The legal battle between the city of Fort Worth and a coalition of short-term rental operators took the next step with a court hearing held Dec. 19. The saga over the city’s short-term rental regulations is expected to continue into the new year, with no definitive timeline for a verdict.
Republican Judge Tom Lowe of the 236th Judicial District Court heard from both parties inside his courtroom at the Tom Vandergriff Civil Courts Building in downtown Fort Worth. After hearing arguments, Lowe said he wanted to study the case further but will deliver a verdict as quickly as possible.
The lawsuit, filed by 114 Tarrant-area short-term rental operators and members of the Fort Worth Short Term Rental Alliance, claimed that Fort Worth violated property rights by preventing property owners from operating short-term rentals. More than a dozen plaintiffs attended the hearing Thursday.
The operators filed the suit in June 2023 after City Council members voted unanimously in February 2023 to approve new short-term rental regulations. The lawsuit challenged those regulations, which essentially banned short-term rentals from operating in residential areas and created stricter rules for operation in commercial and mixed-use areas.
Both the plaintiffs and city requested summary judgements on the case in October and argued that the opposite party should pay their legal fees. Motions for summary judgements ask the court to decide the case without going to trial, arguing that there are no genuine disputes about the material facts and that the law favors the requester’s side.
Joe Greenhill, an attorney with the law firm Kelly Hart & Hallman representing the city in the suit, declined to comment after the hearing. The city’s legal department declined to comment until after the ruling.
Graigory Fancher, an attorney with the law firm Bourland Wall & Wenzel representing the plaintiffs, told the Report he expects Lowe to have a verdict in the coming weeks, noting that with the holidays, a ruling could come in the first half of January.
“I 100% believe in our client’s argument, and I 100% believe that either at the district court level or at the appellate court level, the homeowners are going to be vindicated,” Fancher said.
Lauren Brady, an Airbnb host and one of the plaintiffs, said she felt “really positive” after the hearing and hopes to get positive news in the coming weeks.
“I felt like our attorneys made some excellent points and did so very eloquently and respectfully but poignantly in order to make our case in front of the judge, and we’re just really hopeful that the judge rules in our favor and we can move on,” Brady said.
Lowe could decide to grant either side’s request to rule in their favor immediately or decide that the case should proceed to trial. Summary judgments do not allow judges to decide on factual issues, but examine whether the pleadings and proof require a trial.
In a Dec. 13 court filing arguing against the plaintiffs’ request for a summary judgment, the city’s attorneys argued that the plaintiffs do not have a vested right to lease their properties for less than 30 days; short-term rental ordinances are “rationally related” to a legitimate government purpose; and the ordinances are not so burdensome as to be oppressive.
“Even if Plaintiffs have a vested right to lease their residential property for less than 30 days (they absolutely do not), the city is still entitled to summary judgment because plaintiffs cannot show that the (short-term rental) ordinances are not rationally related to a legitimate government interest,” the filing states. “The city prohibited (short-term rentals) in residential neighborhoods to preserve the residential quality of neighborhoods, ensure the health and safety of (short-term rental) guests and residents, and preserve the residential housing supply.”
The plaintiffs’ attorneys argued in a Dec. 13 court filing that the operators’ right to lease their properties is “fundamental, vested, settled and not restricted in duration or location.” The filing added that the short-term rental ordinances are not rationally related to any legitimate government purpose and are so burdensome as to be oppressive.
During the Dec. 19 hearing, attorneys reiterated their arguments to the judge. Greenhill hammered down the city’s point that short-term rentals harm the character of Fort Worth neighborhoods.
“The only question the court has to answer is, ‘Was it rational for the city to believe, based on the public comment and the studies that we had done, to think that restricting (short-term rentals) from residential neighborhoods would promote the public health and welfare?’” Greenhill said during the hearing. “The answer to that question is absolutely yes.”
Fancher emphasized the plaintiffs’ opinion that there is no evidence proving short-term rentals pose any harm to the city and that city officials have not conducted any independent studies or research to prove otherwise. He added that existing city ordinances regulating parking, noise and litter concerns are enough to manage common concerns surrounding short-term rentals without banning the rentals themselves.
“We believe that the facts of this case show that there is absolutely no harm to the city from these short-term rentals, that it encourages a police state, that it encourages snooping and spying upon the neighbors, and that there is absolutely no evidence to show that these are any more harmful or less harmful than the population at large,” Fancher said.
Additionally, Fancher argued that the city has acted hypocritically in enacting regulations on short-term rentals. The plaintiffs’ Dec. 13 filing cites a Nov. 20 Fort Worth Report article about the city’s Lead-Safe Program, designed to provide lead-hazard reduction home repair services to Fort Worth homeowners. Fort Worth homeowner Karely Rivas and her family, beneficiaries of the program, said city officials relocated them to an Airbnb during the two-week repair period.
“Finally, and most notably of all, the city’s contention that (short-term rentals) are dangerous and contrary to the character of its residential neighborhoods … is demonstrably false,” the filing states.
Editor’s note: This article was updated at 9:30 p.m. Dec. 19 to include a response from the city’s legal department.
Disclosure: Marianne Auld, a member of the Fort Worth Report board of directors, is the managing partner of Kelly Hart & Hallman. Kelly Hart has also been a financial supporter of the Report. At the Fort Worth Report, news decisions are made independently of our board members and financial supporters. Read more about our editorial independence policy here.
Cecilia Lenzen is a government accountability reporter for the Fort Worth Report. Contact her at cecilia.lenzen@fortworthreport.org or @bycecilialenzen.
This article first appeared on Fort Worth Report and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.