City Council - public_hearing

I apologize, it's a little bit, yeah, go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. Tonight I'll provide you and the public with an overview of the proposed revisions to the city's rental housing regulations, the additional amendments proposed by Council following first reading, and the related zoning amendments concerning short-term rental units. As Council will recall, first reading of the proposed rental housing regulations was approved on June 2, 2026, During first reading, Council proposed five additional amendments for consideration. Since that time, the Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended approval of the related zoning amendments. The proposed ordinance, Council's additional amendments, and the related zoning amendments have been made available for public review and comment on the City's website, and staff has provided Council with the public feedback received to date. The city's current rental housing regulations ordinance already regulates residential rental units. These proposed revisions are intended to clarify the requirements for long-term and short-term rentals and establish additional standards specifically for the operation of short-term rentals. The proposed ordinance updates and clarifies the requirements for long-term residential rental units Long-term rentals would continue to be required to maintain an annual rental registration and a city business license, comply with applicable city codes and designate an agent in charge when required. Properties registered as long-term rentals could not be advertised or operated as short-term rentals without first obtaining the required short-term rental approvals. Short-term rentals differ operationally from traditional long-term rentals because of the transient nature of their occupancy and the frequency of rental activity. The proposed regulations establish a framework for where short-term rentals may operate and the standards that they must follow while addressing potential impacts on the surrounding properties in the neighborhoods. Under the proposed ordinance, all short-term rental units would be required to obtain a short-term rental permit, zoning approval, and city business license prior to operation. Permits would be non-transferable and tied to the city's existing business license renewal cycle, which runs from May 1st through April 30th of each year. The ordinance establishes an annual short-term rental permit fee of $150 per dwelling unit with a $100 late fee for failure to timely obtain or renew the required permit. The ordinance also establishes operational requirements specifically applicable to short-term rental units, and these requirements include the following. The person making the reservation must be at least 21 years old, and the minimum rental period must be two consecutive nights. Maximum overnight occupancy would be limited to two persons per bedroom, excluding children under five years old. The owner or the agent in charge must be available by telephone during periods of occupancy and be able to physically respond to the property within 45 minutes when requested by an authorized city official. Each short-term rental would be required to provide guests with an informational packet containing the owner or agent's contact information, parking requirements, emergency information, sanitation information, the STR permit number, and then information regarding applicable regulations. Each short-term rental would be required to provide at least one off-street parking space per bedroom. Overnight street parking by short-term rental guests would be prohibited, as would parking on landscaped, grassy, or unimproved areas. Vehicles could not block traffic, sidewalks, driveways, or access to neighboring properties. Short-term rental advertisements would be required to include the city-issued short-term rental permit number. The owner or agent would be required to provide notice of the short term rental and contact information to immediately adjacent property owners, property owners directly across the street, and any applicable homeowners association. Property maintenance requirements would have to continue to be met to ensure compliance with our city codes and then compliance with all applicable city, county, and state business license and revenue collection requirements. The proposed ordinance also addresses short-term rentals that are currently operating within the city. An existing short-term rental may qualify as a lawful, non-conforming use if, prior to the effective date of the ordinance, the owner held a valid city business license and rental registration and the property met the definition of a short-term rental. and short-term rental operating without the required rental registration or business license would not acquire pre-existing non-conforming status. For short-term rentals that are currently operating in the approved zoning districts or can demonstrate a lawful non-conforming use, the ordinance provides a 90-day compliance period from the effective date of the ordinance to obtain the required short-term rental permit and pay the fees. The ordinance also establishes procedures for enforcement and revocation of the short-term rental permit. A permit may be revoked for failure to comply with the ordinance or other applicable laws, providing faults or misleading information, more than three verified violations within a 12-month period, or failure to timely correct a violation. An owner may appeal a decision to suspend or revoke the permit in accordance with the city's business license ordinance with the appeal heard by city council or its designee. Upon revocation, all short-term rental activity must cease for that property, and the property would be ineligible for a new permit for the next 12 months. In addition to the provisions contained in the proposed ordinance, Council proposed five additional amendments during first reading for consideration. The first amendment would prohibit visitors in excess of the maximum permitted occupancy from being on the short-term rental property between 9pm and 7am. A visitor is defined as someone invited to the property by a registered guest who does not stay overnight. The second amendment would require each short-term rental to have a noise monitoring device capable of providing real-time notification to the owner or the designated agent when sound levels exceed 80 decibels. The third amendment would prohibit a short-term rental from being rented to a person whose primary residence is located within 50 miles of the short-term rental property. And the owner or the designated agent would be responsible for verifying the primary residence of the person making the reservation and then providing documentation upon request by the city. The Fourth Amendment would provide an exception to the proposed zoning districts for certain properties purchased during a specified period. To qualify, the property must have been purchased on or after July 6, 2025, and on or before January 6, 2026, and remain unoccupied from closing until public notice for the June 2nd meeting, which is when we did first reading on this ordinance. And then the owner must demonstrate that the property was intended for use as a short-term rental at the time of closing. and then all other short-term rental requirements would continue to apply to that property. The Fifth Amendment would provide an exception to the proposed zoning restrictions as well, and that would be for owner-occupied properties. To qualify, the property must be classified by Lexington County as owner-occupied and receive the 4% special assessment ratio, and all other short-term rental requirements would continue to apply. For amendments four and five, if those items pass tonight, then staff will draft the zoning text amendments and present those to the Planning Commission in September. In addition to the proposed changes to the rental housing regulations, council will also consider tonight the related amendments to the city's zoning ordinance. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed zoning amendments on June the 22nd and recommended approval. The amendments would allow short-term rentals within dwelling units otherwise permitted and the C1, C2, C3, R1 and R2 zoning districts. In the C1 and C2 zoning districts specifically, residential dwelling units are already limited by the zoning ordinance to upper story residential uses located above non-residential ground floor uses. As a result, the proposed amendment would not authorize new standalone residential uses or ground floor residential occupancy where otherwise prohibited by the zoning ordinance. As I mentioned, if council approves amendments four and five tonight, staff would also move forward with the necessary zoning text amendments to address those. And I think that concludes everything. I'm happy to answer any questions you have.

Yeah. Michelle, will you clarify for everybody in the audience and for our residents? Currently, at this time, where can short-term rentals be? All over the city? I mean, there's no guidelines. Okay. That's correct. I think there was a misnomer out there that we were singling out certain areas to allow them versus not. And I think that that was one thing that just needed to be cleared up to where right now we're just trying to make sure we've got good, I guess, ordinance in effect.

Yes, as related to our zoning ordinance, that's correct. Homeowner associations may have different rules related to short-term rentals.

Anyone else?

So Amendment 5, the owner-occupied property, does that cover the folks that are building buildings behind their houses for whether it's short-term rental or whether it's a family member moving in with them and how we...

So that would be whether an accessory dwelling use would be allowed in that zoning district.

So it would not be allowed?

No.

I want to make sure I understand you. So if you're in a district where an accessory dwelling unit is allowed and you have another unit there, so you had to have two units on the property,

the amendment five would it allow you to use both of those as short-term rentals or you would have to live in in the home because you would have to get the four percent um we have we have definition for owner occupied was that you're uh receiving the um four percent four percent tax assessment from lexington county so if you have and

If you have an ADU currently and you get your tax bill, do you get one tax bill for the primary residence on the property and one for the second building or are they both taxed at 4%?

I think they're both taxed at 4% unless they're separate addresses.

That's my thought as well, which means that you would be able to, qualify to use both like if we're going to do that for residential structures i think it should be limited to the structure that you live in i don't think the intent of it is to say you can have your house and then you can also escape by the law by having an adu out back that you rent out non-stop all the time as an airbnb but that's just my thoughts but we really allow

Yeah, and we got restrictions on the ADUs.

And it wouldn't be a problem unless there was one currently that gets grandfathered because going forward it wouldn't. Anyone else? All right, thank you. Ms. Bergman, if you would please come on up. Everybody's gonna be limited to three minutes tonight. When you come up, please say your name and your address for the record. And we look forward to hearing from you. We appreciate your emails.

Yep. And thank you for allowing us the public input. My name is David Bergman. I'm at 200 Augusta. That's where my property is. I own a property management company, Heartwood Furnished Homes. I'm just going to focus tonight on one specific thing, which is how we're treating existing SDRs that existed prior to us bringing this clarity forward for adoption. It really doesn't affect me. We have a business license. We've been getting our residential rental permits because I have long-term permits. So when I went in, they made it you know they kind of told me the last year to oh yeah we're doing this now um so but i have spoken with a lot of people and it's pretty clear to me that a lot of operators really weren't sure about this and maybe they don't live locally so they didn't come into city hall to talk to staff and in the past year to understand that, but I think it's unnecessarily punitive, and it could create legal problems that I just think we could avoid. Before January, STRs weren't identified in the principal use table, and under the zoning definitions, rentals of less than one week were specifically considered lodging units, so requiring a residential rental permit for a lodging unit is just counterintuitive. It's worth saying they required something that they weren't in the zoning code. So I experienced that confusion firsthand a few years ago. When I did go into the city, I explained what we were doing for the first time. And the staff wasn't sure what we needed. And they had to email. And it took several weeks for them to get back to me, because I think we are the first people to do that. and there wasn't any guidance on the city's website so there is real ambiguity here and obviously part of what this ordinance is doing is fixing that which i think is really good and i like a lot of it and i think we got to update that zoning obviously to have that principal use for strs but if we're creating that clarity now i don't think it makes sense to punish existing operators for not understanding rules that we really weren't even clear as the city staff on And I think that raises a legitimate question, too, about that pending ordinance doctrine. Someone who established a new use after the... Are we really saying that these people are establishing a new use after the cutoff, or are they simply curing a licensing deficiency to turn that STR that was already operating before the cutoff? And I've spoken with operators who they are prepared to challenge that position. And I just think it's a fight the city should avoid. We're told there's roughly 130 STRs in West Columbia. I don't even think we know how many of those had permits. Do we? No, I don't think we do. So a significant number didn't is my feeling, but I'd like to get the data, and I think that'll say how unclear those city requirements were before January. So my suggestion is simple. If someone can document that they were operating before the January cutoff, just give them 60 days to come into compliance, get the permits, pay up their licensing fees, whatever they need to do. Mr. Herman, that's it.

But I'll tell you, your email was well received today. I've asked staff. To prepare a revised Amendment 6 to remove the rental registration requirement, because I do agree with you, there was some lack of clarity, in my opinion, if you look at the lodging units compared to a rental unit.

Thank you.

Ms. Kelly Burnside?

Good evening. Thank you for allowing me to be here. I think David said it really well, and I don't want to, you know, beat a dead horse, but... Kelly, if you don't mind, give us your name. Oh, I'm sorry. Kelly Burnside, 2100 Bob White Lane. Good to see you. Yeah, good to see you, too. And I just want to take a couple minutes and talk about the human side of this. We talk about terms like short-term, business license, grandfather and permits, but behind those terms are actual homeowners. They're actual people. These are some people that bought homes. They've invested their life savings. Maybe they invested just some of it for investment purposes. They've made repairs. They put their heart and soul, their sweat into these properties. And in good faith, they pay taxes. And this is also when the city used to allow that. Now we're talking about drawing a line saying, well, I know you just spent hundreds of thousands of dollars. You've cleaned up the yard. You've painted the house. You've done all these repairs. Some of them have done the repairs themselves. Some of them have hired contractors. And now we're saying, well, sorry, too bad. You forgot to get a license. You're done. And so I think there's, we need to look at the human aspect of this, look at how people have invested in these properties, they've made them better, and really all we need to do is get everybody in compliance, that way the city can benefit from that, the citizens are happy, and then going forward, people can be in compliance with the rules and the regulations. So thank you.

I get the potential lack of clarity on the rental registration due to conflicting, possibly conflicting definitions or some vagueness in the definition. But I don't understand a lack of understanding on getting a business license for rental activities.

So some of the people have only owned the property for a few months, and I've known homeowners, the late Billy Oswald, who has probably 50 rentals, and he doesn't have a license for any of them, and I'm not trying to call anybody out, but there's people, and that's the way it's been done for years and years, and they didn't have an actual business license because, I mean, you know there's a Supreme Court case back in the 1980s that said short-term rentals or rentals in general weren't a hotel. So maybe that lack of clarity, but also we're all human. We all have busy lives I have three children, you know the and I don't think going back. Okay, let's allow ten years of being non-compliant I don't really agree with that, but maybe a year maybe six months I think that's reasonable when you're running multiple businesses kind of like with my law practice Maybe if I forgot to got up to get a business license for my law practice the city would say hey You got to pay you forgot. Let's get you in compliant and I'd get a fine, right and That could have happened, starting your new business not knowing, right? But you wouldn't ever come in and say, well, you can't operate your law practice in this area. And I think that's the distinction is some people forgot, some people busy, especially around Christmas time, things like that, they forgot to get a license. I don't think you should punish those people for such of the damages that they would suffer because of that. Thank you. Thank you for your time.

Travis Reed. Kelly, thank you for sending your email and your correspondence. Thank you to everybody who's reached out one way or another. Mr. Reid, if you will, please say your name and your address.

Afternoon, everybody. My name is Travis Reid. I am a realtor here in the Midlands. I live at 631 Hooks and Circle. Here in West Columbia, I think beyond a lot of what was spoken about today is the simple fact that a short-term rental, once given too many regulations or they fall out, is just going to turn into a long-term tenant situation where you don't see them turn hands often enough, where it seems like it's going to be more of a hindrance. We get more complaints about long-term rentals. Whereas, as an operator of a short-term rental, when we have an issue, the neighbors call me. They know about it. I think there should be some regulation here. I'm just worried about a carve-out not being big enough for those who have invested their life savings into short-term rentals being their retirement. My parents have. I have. It's very few, like the big hedge funds that everybody talks about, very few of them are buying short-term rentals. They're buying long-terms, and they're holding them forever. so It just seems like an unnecessary restriction Or it could be potentially too too constricting for for operators out there like myself.

So as far as your properties Are you covered by the carve-out?

No, sir. Well the next house won't be so the house I'm in now I'm fixing it up currently to get it ready to to put up for rent and then it won't be because I guess it's not grandfathered in because I haven't Needed a business permit before now Two or three years ago.

I couldn't have talked about it. Has it been sitting vacant?

No, I live there. You live in a house. And as I'm able to afford renovations, I've been renovating it with the intention of putting it up.

Okay, so you've been there and you've been renovating it along and along, but your eventual intention is to get it in tenable enough shape to do a short-term development.

and be able to afford the next house. Not not not scoffing at that.

Yeah. And I think that highlights the problem with being open ended about the I mean, sure, we want to help and we want to extend as much relief as we possibly can. But I think that highlights the problem with being open ended with the relief that that that we provide i mean um no offense to you but you purchased that house two or three years ago to live in and you've lived in it and you may have had some plan to deliver that into short-term rentals but i mean as far as the neighborhood goes i think it has a short-term rental is much better than as a long-term and that's what i'll have to do is make it a long-term rental for everybody who has a house to come in and say, I wanted to make it short term.

I think you're going to see a lot of people come in doing that.

Yeah. Yeah. I just don't know how big those floodgates are. I think it would open a floodgate.

Mr. Mayor.

Thank you for your time. Thank you. I'm sorry, we cut you off. Did you have anything else you wanted to offer? I thought you were through with your comments, and we cut you off.

For the most part, they said it much better than I did.

Thank you.

I have one question for him, if you would.

Yes, sir.

I'm sorry, I forgot your name. What's your name again? Travis Reed. Oh, Mr. Reed. Yes, sir. Mr. Reed, you stated that to get out a short-term rental person would take you how long? Do you think?

Well, it just depends on the case, but we don't. We haven't, knock on wood, we haven't had any issues needing to get someone out.

And to get out a long-term renter, how long would it take you?

I explained that poorly. I was saying that a purchaser of the home, so as far as the community goes, we'd want probably less rentals and more availability.

But if you had a renter in there that you wanted to get out, how long do you think it would take you to get that renter out if you did everything as fast as you could?

At the admission of, I don't. I don't dabble in that world in long-term rentals. I'm not short 30 to 60 days.

No, no, I do. And I mean, I think that at least 30 days, it would take at least 30 to 45, maybe even 60 days to get out a renter, even if you did everything quickly and most efficiently.

Yes, sir.

Sometimes there's just things that are held up. So I mean, a short-term rental person, you could get out much easier than a long-term renter. That's my comment. 100%. Thank you.

Gustavo Bueno. Mr. Bueno, if you would please say your name and your address for the record.

Good evening, everybody.

Gustavo Bueno is my name. I own 1508 Redwood Drive and I'm in a 750 Augusta Street, so I only have two properties. My understanding, please correct me if I'm wrong, this is always started because we have residents that are fed up with noise, parties, public parking.

Parking. Pool parties spilling over into a neighborhood. Drug use. Drug use.

Wow, that's a great point, because 1508 Redwood Drive was a drug spot for 10 years, and I bought that property and turned it into what it is today. And I think that most neighbors are happy about it, not everybody. Mr. Brooks knows one of them. But what I would like to say is we've faced the same challenge with the city of Columbia, and they created a regulation that they can't enforce. You already have regulations in place to fight parking, to fight noise, to fight drug use, regardless of what the source of that rental occupation is. So really what I would like to see is those rules being enforced, because if you create those regulations All you're going to do, you're going to get rid of the good operators. The bad operators, they don't care. They don't get a business license. They're not going to answer your calls if you text, email them. You're going to have to sue them. You're going to go after them. So who do you want to deal with? You want to deal with the good ones. They're going to sit down and talk to you. And I actually congratulate Councilman Brooks and Green because they actually sat down to listen to what we had to say. And I think that's a good avenue. I think we, the good operators, want to work with you and get rid of these problems. You know who hate parties in my properties? I do. I don't let them happen. I get a call, those guys are out in 15 minutes. I'm going to kick them out of there. Now, if it's a bad long-term tenant, like Mr. Green was saying, it's going to take you two months to get rid of them. So if we work together with the enforcement units and really enforcing the existing rules. Like you guys are suggesting putting literally microphones, those monitoring device, they're just microphones inside of the home, which could potentially lead to a lawsuit because if those audios leak because the company is doing something weird, the guests can sue us and we're gonna have to bring you with us because you told us to put that in there. So I think we can work together and fight those problems because we hate them just as much as the residents. Thank you.

Diane Montgomery. Ms. Montgomery, if you will please say your name and your address when you get up here.

Diane Montgomery, 1026 Lafayette Avenue, and I'm pretty different than everybody else that's speaking because I'm court appointed for an individual who owns a group of properties in West Columbia and Casey, and I'm really related to what Mr. Green was saying about getting the long-term tenant out and getting rid of that problem versus dealing with your short-term folks. I'm an old landlady, and it takes a long time, and I'm here getting people out of bad properties and cleaning up those properties right now. I just wanted to kind of call out the positive aspects of embracing and viewing the short-term rentals a little more from a perspective of, as Mr. Bueno has said, deal with the problem. not with this broad zoning thing that you, it looks like you're going down. I'm a veteran of a very unfortunate and long protracted lawsuit in another town, which we really, we ended up winning, but it was awful for everybody, the county most of all, because lots of legal expense and things tied up. So just, I would urge you to consider that your responsible short-term property owners are going to be some of your very best people. They're going to be a little more better funded. They care to stay within the rules. Some of us haven't been able to get a permit, though we've been trying. And the last thing we want is trouble. We want good properties, and we don't want bad renters. Um, there, there are ways to deal with it. And, and I would urge you also to look at the big rental platforms. Everybody has to go through those. They're doing a great job of cleaning it up and applying technology and having blacklist for those people that have violated somewhere else. They're not going to let them in. I think your idea about not letting the locals, um, Rent a house for parties. That's just not a good plan. But don't expose West Columbia to a lawsuit and a really angry group of people that have made investments and would be really good fee payers and taxpayers and good citizens. I just urge you to tweak it a little more. Just taking a wholesale map approach. I'm not sure that's going to be the best way to go.

How long have you managed Ms. Ellis' horse stuff?

Know miss Ellis or she used to be a she had property which it's been a long process from when they started Down the road of dementia and the properties were just failing and just terrible problems I've been involved for probably five years, but I didn't get legal control until 23 mid 23 how many of her properties Were utilized for short-term rentals before this that will not be able to be utilized for short-term rental after this We have we have only one and it's in Casey and it's kind of a special case and I would actually wouldn't have chosen to do that but because of the our needs for accessing the property it just was a nice way to go and we've had a great experience and

But just so I'm clear, there's no property that y'all previously utilized for short-term rental that will be impacted to the point that you can no longer utilize it for short-term rentals after this is adopted, right?

I'm not sure I understand your ordinance.

Is there any property in the city of West Columbia that y'all have utilized for short-term rentals before this that you will no longer be able to utilize for short-term rentals after this?

If you grant us grandfathering in, I think the answer to your question is no. I mean, we would be able to do that, but we got caught. In the middle there, we were already working on that house and furnishing that house, and when we realized the ordinance was out there pending.

How long were you working on the house?

We're going to have to go back and look at receipts and what we've paid people, but it's been many, many months before the end of last year, for sure.

And your rights run through Ms. Ellesore. How long did she own that property? And how long did her husband own it before she took over?

Decades. There are a bunch of properties, and I don't have every one in my brain.

And they never elected and decided to go into short-term rental, right?

Well, those didn't even exist then. That wasn't a possibility.

Thank you for your input.

Thank you.

Summer Winslow? Summer, if you would, say your name and address for the record.

My name is Summer Winslow. I live at 101 Timber Ridge Drive in Westover Acres. I've been there about 15 years. I've been a resident of West Columbia proper for about 25 years. Wonderful place to have community, raise a family, which is what I've done. And I love Westover Acres. It's convenient. I work downtown. I just love it, love it, love it. But in recent years, the dynamics of the neighborhood has started to change. And I believe it is mainly because of these short-term rentals and the Airbnbs. And within my house, I can walk to probably six to eight Airbnbs from where I am. So they're in close proximity. I wish everybody were good host. However, that's not the case. And we've seen it firsthand. between noise, being party homes, you know, 20-50 cars parking, street racing, just speeding in general, because it's not their neighborhood, so who cares? Trash being left out. You know, in West Columbia, you have a certain time to put out your trash and a certain time to bring it out. It doesn't apply, apparently, to Airbnbs. And just unsavory individuals in our neighborhood. You know, I have an 11-year-old. He's seen it with his own two eyes and asked, what are they doing? Because we've called the cops on certain things. I'm like, unless something changes, there's nothing we can do right now. I mean, we shouldn't be in our home hearing all these things. And yes, you should have birthday parties and things like that in your home. But when it's not your home, you just don't give it as much consideration to the neighbors. And that's where we are. And frankly, I think economic development for the West Columbia, we should be boosting the hotels that are doing what they're supposed to do and can deal with transients and have You know, that's their purpose. So why are we opening up our neighborhoods to becoming hotels when we have great hotels nearby? Some we could do without, but for the most part, we have great hotels. And without these rules, you know, our neighborhood is, the safety in our neighborhood is becoming an afterthought because most of these people are not part of our neighborhood. So without y'all pushing these, you know, these folks to do the things and do the right things and parking and all this, it's gonna stay this way. And I just think that we need these changes to happen to protect our neighborhood. The last thing I want to do is leave and go live in an HOA in a cookie cutter home. But the thing with HOAs, they don't allow this kind of stuff. And so that's the last thing I want to do. But it makes you start thinking about that. This home I bought, I wanted my child to be in one home. I moved all around when I was young. This is the house we bought to be there from start to finish. And I want it to stay that way. And I hope that y'all will push these things to help people like me want to stay in the neighborhood. And that's all.

Thank you. Thank you. I have one question. Can I ask her one question? With the trash situation, what day is trash picked up?

Well, it depends on the street. I know mine is on Wednesday. I just put it out today. And then you're supposed to have it, you know, up. You can only put it out, I think it's like 5 o'clock the previous night. Right. by the next day, probably 24 hours, I guess.

How long were those trash cans sitting out at the short-term rentals?

Days.

Okay.

And not to mention just the, you know, the trash in the streets, because, I mean, again, it's just, and I know I've seen on the Facebook page one of them that we've had the most issues with, you know, trying to get someone in the neighborhood to maybe move their trash, which, thank God, I mean, that would be great, but, I mean, it's just, it doesn't happen. I mean, it just sits out there, and I know I'd get in trouble for it. But I wouldn't do that because I don't want my neighbors to see trash if they didn't pick it up.

We also have had, and we're about to get, I guess, back toward that season where they start kind of roaming around. We've had coyotes.

Oh, I see them on my camera all the time.

We've got plenty of deer. We've got other wild animals that can get into the trash and cause a major mess. And if you don't mind, can I ask a question to people that already talked? I want to know how they handle your trash. How do you handle your trash? Me? Yeah, for the city of West Columbia.

Almost. Okay. Gotcha.

And put them back up. Okay. I got you. That's what I want. I just want to say somebody was handling it because that is a concern I have. We're starting to see it.

Mr. Reid won't say it's your question.

I'd love to answer it. My family, my mother and father and myself take turns. Gotcha. Because we're not at that scale.

Okay.

Because we've been working so hard for this to get it.

And as a city, from a city standpoint, I noticed it Saturday morning. I was up really early Saturday morning because I had something I had to do, and I was actually going through the avenues, and I noticed a lot of trash cans at either short-term rentals, some of the duplexes, apartments sitting on the street on Saturday. So I do think that's a concern that needs to be addressed with not just short-term but long-term rentals. So I hope that's something we can address.

Is this visually unappealing and all the other things?

Yeah.

I had a question for Mr. Carter. Is there not a city ordinance that requires the trash cans to be put back and code enforcement would be issuing tickets or nice notes to our residents if the trash cans are not put back?

We do currently have an ordinance regarding the management of roll carts and when they can be put out and when they must be brought back in from the street. The issue is notification and issuing the violation. It's a more direct process when dealing with someone who is living in the residence long term or a owner-occupied property. Vacant properties, if no one's there, code enforcement just simply is not able to issue it.

Do they send the owner a letter I think I've received a letter or two for my grass being high at one time or another.

They will go through a process, and that process does include written notification.

I see. Thank you.

It's the repeat offenders that get the tickets, which happens frequently.

Thank you so much. Thank you. Hey, was there anybody else who wanted to be heard before we close out the public comments? Come on up if you would. Say your name and your address.

My name is Shane Crowley. I recently purchased 1100 Seminole Drive in January. My actual purchase date currently falls seven days out of the exemption period as far as that goes.

Where do you currently live?

what's that where do you currently i have a property in sprintdale that i live more than six times six months out of the year and then i partially live uh in minnesota part of the year as well too so back and forth all right as far as that goes but i really i've spoken about changing the exemption to be under contract compared to closing because i was legally obligated to purchase the house when you guys made the decision. If I wouldn't have purchased the house, I would have been in breach of contract and had $20,000 to $30,000, whether it be legal fees or something else, you know, in order to get out of the contract. But I also want to point out, you know, the people that we actually serve, they're not the party people. They're not, you know, troublemakers and stuff like that. In multiple properties that I own, majority is people who are military families they're coming to graduation family day things like that to go and support the people that are coming to training to you know go off and serve our country as far as that goes that's a large majority of them and you're basically just telling them that you can serve our country but Coming and staying in our neighborhoods is really, we don't want that of you guys as far as that goes. Even residents of West Columbia, if a tree falls on their house, they can't go rent a place for three weeks to stay in West Columbia. They've got to go stay somewhere else as far as that goes. Or you say go to a hotel, but try to do homework, try to do any of your normal things as far as cooking or anything like that, and hotel for three weeks. And it really doesn't, it's going to be a major problem as far as that goes.

Anyone have any questions? Thank you.

I'll say we talked yesterday. Yes. And I do, I think, I will tell you, well, hopefully we'll get into this in a little bit. I do think that's one thing we need to look at is under contract because things do happen. And I know you were trying to get yours closed as quick as possible, but you're under contract. When you tell me for two months,

From end of November through as far as that goes and we had a couple of the delays but yeah so I just think it was and it was something that I was obligated to as far as that goes and I was also confused on the process because I didn't come in and say hey I Want a license and try to get a license because you guys said pending ordinance. We're gonna figure this out and my thought process was Let you guys figure it out. And then once you guys come to a decision then incorporate you know, communicating and stuff like that, because it wasn't gonna do me any good right away when we didn't have any idea what the rules or regulations were gonna be.

Thank you.

Come on up, ma'am. Say your name and address, please.

My name is Christy Simbos. I currently reside at Foxworth Drive in Lexington. I first started the short-term rental business last year. I bought my first house in May of last year. I did everything proper exactly the way I was supposed to. I actually got my business license and registration after the July cutoff last year. So, you know, I was trying to make sure I've done everything correct, everything right. A few months after that, I would say four or five months, you know, everything's going well. I mean, we've told our neighbors, you know, please call us anything goes wrong. You know, we have a deputy that lives next door. His parents live across the street. You know, we've definitely gotten involved with the street. We live locally. We take care of the property. We manage it. We clean it. We are here to do the right thing. I entered into a contract unknowing that I would not be able to get a business license in April of this year. I called the city five days after we got it ratified after inspections because I knew I wanted to go forward with it. They told me that I wasn't allowed to get a business license yet because it was paused. And so I finally heard back 17 days later after my due diligence period is over from Michelle Dickerson that all the regulations are unknown at this point in time. The property I'm buying is actually in a R3 zone. I've already closed on it. And I'm just asking to be grandfathered in before these regulations actually take effect because I did purchase the property before the June 2nd meeting and this happened. If you guys would not grandfather me in, if you would give possibly a special exception through the Boarding Zone of Appeals for just my parcel property, I'm happy to answer any questions, anything you guys have for me.

Anybody have any questions?

Where is the first property you're currently doing a short for?

It's 1132 Seminole Drive.

Okay, and then where's the other property at?

It's on B Avenue.

Thank you. Where is it on B Avenue?

1605 B Avenue. and actually the property next to me is open. There's no house on it. The property next to me on the other side is a long-term rental, which looks dilapidated and nobody cares about, which I care about my property. So that right there is just bad for me. Across the street is an LLC. The two other houses across the street, the owners don't even live there. They operate those as long-term rentals. So I'm in an area where actually nobody around me even, owns and lives in the property for themselves.

Thank you. Anybody else?

I have one more question. I'm sorry, down here. How often are you at those rentals, the short-term rentals?

I'm there every turnaround.

And how often is the turnaround, what, a week, a month?

It depends. You know, some people are like, you know, they said previously they're coming in for, you know, a Fort Jackson graduation or they're coming in for, you know, something else that has to do with their family or, you know, their family lives close by and it's a wedding or something to that effect. So usually it's less than a week we've had, you know. Two, I believe, that have been there since I've operated for more than one week. They were there for about two weeks, but that's the longest I've ever had. It's usually three to five days.

So you're at your property about every two weeks, give or take?

I'm there, yeah, probably at least once a week.

And the long-term rental that you saw, have you seen those owners any come by?

They are actually owned by an LLC in California.

Okay. So they haven't actually come to the property any at all?

No, and it looks terrible.

Thank you.

Um, it's right next door to mine. 1600 block of B, Adam. Yeah.

The odd side of the road. Yeah.

Yeah, that one looks terrible. I've seen people coming in and leaving very quickly right after they've looked to even rent it, and they just have disappointed looks on their faces because it's pretty rough.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else? Hearing no one else July the 6th of 2025

we will certainly give it consideration anyone else hearing nobody else wishing to speak we will close out the public hearing on the short-term rental

And we will go into the regular council meeting for the month of September. We do have a quorum present. If you would, please bow your head while I say the invocation.