By Jeremy Durham, Opinion Contributor

Whether you personally support or oppose short-term rentals (STRs) one principle should unite us all: City leaders should not gamble taxpayer money or exploit concerns of citizens for personal political gain.

This situation is no longer about STRs. It is about a mayor ignoring clear warnings, rejecting the solution he claims to seek and putting residents on the hook for financial loss — purely to protect his own narrative.

Two-and-a-half years ago, I told the city its STR ordinance did not accomplish the desired purpose. The trial judge stated the same thing and has repeatedly told the city to fix it.

But they chose not to — because they didn’t want to admit they were wrong.

Now, the mayor warns that if the city loses, many properties could end up “grandfathered.” If that happens, it will largely be because he failed to act and then refused to accept a deal that gave him everything he claims to want.

When the trial court order was finally signed on Feb. 24, 2025, I sought to resolve the matter.
At 8:05 p.m. that same evening, I contacted the city and offered to pay a nominal fine — roughly $500 — if the city would dismiss the citations. In return, I agreed not to appeal, meaning I would not pursue damages related to the unlawful injunction and allow the permanent injunction to remain in place.

In practical terms: No appeal. No damages. No more short-term renting.

For a mayor who claims he is not motivated by citation revenue and only wants STR activity to stop, this proposal gave him everything. But the city didn’t take the deal nor make a counteroffer.

That one decision transformed an issue that could have been resolved for a few hundred dollars into a case that now exposes taxpayers to a potential six-figure loss. Furthermore, by rejecting a resolution that would have ended STR activity, the mayor increased the likelihood that such activity continues — undermining the very neighbors he claims to support.

At the Tennessee Court of Appeals, the mayor listened as the judges repeatedly slammed the city’s interpretation of its ordinance and gave every indication that the law cannot be enforced.

A responsible official would have stepped back, put aside ego and looked for a solution to minimize taxpayer exposure and negotiate the best deal possible.
Instead, the mayor ran back to the media to score more political points.

The mayor encouraged residents to call the police simply on suspicion that a home might be a short-term rental — even when no disturbance exists.

Think about that: He is publicly talking about pursuing jail time over a law he knows is likely unenforceable — while urging citizens to weaponize the police despite the absence of any underlying nuisance. Does that sound like a legally sound strategy?

And then he criticizes me for sending letters to stop trespassing and harassment at the properties?

He seems to believe only he is allowed to be assertive. He can threaten jail time and blast citizens publicly — but if a homeowner stands up against unlawful actions, that’s “the problem.”

In his world, homeowners agreeing to unconstitutional enforcement makes you a good citizen — but challenging unlawful government force means you’re the enemy.

The real problem isn’t the resident who insists the government follow the rules. The problem is the government that refuses to fix its own mistakes, punishes citizens for pointing them out and costs taxpayers money.

There was a logical solution on the table had the mayor taken it.
And now, taxpayers could pay a six-figure bill because the mayor was more focused on headlines than on eliminating short term renting and protecting taxpayers.

Whether you support STRs or oppose them, this should concern you. Because if City Hall can ignore warnings, mislead the public about its intentions and send you the bill for its mistakes, no homeowner or taxpayer is safe.

Hendersonville deserves better leadership.

Jeremy Durham is an attorney, real estate investor and former TN State Legislator.