Dolphin Watch counsel says short-term rental ordinance may be void; magistrate orders legal briefs on hearsay

Code enforcement told the St. Pete Beach special magistrate that Airbnb reviews for 1405 Gulf Way indicated multiple short-term stays that breached the city’s rental limits and recommended fines totaling $3,000 plus $330 in administrative costs.

Luke Cloreau, representing Dolphin Watch, responded with a written motion to dismiss. He argued the chain of ordinance amendments goes back to Ordinance 2004-18 and that the city failed to meet Section 166.041’s notice-and-hearing requirements when that ordinance was adopted. "It's our position that this property was purchased in 2003 and the ordinance is null and void as applied," Cloreau told the magistrate.

Cloreau also challenged the evidentiary basis for the city's case, saying that the Airbnb and internet postings used by inspectors are "all hearsay" and cannot reliably prove the length of stays the city attributes to the property.

City counsel responded that quasi-judicial hearings commonly admit hearsay and asked for time to research the ordinance-adoption and statute-of-limitations issues. Magistrate Erica Augello ordered a two-part briefing schedule: the respondent must file briefing addressing (1) the magistrate's jurisdiction to hear an as-applied challenge and (2) the admissibility of internet/social-media postings as evidentiary proof, within 10 days; the city has 15 days to respond. The magistrate continued the case pending those filings and will consider the motion to dismiss and evidentiary questions at a later date.

The hearing record shows the city believes three internet-posted stays likely occurred within a 30-day window, creating the short-term rental violation; the respondent contends those entries cannot be authenticated and that the ordinance’s adoption process was deficient. The magistrate’s limited-order briefing focuses on jurisdiction and hearsay rather than the ultimate merits of the alleged violations.