The commission devoted considerable time to debating Ordinance 1698, which proposes amendments to Chapter 26.5 of the Cocoa Beach code concerning vacation rentals. This ordinance aims to prevent rentals from being used as party houses by revising occupancy provisions, including exempting infants under two years from the occupant count. Concerns were raised by public commenters, including Janice Scott, who suggested that the ordinance should prevent vacation rentals from being rented during hurricanes to avoid “hurricane parties.” She highlighted the lack of emergency guidance for vacation rental guests compared to hotel guests and noted the growing number of vacation rentals in the city, estimating between 500 and 700. Riley Goldman also voiced concerns, stating the ordinance could harm the local economy by unfairly restricting vacation rental owners compared to local residents who can host gatherings without similar limitations.

A commissioner addressed Goldman’s concerns, noting that the ordinance’s occupancy restrictions would not apply when the property is owner-occupied. The commission acknowledged the need to balance regulations to maintain the community’s character and support economic contributions from vacation rentals. As the discussion continued, the commission considered including a clause in registration documents for vacation rentals, mandating adherence to state and city regulations during evacuation notices. This suggestion was seen as a practical measure to ensure compliance without formalizing it in the ordinance.

The enforcement of rental regulations also came under scrutiny, particularly the definition of an occupant. The commission debated whether the stipulated 15-minute presence should be adjusted to 30 minutes or an hour, considering enforcement challenges. The police chief emphasized the difficulty of enforcing such regulations without extensive monitoring, noting that enforcement would likely rely on public complaints rather than proactive measures. The commission agreed on the importance of discretion in enforcement to avoid unwarranted actions stemming from nuisance complaints.

In addition to vacation rental regulations, the commission discussed a grant application for the renovation of a building purchased by a local church in 2021. The proposal involves an investment of approximately $50,000 to just under $100,000 for improvements to the building’s exterior. Concerns were raised about allocating public funds to a tax-exempt property, but the church representative clarified that taxes were paid on the parking area, and community contributions were emphasized. The grant mechanics allow for reimbursement of 50% of project costs up to a maximum of $50,000. The commission sought clarification on whether Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) guidelines restrict grants to tax-paying properties, with the city attorney confirming such restrictions but acknowledging the need for further review.

Another grant request was considered for the Catalyst Shop on North Orlando Avenue, seeking $10,000 for minor improvements such as roof repairs. The shop’s manager admitted to starting work without prior approval. The commission debated the documentation adequacy, emphasizing the necessity of three contractor bids as part of the application. A motion to approve the request was supported, contingent on compliance with city requirements.