerable revenue by stocking transient units for incoming renters) that he had to publicly admit that he had a conflict of interest and recuse himself from City Commission votes on this issue.
The term "quid pro quo" has been in the national news a lot lately. We've got our own quid pro quo right here. Jimmy took campaign contributions from the transient rental landlords, promising that he would, in return, do everything that he could to block the implementation of the law banning short-term transient rentals. And, so far, he's been able to keep his part of the bargain.
But there's another City law that, if enforced by Code Enforcement Director Catherine Harding, would probably put all of the unlicensed short-term rental landlords out of business overnight. That's the Occupational License Law. That law says this: "No person shall engage in, manage, carry on or practice, wholly or in part, within the city limits, any business, profession or occupation without first procuring a city occupational license."
Property owners who are renting their property on a short-term basis for money are running businesses. Right? So they need an occupational license like any other business. Right? But there's a problem. The City is no longer issuing short-term rental licenses.
So the situation here is that most short-term transient landlords are operating illegally without City occupational licenses. And, for some reason, Catherine Harding is looking the other way. And since the law is obviously not being enforced, more property on the island is being converted to illegal transient rentals every day.
Some landlords are arguing that they don't need occupational licenses because they rent less than half the year. That doesn't seem to be much of an argument. And it was, in fact, rejected by the administrative law judge last year. But for some reason Code Enforcement and the City Attorney seem to be buying it as an excuse not to enforce the law. Could the real reason be that they simply don't want to cross the Mayor?
Apply that same reasoning to a woman who runs a little shop that is open only three months a year. Can you imagine what Catherine Harding would tell that woman if she tried to argue that she doesn't need an occupational license because she is only in business three months a year?
Martha and Henry Dupont (yes, that Dupont family) say they've had enough. The Duponts own a home in Truman Annex. Last week, Attorney Lee Rohe, on behalf of the Duponts, wrote a letter to Mayor Weekley politely asking that the City enforce its own occupational licence law.
But Mrs. DuPont says their politeness will probably wear thin if City officials don't respond to their letter by instructing Catherine Harding to enforce the occupational license law.
"We are prepared to ask Mr. Rohe to file a writ of mandamus to force city officials to enforce their own law," she said. "That will probably put the matter before a judge, and if a judge orders them to do it, I can't imagine that they won't comply."
If that happens, it will be interesting to see if Harding will still knowingly and willingly selectively enforce the law if she has a judge looking over her shoulder.