Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vacation Rental Compliance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Magistrate orders 365-day suspension after fourth vacation‑rental violation; owner allowed 60 days before suspension begins
Summary
A Fort Lauderdale magistrate found that a property’s fourth vacation‑rental violation triggered a mandatory 365‑day suspension under city code; the owner was permitted a 60‑day grace period before the suspension starts to honor imminent bookings.
Get email alerts on the Vacation Rental Compliance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The presiding special magistrate ruled March 26 that a vacation‑rental property that accumulated four qualifying violations must have its vacation‑rental certificate suspended for 365 days under the city ordinance. The city presented evidence that four separate violations existed; the magistrate said the language of the code leaves no discretion once a fourth qualifying violation is established.
The property owner argued the violations stemmed from a single incident and said the rental is also the family home. Owner Renee Gonzales told the court, "This is my home where I live with my wife ... I respect the community," and asked for leniency, warning that a long suspension would harm her small business and employees.
The magistrate acknowledged the hardship but explained the ordinance’s mandatory language: "I don't have any choice in the matter... when a law says I shall do something, that means I have no discretion in the matter," and offered the owner two limited options on the record: have the 365‑day suspension start immediately or delay its start by 60 days to allow for any pre-existing bookings. The owner asked for the 60‑day delay; the magistrate agreed and set the suspension to begin on the 60th day following the hearing.
Separately, the court handled other vacation‑rental enforcement matters where, by code, the magistrate had to suspend a certificate after repeated violations (one inspector requested a 180‑day suspension in another case). Where suspension was mandatory, the bench explained the limited remedies are through appeal or an ordinance change by the city commission.
The magistrate advised owners charged with multiple violations to consult counsel if they plan to appeal the suspension order. The case record and the magistrate's written order will state the effective date for the suspension and any interim conditions the owner must meet.

