Florida Court Upholds Fire District’s Vacation Rental Assessment

A Florida circuit court has ruled in favor of the West Manatee Fire and Rescue District in a legal challenge brought by a short-term rental property owner over higher fire assessment rates for vacation rentals.

C&D Properties of AMI, LLC filed suit against the District claiming its classification of short-term vacation rental properties as “commercial” for the purpose of calculating non-ad valorem fire assessments, was unlawful. The lawsuit asserted three key claims:

• First, that the higher rate was an impermissible regulation of short-term rentals disguised as a special assessment.
• Second, the District’s action that treated short-term rental property as commercial was preempted by state law, specifically Florida Statutes § 509.032(7), which prohibits local governments from regulating the duration or frequency of vacation rentals.
• Third, the plaintiff challenged the validity of the District’s classification of vacation rentals as “commercial” properties for assessment purposes, arguing that it was arbitrary and exceeded the District’s statutory authority.

Judge Edward Nicholas of the Manatee County Circuit Court granted the District’s motion for final summary judgment. In a comprehensive order, the court rejected all of the plaintiff’s claims, holding that the District acted within its legal authority when it imposed the higher assessment rate based on property usage.

The court emphasized that the assessments were not regulatory in nature. Quoting from the court’s final order:

• Our courts have historically made distinctions between monetary exactions that are regarded as revenue-raising taxes, and those regarded as duties imposed for a regulatory purpose.
• A tax is an enforced burden, imposed unilaterally by sovereign right, for the purpose of supporting “routine government functions.”
• If the “main object [of the law] is the obtaining of revenue, it is properly referable to the taxing power.”
• Taxes by a local governing authority must be expressly authorized either by the Florida Constitution or a grant of the Florida legislature.
• In contrast, if the main object of the monetary exaction is “not economic in purpose,”

but to promote the health, health, safety, welfare, or public morals, it is a regulatory measure.

• A special assessment is like a tax, in that it is an “enforced contribution from the property owner,” but it is governed by different principles.
• Special assessments operate on the theory that community members should pay an amount proportionate to the level of benefit received from the government’s actions, rather than in relation to the value of their property.
• An assessment can often be imposed when a tax would otherwise be unauthorized.
• Property Owner does not dispute that the Fire District is properly authorized by the Florida legislature to impose non-ad valorem assessments on its properties, or that the apportionment is fair.
•  It argues that the increased assessment rate acts as a regulation, and therefore violates § 509.032(7)(a), Fla. Stat.
• For the Fire District’s assessment rate to act as a regulation… it would have to do something to control Property Owner’s vacation rentals, like fund a licensing scheme designed to impose accountability standards.
• Property Owner concedes that the increased assessment rate does not prohibit the existence of its vacation rentals or regulate the duration or frequency of the rental of its condominium units.
• Moreover, and most importantly, Property Owner fails to identify any control mechanism imposed on its vacation rentals as a result of the increased rate.
• While the units, operating as vacation rentals, are apparently now being subjected to increased life safety standards under the Fire Code, these standards are imposed by the State… and the District merely enforces them, using their available resources.
• Permitting an increased rate to fund increased services benefitting an owner’s property, in proportion to that benefit, simply does not meet the definition of a “regulation.”
• Because there is an absence of any evidence indicating that the Fire District’s increased assessment rate is for a non-revenue-generating purpose, the rate increase does not act as a “regulation” on Property Owner’s vacation rentals, and it does not violate the provisions of § 509.032(7)(a), Fla. Stat.
• Even if the Fire District’s increased assessment rate could be viewed as a regulation, the Court would not find that the increased assessment was an action preempted to the State, either expressly or by implication, under the language of§ 509.032(7), Fla. Stat.
• In consideration of the foregoing, the Court finds that the Fire District’s rate increase of its assessment imposed on residential properties used as transient public lodging establishments, which includes vacation rentals, is not a regulation that is preempted to the State, either expressly or by implication, under the terms of§ 509.032(7)(a) and (b), Fla. Stat.
• As there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact, the Fire District is entitled to final summary judgment in its favor.

The decision was followed by a final judgment order entered on May 29, 2025. No appeal was filed, and the time to appeal has expired.

In a July 2, 2025, press release, Fire Chief Ben Rigney praised the ruling: “The Fire Commission has never opposed short-term vacation rentals within the District. The Fire Commission believes that property owners have the right to choose how they use their homes. However, if they opt to operate a vacation rental, they should bear the additional costs for the inspections and life safety enforcement required by the Florida Fire Prevention Code.”

The District noted that it applies similar higher commercial rates to other residentially zoned properties with intensified use—such as assisted living facilities and daycares—which are also subject to stricter life safety regulations.

Attached are copies of the decision, judgment, and the fire district’s press release.