One violator was served a hefty fine for failing to comply with Holmes Beach city code and a previous order.
Special magistrate Michael Connolly Oct. 25 found Daniel Spitzer, owner of a home at 520 58th St., in violation of city code and an order from earlier this year requiring Spitzer to renew his vacation rental certificate and stop advertising his rental unit for less than 30-night stays.
Connolly ordered Spitzer to pay a city-recommended $250 daily fine for the time he was found in violation, Aug. 8-Oct. 25, or $19,50078 for days, as well as a $127.24 administrative fee — bringing the total amount owed to $19,627.24.
Connolly first ruled in July to find Spitzer in violation of city code by advertising and renting his vacation unit for less than 30 days in the city’s R1 zone.
The R1 zone is one of the city’s low-density residential districts designed for single-family homes and stretches across several areas of the city.
City code requires minimum 30-day stays and matching advertisements for vacation rentals within the R1 zone.
Connolly found a violation had occurred and ordered Spitzer to comply with code but did not issue the city’s recommended $250 daily fine since it was not a repeat offense.
City code compliance officer Nate Brown said online advertisements for 14-night stays at the rental property remained active as of Oct. 25 and the owner had not applied to renew the city-issued vacation rental certificate.
Brown also read a review of the rental unit posted online indicating the guest had stayed for a seven-night stay.
Marissa Spitzer attended the Oct. 25 hearing via Zoom on behalf of her father-in-law, Daniel Spitzer, who she said had multiple strokes and remains in serious condition.
Spitzer said all rental bookings at the unit had been canceled from the July 26 hearing through the rest of the year and steps had been taken to notify people that the rental unit must be rented for at least 30 consecutive nights.
She said the property was up for sale, so they didn’t plan on renewing the vacation rental certificate, and the rental unit was currently not booked.
Spitzer said they had difficulties accessing her father-in-law’s online accounts to remove advertisements for the rental unit but she reworded the advertisements earlier that same day to say the property could not be rented.
City attorney Erica Augello said on behalf of the city that the matter remained a violation of the July 26 order because Spitzer hadn’t taken down advertisements for the rental unit or obtained a vacation rental certificate.
Connolly’s latest order requires Spitzer to remove all vacation rental advertisements for his property or renew his rental certificate by 4 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. 8.
The order establishes that, if Spitzer fails to come into compliance, another $250 daily running fine will begin Nov. 9 and end when he complies.
The city’s next special magistrate hearing will be at 10 a.m. Tuesday, Nov. 15, at city hall, 5801 Marina Drive.
Zoom access for magistrate hearings is not available to the public.