Tuesday Evening, the Palm Coast City Council held their business meeting where Mayor Norris let residents know that they are aware of the letter from former director Amanda Rees and are looking into it, as well as providing consensus on the dias to hold a workshop on the commercial vehicle ban in city limits.
Following the public comment section, Gambaro moved to approve the ordinance with an amendment. He stated the ordinance is an important public safety matter. Language was previously deleted before he joined that exempted owner-operators. He agrees they shouldn’t be exempted, but they should be exempt from the maximum occupancy rules in the new ordinance.
Stevens seconded the motion with the amendment, he reasons that he felt it was contradictory to limit the arrangements due to using sleeping rooms, with two people maximum plus one infant /toddler per room, with some homes having four rooms and others with 6 rooms. He agreed with Gambaro on allowing the exemption with owner/operators that are listed as homesteaded properties with the tax collector, and that exemption is only for when the owner-operator of Airbnb is on-premise permanently.
Mayor Norris did not agree with Stevens and Gambaro. The city attorney explained that if the motion passes with Gambaro’s amendment, it will require two more hearings and two more votes.
Pontieri explained her disagreement with Gambaro and Stevens and her stance that if you want to operate a hotel or a true bed and breakfast, there are zoned areas for that, and the residents in neighborhoods and their quality of life are of the utmost importance. Norris explained that he wanted to amend the age of children who are exempt from being counted to 0-3.
Public comment was then opened up, and both residents and Airbnb residents stood up to speak about their perspectives. Residents begged the council to hold fast to the maximum amount of guests, whereas owner-operators begged the council to allow the exemption.
Council moved to vote on Gambaro’s motion with the amendment, to which the motion failed 3-2. Pontieri made a motion to accept the ordinance as is, with the amendment that maximum occupancy does not apply to children between 0-3, miller seconded the motion. The vote was called on this new motion which passed unanimously.
