Appeals sent a handful of rulings back to the city of Holmes Beach’s special magistrate.
And this time around, he saw things a little differently.
Special magistrate Michael Connolly of the Sarasota-based Fournier, Connolly, Shamsey, Mladinich & Polz law firm issued rulings Oct. 27 to dismiss alleged city code violations for renting for improper length of stays at a handful of vacation rental units at the Coconuts Beach Resort, 100 73rd St. on the Gulf.
However, Connolly also ruled to uphold other code violations for operating a vacation rental without obtaining a city-issued vacation rental certificate.
Developer Shawn Kaleta is the listed title manager for Coconuts units 100 73rd LLC, 100 73rd 202 LLC and 100 73rd 203A LLC, according to sunbiz.org.
Holmes Beach residents Christopher and Kimberly Roehl are the listed title managers for KCI Island Investments LLC.
The properties are located within the city’s A-1 residential district, which is intended for multifamily residential and seasonal tourist uses and does not require minimum-night vacation rental stays.
Nevertheless, Connolly ruled in November 2021 in favor of the city’s argument that the properties are subject to the use requirements of the city’s R-4 residential zone, which requires seven-night minimum rental stays, since their primary principle uses are multi-family dwellings.
He ruled that the owners committed code violations and established daily fines until they achieved compliance.
However, the owners appealed the cases in December 2021 and Judge Edward Nicholas of the 12th Judicial Circuit issued mandates in May to reverse and remand Connolly’s orders back to the magistrate.
Nicholas wrote that the city’s R-4 zoning district’s rules only apply in the city’s A-1 zoning district if the principal use of a property is for multi-family dwellings, not resort housing.
Nicholas ordered that, upon remand, Connolly must determine the properties’ principal uses to determine whether rental duration restrictions apply to the properties.
The remanded cases were brought back before Connolly at an Oct. 24 magistrate hearing.
At the hearing, attorney Louis Najmy of the Bradenton-based Najmy Thompson law firm represented the property owners. He argued that city code requires vacation rental properties to be deemed as resort housing for purposes of zoning and use, so the properties would not fall within the city’s R-4 zoning rules.
City attorney Erica Augello argued that resort housing cannot be a property’s primary principle use in the A-1 zone, only a supplementary use. She said the primary principle use of the parcel was multi-family dwelling.
Connolly said at the hearing that he needed time to take both arguments under advisement before a conclusion.
That conclusion came Oct. 27 with a handful of final administrative orders by Connolly.
Those orders dismissed the alleged violations for renting for an improper length of stay against 100 73rd LLC, 100 73rd 202 LLC, 100 73rd 203 LLC and KCI Island Investments LLC.
Connolly wrote that while the parcel’s primary principle use may be multi-family dwelling, each vacation rental property is an individual dwelling unit used for resort housing.
“Consistent with the circuit court’s ruling … the 7-night rental duration restrictions are not applicable … because the property is ‘resort housing,’” he wrote.
Connolly’s orders also upheld the alleged violations for operating a transient public lodging establishment without obtaining a city-issued vacation rental certificate.
Najmy wrote in a Nov. 3 text message to The Islander that Connolly’s order was “ridiculous,” since the city denied issuance of VRCs to the property owners due to the alleged improper length of stay violations.
“The magistrate was too biased to the city to make the right decision and wipe out those fines, too,” Najmy wrote. “No citizen should ever have to worry about biased decisions from the judicial forums.”
He added, “This, along with other retracted decisions of the city, show clearly that those who think Shawn Kaleta and his related entities continually violate rules may be misunderstanding the true facts. His companies do follow the rules and certainly follow them more than those would think. It’s time to lay off of that mindset. His enterprise is a large moving entity navigating a lot of regulation in a very responsible way. Others shouldn’t equate nor disguise not liking tourism growth with violating rules.”