The Anna Maria City Commission agreed March 23 to extend seven more Bert Harris settlement offers.
Commissioner Nancy Yetter voted against approving the offers.
Since Anna Maria’s vacation rental ordinance went into effect April 2016, more than 100 Bert Harris claims have been filed against the city. Of 112 filed claims, 51 have been settled and the remainder await city or property owner action.
The Bert Harris Jr. Private Property Protection Act of 1995 allows property owners to seek relief if they can prove a government action lowered the value of their property.
Claimants must provide appraisals to establish value and settlements, in lieu of a cash payments, can either fully or partly restore the rights that existed prior to the prohibitions. The city initially has 150 days to respond to Bert Harris allegations.
The city’s VRO includes an eight-person occupancy limit. The city has settled applicable Bert Harris claims thus far with occupancy limit increases.
At the March 23 meeting, city attorney Becky Vose presented 14 Bert Harris claim recommendations, although she recommended the city reject making settlement offers on four claims. The commission did so unanimously.
Commissioner Carol Carter requested the city consider purchasing two undeveloped lots under the city’s 10-year plan that include developing more green spaces in the city and reject one other offer on Vose’s recommendation list, pending further commission discussion.
The commission voted to offer settlements of 10-14 person occupancies for properties at 62 N. Shore Drive, 113 Maple Ave., 414 Pine Ave., 801 N. Shore Drive, 797 North Shore Drive, 703 N. Bay Blvd. and 103 Park Ave.
The city declined to make offers on two claims for two lots at 404 Spring Ave., but may consider making a purchase offer to transform the two vacant lots into a public green space.
The commission also declined to make offers on two claims filed for two lots at 116 Peppertree Lane and properties at 201 Elm Ave. and 10107 Gulf Drive because the claims were invalid, according to Becky Vose.
The Peppertree claims, she said, were for properties purchased after the city’s VRO went into effect, and the Elm and Gulf claimants failed to file timely appraisals along with their claims.
