Get on the bandwagon if you’re going to sue Anna Maria.
There were two lawsuits and four Bert Harris Jr. claims pending against the city as of June 11.
The Bert Harris Jr. claims and one lawsuit name the city’s building moratorium as the reason for the fight.
The second lawsuit is from vacation rental property owners and agencies fighting against the vacation rental ordinance, adopted April 9.
Letters of intent were delivered to city hall April 13 from attorney Sean Kelly of the law firm Najmy Thompson Attorneys at Law of Bradenton. Kelly, representing Shawn and Jennifer Kaleta, owners of 9405 Gulf Drive; Crescent Cottages I LLC, the owner of 146 Crescent Drive; Crescent Cottages II LLC, owner of 142 Crescent Drive; and Gulf View Retreat LLC at 881 N. Shore.
Kelly states in the letter that the building moratorium creates a burden on the clients’ property rights.
He claims the inability to obtain building permits and develop the land results in each property losing $2,500 a week.
City commissioners adopted the building moratorium during an emergency meeting in September 2014. It put a hold on all residential building permit application with four or more bedrooms.
Applicants could still obtain a permit if their paperwork was submitted to the city’s building department before Sept. 22, 2014, or if they signed the restrictive covenant.
Signing the covenant means the applicant will get a building permit for four or more bedrooms, but cannot rent, sell or lease the property to anyone other than the owner or the owner’s family until five years after signing the covenant.
The building moratorium was created in response to the city’s concern over older, smaller homes being demolished to make room for larger homes being used primarily for short-term vacation rentals.
The Bert Harris Jr. Property Rights Protection Act was enacted in 1995 by the Florida Legislature. It allows a property owner to pursue a civil action against local government for causing his/her property to lose value.
The property owner has one year from the date of the action to make the claim against the city, while the city then has 150 days from the claim date to offer a settlement for the claim.
According to Anna Maria city clerk Diane Percycoe, as of June 11, none of the claims had been submitted for legal action.
The other legal action involving the building moratorium is AMI Breeze LLC v. Anna Maria.
AMI Breeze is owned by Shawn Kaleta with an office at 5702 Marina Drive, Holmes Beach. It claims the building moratorium halted issuance of a building permit for a residence at 205 Elm Ave., Anna Maria.
Kaleta submitted the building application July 8, 2014.
Kelly, representing AMI Breeze, wrote then-city attorney Jim Dye in October 2014 and said the permit should have been approved Aug. 17, 2014.
On June 5, Anna Maria city attorney Becky Vose filed a motion to dismiss the case, saying AMI Breeze did not follow the administrative process before bringing legal action against the city.
Vose’s motion states AMI Breeze was supposed to go before the Anna Maria Planning and Zoning Board for an appeal for action.
Kelly was unavailable for comment.
The third legal action against the city centers on the vacation rental ordinance.
The lawsuit, filed May 28 by attorneys Kevin Hennessy and Jennifer Cowan of the law firm of Lewis, Longman & Walker of Bradenton, representing vacation rental properties owners, agencies and associations, claims the ordinance prohibits the use of residential homes for short-term vacation rentals.
The plaintiffs include Timothy and Ayne Kimberly Iafolla and Carol Roaldi of Salouh Florida LLC, 106 Los Cedros Drive, Anna Maria; Rysal Enterprises LLC, of Bradenton; Seven Emeralds LLC, 803 N. Shore Drive, Anna Maria; Island Real Estate of Anna Maria Island Inc., 6101 Marina Drive, Holmes Beach; and the Anna Maria Island Vacation Property Association, also at 6101 Marina Drive, Holmes Beach.
They claim the ordinance is illegal and is prohibited by Florida law, which reads, “A local law, ordinance, or regulation may not restrict the use of vacation rentals, prohibit vacation rentals or regulate the duration or frequency of vacation rentals.”
Vose replied, stating the law was amended and the phrase “restrict the use of vacation rentals” was removed.
This allows local governments regulating authority.
Vose filed a motion June 9 seeking to dismiss the vacation rental lawsuit.