Senators Back State Regulating Vacation Rental Properties
The state would take over regulation of vacation rental properties while local regulations passed since 2011 would be nullified, under a bill approved by a Senate committee.
January 31, 2018 at 03:44 PM
4 minute read
The state would take over regulation of vacation rental properties while local regulations passed since 2011 would be nullified, under a bill approved by a Senate committee.
In a 4-2 vote, the Senate Community Affairs Committee merged legislation (SB 1400) filed by Sen. Greg Steube, R-Sarasota, with a bill (SB 1640), sponsored by Sen. David Simmons, R-Altamonte Springs, although the combined bill largely favored Steube's effort to pre-empt local regulation of the growing vacation rental industry.
“It was my intent to pre-empt regulation up to the state so that there was some continuity across the state,” said Steube, who has argued that the property rights of people who rent out properties are being undermined by local regulations.
Steube said vacation rental properties would be regulated largely like hotels and motels, with owners who hold five or more properties being subjected to twice-a-year inspections by state regulators.
Simmons fell short on his effort to let cities and counties conduct fire and building-code inspections at the vacation rentals.
He warned that a move toward “zero regulation” could lead to consumers being hurt or killed at rental properties. He said allowing local governments to conduct safety inspections offered “a reasonable amount of protection,” while balancing the interests of property owners, consumers and local governments.
Under Steube's bill, the state would have the right to inspect any property, although only larger rental-property owners would be subject to regular inspections. The bill also would require the property owners to provide emergency numbers to the state that would be shared with local governments.
Simmons was also unsuccessful in arguing that local governments should oversee the rental of single-family homes in residential neighborhoods when owners are not staying at the homes. He said some of those vacation rentals, where neighbors complain about parking, noise and parties, are destroying the “quality” of single-family neighborhoods.
“These are the ones in which there is the greatest amount of abuse that can occur,” Simmons said.
Steube said although the state would regulate vacation rentals, the properties would be subject to other local government restrictions.
“Local governments will still be left with the ability to preserve the integrity of their neighborhoods by passing ordinances to address noise, trash, parking or any other behavior that would tend to disturb their neighborhoods,” Steube said.
Steube's bill would have originally wiped out all local government regulation of the vacation rentals. But Community Affairs Chairman Tom Lee, R-Thonotosassa, amended the bill to allow vacation rental ordinances passed before June 1, 2011, to remain in effect.
Local government leaders opposed Steube's bill, while supporting Simmons' efforts.
Gary Bruhn, mayor of Windermere, said local governments should play a role in the regulation of vacation rentals in single-family neighborhoods.
“Yes, people who rent these homes have property rights,” Bruhn said. “But, so do the people who live next door to them. I see that constantly throughout our area.”
Lori Killinger, representing the Florida Vacation Rental Managers Association, supported Steube's bill and said a proliferation of local ordinances regulating vacation rentals is thwarting their development.
“This all started because of the morass of local ordinances adopted since 2014 that have caused significant unpredictability around the state,” Killinger said.
She said Steube's bill “clears the deck a bit” and “puts back clear, appropriate regulations.”
The vacation rental bill now heads to the Senate Regulated Industries Committee. A House bill (HB 773), sponsored by Rep. Mike La Rosa, R-St. Cloud, would also pre-empt local regulation of vacation rentals and is awaiting its first hearing.
Lloyd Dunkelberger reports for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Disease-Causing Bacteria': Colgate and Tom’s of Maine Face Toothpaste Class Action
3 minute readFlorida-Based Law Firms Start to Lag, As New York Takes a Bigger Piece of Deals
3 minute readFowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
3 minute readDisbarred Attorney Alleges ADA Violations in Lawsuit Against Miami-Dade Judges
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1$34M Verdict Shows How 1 Claim Could Ratchet Up Employment Suit
- 2OIG Progress Puts Connecticut in Leadership Position
- 3Bankruptcy Judge to Step Down in 2025
- 4Justices Seek Solicitor General's Views on Music Industry's Copyright Case Against ISP
- 5Judge to hear arguments on whether Google's advertising tech constitutes a monopoly
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250