CITY
COMMISSION!
CLICK HERE
MORE TRANSIENT
INFORMATION
AND E MAIL LINKS
CLICK HERE
ASSOCIATIONS
HOMEOWNERS' ALERT!
WE HAVE A PROBLEM.
THIS PAGE: The "Last Word on Transient Rentals." CLICK HERE
CLICK HERE FOR A BRIEF HISTORY OF THIS ISSUE.
including Rollison, Behmke and other named parties. It is a resolution, not an ordinance or amendment to the
Transient Rental Ordinance. The proposed resolution is an unnecessary giveaway by the City, not only to Rollison
who won her case, but to the other named parties who may only have pending lawsuits but have not yet been
decided against the City.
The settlement permits all Truman Annex owners (Shipyard and all other units, a little under 500 in total) to
obtain transient rental licenses within a defined time period for the one-time amount of $1500. All units may then
be rented transiently for 25 weeks per year (it is not mentioned who or how this will be counted). The transient
licenses run with the property, so subsequent owners continue the right to transient rent. The sunset is 20 years,
except for Rollison and the other named parties, for whom there is no sunset provision.
Rollison can even transfer her transient rental license to another Truman Annex property if she sells the one
mentioned in the original lawsuit. The named parties do not even have to pay the $1500, just all the other Truman
Annex owners. All code enforcement proceedings for alleged short term rental violations before the settlement's
effective date will be dismissed. The fund created by the $1500 fees (about $750,000 if all purchase the transient
license, and who would not, just to protect themselves) are to be divided in half. Half goes to paying damages to
Rollison as well as to others with pending lawsuits, and half is earmarked for the City to defend itself against any
new lawsuits. So the settlement does not assure fresh lawsuits. If no lawsuits emerge after a year, the amount
remaining in the City's portion of the fund is to be distributed to Rollison and the other named parties. This
escrow fund (public money) is to be kept in private hands (the plaintiffs attorneys, located in Toledo, Ohio, near
the Cleveland home of Behmke) until disbursed for the purposes defined in the settlement agreement.
This settlement agreement does not appear to be a good deal for the City. Truman Annex, a beautiful area of
town will become a hotel. The $1500 fee is quite a bargain, given that transient licenses seem to have a market
value in the range of $50,000. But most importantly, the settlement gives away a valid ordinance. It does not
involve a modification of the existing ordinance, but is a negotiation point. How do you give away something that
you do not own? It is a resolution, so it does not even go through, apparently, three readings but can be
accomplished at one meeting.
The resolution should be postponed further to permit more public scrutiny and to study the implications for all of
the City. Clearly, others could claim a lack of due process and unconstitutional discrimination for other areas of
the City, undermining illegal transient renting throughout the City.
The editorial in the Citizen was disappointing, in that it recommended approval, with great caution. The caution
part was glossed over. The incumbent commissioner for District I appears to be supportive of this resolution,
Hopefully, his support is not to curry favor with commercial real estate operators or some Truman Annex voters.
In any event, the rather insane terms and conditions of this proposed settlement need to be made known to all.
Regards,
A Concerned Neighbor
Mayor@keywestcity.com, Bverge@keywestcity.com, Mrossi@keywestcity.com,
Dkolhage@keywestcity.com, Hbethel@keywestcity.com, Menedezkeywest@aol.com,
Clopez@keywestcity.com
LEGITIMIZE TRANSIENT OPERATIONS IN "VIRGIN" AREAS IN KEY WEST IS
UNDERWAY. THIS IS HAPPENING IN SPITE OF THE REALIZATION THAT OUR
COMMUNITY IS IN SUCH DANGER OF LOSING "WORKFORCE HOUSING" THAT
BUSINESSES ARE CLOSING, AND BASIC MUNICIPAL, COUNTY, AND MEDICAL
SERVICES ARE THREATENED.
LESS THAN THIRTY DAYS IN RESIDENTIAL
AREAS.
OUR COMMUNITY IS ALREADY THREATENED
BY LOSS OF MIDDLE-CLASS HOUSING.
ANY ATTEMPT TO LEGITIMIZE "VACATION
RENTALS" IN CROWDED RESIDENTIAL AREAS
IS NOT GOING TO IMPROVE PROPERTY VALUES
FOR ADJOINING PROPERTIES, AND IS A
LONG-TERM DETRIMENT TO THE AMBIANCE
OF OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
CALL YOUR COMMISSIONER, CALL YOUR CANDIDATES.
WRITE TO THE PAPERS.
CALL YOUR FRIENDS.
E MAIL YOUR FRIENDS.
THIS IS NOT "CHICKEN LITTLE" -- THIS RESOLUTION AND THE ONES
THAT WILL FOLLOW WILL COMMERCIALIZE KEY WEST
PERMANENTLY.
WRITE THE PAPERS!
WRITE A LETTER TO BE READ INTO THE
RECORD WHEN THE ISSUE COMES UP:
SEND IT TO THE CITY CLERK PO BOX
1409
KEY WEST FL 33041
CALL OR WRITE THE COMMISSION AND
MAYOR.
UNBRIDLED TRANSIENT RENTALS WILL
RUIN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
30 DAY RENTALS KEEP VALUES UP!
--Will other areas in the City be protected?
---Don't count on it. There will be litigation....
--What about a giveback for "workforce housing"?
---There has been no talk of it. They want to
tax us separately to pay for "workforce
housing." Those who profit from transient
conversion will not have to pay.
--Where's the "DCA" in all this? Asleep?
---Possibly asleep, possibly a moribund
bureaucracy.
"hotel" for years.
But people in other areas don't want a law
that's going to allow commercialization to spread.
It's already causing problems all over Old Town,
and is spreading into New Town as "regular
people" leave, and the second home owners come
in.
There are plenty of ways to avoid lawsuits
without giving away the WHOLE TOWN!
have come in.
--Will the newly legalized units have to
be ADA compliant, like hotels and
guest houses? ---No way, for a number
of reasons, some legal, some not.
--Who will be enforcing the rules for
these units? Will they have security like
most hotels or guest houses? --No, that
costs money.
--What if one opens up next to me?
What can I do about it? --You can cry.
You can buy earplugs. You can move.
--Why must the "right" run with the
property? Shouldn't it have expired if
the unit was sold? --Of course it should
have! Doesn't anyone see what's going
on here?
THAT ALL ONE WOULD NEED WOULD BE A
NON-TRANSIENT LICENSE IN EFFECT SINCE 1998 AND THE
ARGUMENT THAT THEY RELIED ON THE "FORMER
TRANSIENT DEFINITION."
FACT: NO ONE KNOWS HOW MANY OF THESE "50%
RULE" OPERATIONS WILL BECOME LEGAL, OR WHERE
THEY ARE LOCATED.
FACT: THE CITY HAS NOT BEEN EFFECTIVE IN
ENFORCING THE ZONING WITH REGARD TO PUBLIC
RENTALS.
FACT: THE CITY WEAKENED IT OWN ENFORCEMENT
OPTIONS BY AN ORDINANCE THEY PASSED IN
FEBRUARY 2003.
FACT: MANY OF THE LEGALLY LICENSED TRANSIENT
RENTALS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES ARE NOW RUN BY
REGULAR HOTELS AND LODGING ESTABLISHMENTS:
THERE'S NOTHING "RESIDENTIAL" ABOUT THEM.
THEY'RE COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS.
FACT: TRANSIENT RENTALS INTERSPERSED WITH
REGULAR HOUSING HAVE CAUSED FRICTION
WHEREVER THEY HAVE OCCURRED.
NOT A PROVEN FACT BUT A LEGITIMATE FEAR:
THE CITY COMMISSION WILL PASS ANOTHER
TRANSIENT RENTAL "LEGALIZATION"
ORDINANCE THIS YEAR OR EARLY NEXT YEAR.
IS MY HOME SAFE?
IS MY NEIGHBORHOOD SAFE?
THE WATERS ARE SUFFICIENTLY
MUDDIED THAT NO ONE CAN
ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS.
CERTAINLY NO ONE ON THE CITY
COMMISSION CAN ANSWER US.
IS THERE ONE SINGLE
COMMISSIONER WHO CAN LOOK
US IN THE EYE AND TELL US:
"NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY
ABOUT IT."?
IF THERE IS, WILL HE/SHE PLEASE
COME FORWARD?
PHONE NUMBERS, AND MAILING
ADDRESSES OF ALL THE CITY
COMMISSIONERS ARE ON THIS PAGE:
CLICK HERE!
DON'T BE SHY ABOUT TELLING THEM
HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT IT!
TO A MOTEL? WOULD YOU
BUY A HOUSE NEXT TO A
MOTEL?
CITY OFFICIALS AND EVEN
THE PRESS DOWNPLAYED
THE EFFECTS OF THE CITY'S
LOSS IN THE APPEAL OF THE
"ROLLISON DECISION"
THE LEGAL OPINIONS WE
RECEIVED LED US TO BELIEVE
THAT RESIDENTIAL
HOMEOWNERS
MAY WELL HAVE A PROBLEM.
LET'S NOT BE ASLEEP
WHEN THIS ONE HAPPENS.
AND REMEMBER, AFTER
THIS ORDINANCE THERE
WILL BE ANOTHER ONE
TO LEGALIZE MORE
TRANSIENT UNITS IN OLD
TOWN!
STAY TUNED.
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
