Cape Coral council pauses proposed $600 rental registration fee after hours of public opposition

Dozens of residents, Realtors and members of the Royal Palm Coast Realtor Association urged Cape Coral City Council on May 28 to abandon or substantially rewrite two proposed ordinances that would raise the city's rental-registration fee and create an associated tourism development fund. Speakers said the measure, which would raise the current $35 fee to $600 annually and include enforcement mechanisms, would burden small landlords and renters and risk constitutional and public-safety problems.

Supporters of the change have said the fee would fund enforcement and tourism programs. Councilmember Kevin Long, who introduced the measure, told colleagues he intended it to target short-term rentals and that any enforcement provision could be changed to civil citations. "This is my ordinance," Long said, speaking at the start of the council's discussion, and then clarified his intent was to focus on short-term rental registration rather than annual rentals.

The proposal drew sustained public opposition. Adrienne Bray, a Cape Coral resident and realtor, told the council she had researched state law and municipal practice and could find no legal basis to allow police to enter a private home solely for registration noncompliance. "My biggest concern is the dangerous precedent of allowing law enforcement to remove tenants over a registration issue," Bray said during the public-comment period.

Representatives of the Royal Palm Coast Realtor Association took the same position in a coordinated turnout. Karen Barelli, the association's president, said landlords would pass charges on to tenants already struggling to pay rent. Kevin Besser, the association's director of public policy, and several property managers including Lisa Cohen and Patrick Quinlan warned the increase would drive small landlords out of the market and decrease housing availability.

Council discussion focused on four core questions: 1) which rental types the fee should cover (short-term only versus all rentals); 2) whether the charge should be annual or a one-time registration; 3) the correct fee level to recover enforcement costs without overburdening small owners; and 4) the form of enforcement and due-process safeguards. Councilmember Long said he intended the measure for short-term rentals and acknowledged enforcement clauses in the draft needed changes; he said civil citations should be used rather than immediate occupant removal.

After more than an hour of council debate and multiple members urging broader discussion with industry stakeholders, the council reached a consensus to withdraw the ordinances from the June 4 agenda and put a stakeholder group together during the upcoming break. Councilmember Laster volunteered to lead the stakeholder process; city staff and council members said the group should include property managers, small landlords, the Realtor association, representatives of short-term rental platforms and city staff. "Let's bring everybody in a room, put up the post-it notes and hash it out," Laster said.

City staff and legal advisers said they would return with revised language and analysis. The city attorney clarified that if the draft ordinance were substantially changed it would have to be reintroduced for formal consideration. The assistant city manager and city manager told the council they would provide a list of specific questions and what additional data would be useful to the stakeholder group, including incident counts tied to rental properties, comparative fee studies, and enforcement cost estimates.

What happens next: Council removed both draft ordinances from the June 4 agenda by consensus and asked staff to assemble a stakeholder group to draft an alternative approach. Councilmembers and staff emphasized the need to coordinate with Lee County and short-term rental platforms and to examine funding alternatives linked to tourism rather than a single new fee on homeowners.

Votes and formal actions: The council did not adopt the ordinances; by consensus the items were withdrawn from the June 4 agenda and will be revised with stakeholder input.

Ending: Council members asked staff to return with a menu of options and cost estimates after stakeholder consultations. The group agreed the city should aim for a balanced approach that funds enforcement and tourism programming without imposing undue burdens on small-property owners or creating enforcement practices that raise due-process concerns.