Rental license transfer doesn't benefit public

The subject at the heart of the latest disagreement between the city of Key West and the local watchdog group Last Stand is complex, to say the least.

But it goes to a fundamental question about the future and character of the island, specifically the historic district. Do we want to do everything we can to keep Old Town as an actual residential area, inhabited by people who live and work here? Or do we want to turn it into, essentially, a giant hotel and playground that only happens to resemble individual homes?

In its latest move, the City Commission, sitting as the Board of Adjustment, went with the second option. The commissioners, by a 5-1 vote, overruled city planning staff and approved a plan by developer Pritam Singh to transfer short-term rental permits from his Parrot Key condo project (formerly the Hampton Inn) to Old Town, including residential neighborhoods along Simonton and Petronia streets.

City Planner Gail Kenson initially rejected Singh's proposal for several reasons: because short-term rental licenses sent to Old Town neighborhoods cannot displace existing housing stock, and because the city has set a target of 25 percent of total dwelling units as short-term rentals (a target it exceeds now, according to the city's own records).

What Kenson was attempting to prevent was yet another developer-driven maneuver, in which units and rental rights are divided and traded and moved like so many pieces in a board game. It's a clever strategy for developers and attorneys — Singh and his longtime attorney, Jim Hendrick, perfected this with Truman Annex — but it doesn't necessarily serve the public good. Looking out for us is the commissioners' job, and in this case they let us down.

It may sound like nitpicking for Last Stand to challenge this Board of Adjustment ruling, but the group is performing an important civic role, reminding commissioners and the public what's at stake in technical, legalistic and, let's face it, not all that interesting matters that come before the Board of Adjustment, which gets a lot less public scrutiny than the City Commission. The board's role is to offer variances in cases of genuine hardship, not to ease the way for the most profitable possible stratagems for well-connected developers and attorneys.

We urge the commissioners to reconsider this approval and save our citizens the burden of legal fees on both sides of this case — and to remember whose interest they are really supposed to be serving.