City prevails in appeal of rentals decision

LACONIA — A judge has upheld the city Zoning Board’s decision not to allow a Bedford couple to continue offering their lakefront home as a short-term rental.

In a ruling handed down Tuesday, Superior Court Judge James D. O’Neill III said the ZBA’s decision to deny a special exception to Kimberly and Carlos Guzman, of Bedford, who sought to continue to rent a house at 77 Opechee St. on a short-term basis was based upon “ample evidence” that the property did not qualify for a special exception from the city’s Zoning Ordinance.

The Guzmans took the city to court, arguing in part that the city was engaging in selective enforcement of the ordinance because its enforcement decisions were being spurred by complaints made to the city instead of seeking to identify all properties being used for short-term rentals and treating all such uses equally.

The judge concluded that the owners had not offered any evidence to show that the city was treating the complaints made against their property differently from complaints that the city received about other properties.

The board denied the special exception because the guests staying at the house were exacerbating parking problems along the street, it was out of character with the adjacent neighborhood, and the location was not appropriate for a short-term rental use.

In his 16-page ruling, O’Neill said the ZBA’s decision did not violate equal protection because short-term and long-term rentals are not similar.

The Guzmans, whose property has frontage on Lake Opechee, argued the ZBA’s denial of their application for the special exception amounted to an unlawful taking of the property. O’Neill rejected that argument, writing that the Guzmans can still use the house as a vacation home or full-time retirement residence, which are the reasons they bought the property, according to the suit.

“Obviously the city is pleased with the decision,” said Laura Spector-Morgan, the city’s attorney. She remarked that many cities and towns in the state base their enforcement actions on complaints because the enforcement resources they have are limited.

“This decision did not single out the Guzmans,” she said.

A call seeking comment from the Guzmans’ attorney was not immediately returned Tuesday afternoon.

“The ZBA considered the facts and testimony before it and concluded the petitioner did not meet the criteria for the special exception,” O’Neill wrote.