Cocoa Beach adopts higher fees for RS‑1 vacation rentals after lengthy public debate

Cocoa Beach commissioners on a split 4‑1 vote adopted Resolution 2025‑01 to raise registration, inspection and fine fees for short‑term (vacation) rentals located in the city’s RS‑1 single‑family zoning district.

The move, presented by City Manager Wayne Carregino and explained by the city attorney, is intended to shift the cost of regulating short‑term rentals from general taxpayers to short‑term rental owners and provide funding to enforce existing ordinances.

Becky, identified in the meeting as the city attorney, told the commission the ordinance now requires registration only for properties located in RS‑1 and does not cover condominiums or rentals in other zoning districts. “Right now the City of Cocoa Beach only regulates vacation rentals that are in the RS‑1 zoning district,” Becky said, noting that the registration program was originally written to focus on the area where commissioners believed problems were concentrated.

Wayne Carregino described the fiscal drivers behind the proposal: “The proposed fees is to fund a comprehensive program to regulate short‑term rental activity in the city,” he said, adding the increases are intended to cover enforcement costs the general fund has borne. City staff told the commission the city collected $100,306 in short‑term rental registration fees in fiscal year 2024 and that current enforcement workload exceeds existing staffing.

City staff and the development services director told commissioners the RS‑1 district contains roughly 300 vacation rental units, of which about 200 are currently registered; the city estimates about 1,500 short‑term rental units exist citywide, most outside RS‑1 in condo and townhouse zones. The city has one full‑time code enforcement officer for all code matters; staff said the officer’s caseload is large enough that short‑term rental enforcement is not being handled effectively.

Public comment ran more than an hour. Several residents and rental owners urged different approaches: some said fees should be targeted to noncompliant operators and not substantially raise costs for long‑standing, compliant homeowners; others said the proposed fees were still too low to cover police, fire and code impacts they attribute to short‑term rentals. Jim Beatty, who identified himself as a short‑term rental owner, said the proposed jump in renewal fees would be “ridiculous” for small owners who follow the rules. Resident Hayward Davis described repeated neighborhood disturbances and urged higher fees and stronger enforcement: “We are not asking for enough money,” he said, arguing registration should reflect the real public‑safety and police cost of short‑term rentals.

Several speakers asked that the city use a tiered or phased approach. Commissioners debated that during the meeting and an amendment was proposed to modify the registration schedule: commissioners approved an amendment that creates a temporary lower registration fee ($1,000) for a limited compliance window (60 days) for operators who come forward voluntarily; after that window the higher fee schedule applies. The commission then voted 4‑1 to adopt the resolution as amended. The resolution text in the agenda places the vacation rental fees and related fines in a new fee matrix separate from the city’s master fee resolution.

Commissioners emphasized that the adopted resolution covers fee schedules only; it does not itself hire staff nor expand the registration requirement citywide. Several commissioners said the plan is intended to produce revenue that will be tracked and spent on enforcement and related work and that future adjustments could be made if the fee revenue exceeds or falls short of actual costs. “These dollars that come in have to be spent in enforcement of the regulations,” one commissioner said during debate, noting the city must account for collections and expenditures.

What the ordinance covers and what it does not: the registration requirement and the new fee matrix as adopted apply only to short‑term rentals in the RS‑1 zoning district (single‑family homes). Citywide, short‑term rental operators must have a business tax receipt, but the business tax receipt and the regulatory registration are separate under Florida law and are treated differently for accounting and legal purposes.

Votes at a glance

- Resolution 2025‑01 (vacation rental fee matrix, RS‑1): Adopted 4‑1 (vote tally not named individually in the record). Effective date: not specified in the meeting record.

What comes next

City staff said the next steps will include using the fee revenue to support enforcement and likely proposing ordinance changes to expand or refine registration and enforcement citywide. Commissioners said the fee schedule can be revisited at a subsequent meeting and that any additional staffing funded by the fee revenue will be tracked and reported to the commission.

Ending: The commission’s vote shifts more of the short‑term rental regulatory cost to property owners in RS‑1 and sets a higher fine and inspection schedule aimed at improving compliance; several speakers and at least one commissioner requested a phased or tiered approach to soften the impact on established, compliant owners.