Trump Can't Live Full-Time at Mar-A-Lago Because of 1993 Covenant

Or, Trump covenanted that Orangeacre shall not be used for residential purposes.

In 1993 Donald Trump reached a "use agreement" with Palm Beach Florida that restricted the use of Mar-A-Lago. This document appears to be a covenant. Article II, titled "Club use," imposes restrictions on the use of the guest suites on the property:

The use of guest suites shall be limited to a maximum of three (3) non-consecutive seven (7) day periods by any one member during the year.

Generally, Article II empowers Trump. Here, it restricts him. In other words, a member can only live in a guest suit for three, non-consecutive one-week periods. The intent here is to prevent Mar-A-Lago from being used as a permanent home. Or, to put it in Property lingo, Orangeacre shall not be used for residential purposes. (Blackacre just didn't seem to fit here). And, the document was signed by President Donald J. Trump. (President of the Mar-A-Lago Club, Inc., that is).

President Trump has announced that he plans to live in Mar-A-Lago after he leaves the White House (on or about January 20, 2021).

Now, neighbors have complained, and seek the enforcement of the covenant:

Neighbors of Mar-a-Lago sent a letter to the Town of Palm Beach and the U.S. Secret Service on Tuesday complaining that Mr. Trump has violated the 1993 agreement he made with the town that allowed him to convert the property to a moneymaking club.

"Per the use agreement of 1993, Mar-a-Lago is a social club, and no one may reside on the property," wrote Reginald Stambaugh, a lawyer representing the DeMoss family, which has a property next to Mar-a-Lago.

"To avoid an embarrassing situation for everyone and to give the president time to make other living arrangements in the area, we trust you will work with his team to remind them of the use agreement parameters," Mr. Stambaugh wrote. "Palm Beach has many lovely estates for sale, and surely he can find one which meets his needs."

…

Construction has been done on the president's residential quarters at the club, where Mr. Trump is expected to spend the Christmas holiday and which Mr. Stambaugh argued already violates the use agreement.

According to the Washington Post, the town has failed to enforce the covenant over the years. For example, Palm Beach has not imposed restrictions on how many days the President has stayed there--including over Christmas break. Also, the town has allowed the installation of a helipad for Marine One--an addition that would be prohibited by the covenant. And, the club does not seem to be limiting 50% of its members to Palm Beach residents, as the agreement requires.

Perhaps Trump could argue that the covenant cannot be enforced based on the doctrine of acquiescence? That is, Palm Beach failed to enforce the restrictions of the covenant for so long, it cannot now sue to enforce the agreement.

Go figure. We will see Article II litigation concerning President Trump even after he leaves office.

Comments

[neurodoc]

Oh, I think "Blackacre" fits as well or better here than in any Property case, real or hypothetical, I ever read. Can anyone cite any case in which "Blackacre" is a more apt name for the property at issue?

[Aladdin's Carpet]

I'm confused ... what does article II have to do with any of this? Its a property / contracts dispute. Trumps making the same arguments the average citizen would make if such a contract is enforced against them.

And didn't Trump vote in Palm Beach? Meaning, at some point, he had to claim that he was a resident of Palm Beach, and presumably he used Mars-A-Lago as his area of residency and the state said that was ok. So I fail to see how the county has any claim at all because they had to have acknowledged that he was a resident at some point. And since when do the neighbors have standing here?

[Aladdin's Carpet]

Oh I see what your doing. Cheeky. Nevermind.

[billstewart]

The state's voter registration people have entirely no say over whether you're allowed to live somewhere; he provided them some documentation that said that was his address and it looked ok. They don't do a title search and examine zoning regulations and stuff like that; they make sure you're not registered somewhere else in the state. So maybe he really was illegally voting.

And that's Article II of the use agreement document Trump signed with the city, that has the words quoted in the article that say he's not allowed to live there more than 3 weeks a year. (It's not Article II of the Constitution.)

[Ridgeway]

Did he actually place a bunch of hand grenades in the beach somewhere? Lest he be hoist with his own petard.

[M L]

Is Trump a "member" for purposes of this contract provision, and are his quarters a "guest suite" ?

[TangoDelta]

Yeah, that's where I was going to go. As president of Mar-A-Lago can he just declare one to be a "residential suite" instead of a "guest suite" and bypass the entire issue?

[QuantumBoxCat]

"In other words, a member can only live in a guest suit for three, non-consecutive one-week periods."

In the agreement Trump is specifically identified as "Owner" of the property. I would imagine Trump is also a "member," but I do not have access to anything that confirms or denies that. Based on a cursory search, it looks like Trump has a private residence on the property - as opposed to a guest suit - that he and his family stay in.

If this is accurate, then where in the agreement is the "owner" (not member) prevented from living in a "private residence" (not guest suit)? I have no doubt there are nuances in property law that I know nothing about and which may be applicable here. But this is the initial question that occurred to me after reading the original article and the agreement.

[Brett Bellmore]

That was what occurred to me: Why assume owners are restricted by a covenant directed to "members"? He obviously can't convert the place to an apartment complex, let alone condos, but he, personally can't live there? Not obvious.

[Leo Marvin]

My reaction too.

[David Nieporent]

Do you think he's not a member? Because it doesn't matter if he's also an owner.

[hardreaders]

It seems to me the most sensible understanding is like Hair Club for Men (so appropriate here!) where Trump is both owner and a member. So I agree with your suggestion to that effect. It's too cute and overly simplistic to say owner and member are totally distinct and the former doesn't encompass the latter.

But as I note in a comment pending moderation (and as others have done here in the meantime), ultimately I don't think it matters that much how you parse them.

[Leo Marvin]

Do you assume he is? I don't know why the owner would necessarily need to be a member. Are there services or facilities open to members that he wouldn't be entitled to access as the owner? I'm not saying there aren't. Maybe the club charter limits owner access. But absent a document that says so one way or the other, seems to me it's an open question.

[David Nieporent]

Do you assume he is? I don’t know why the owner would necessarily need to be a member. Are there services or facilities open to members that he wouldn’t be entitled to access as the owner? I’m not saying there aren’t. Maybe the club charter limits owner access. But absent a document that says so one way or the other, seems to me it’s an open question.

Hell, I don't even know if he is the owner of the Club. (He's the owner of the land, but that's separate.) But the Use Agreement linked above expressly says, "Club facilities may only be used by members and guests of the Club." So if he's not a member, that would seem to make it even worse.

[ILK]

Except that in the Agreement, the Owner conveys the Property to the Club. So he's no longer the "owner," the Club is. And the Club warrants the land shall be used "for a private social club." Not for a private social club and private residence of the former owner of the property. It also places limits on the number of guest suites, the use of those suites, and whether non-members are allowed to use them. Moreover, club facilities may only be used by members and their guests.

[ReaderY]

Whether or not he’s the owner, he’s staff. Staff are not guests, and staff quarters in hospitality businesses are not guest quarters.

There may be separate zoning rules not shown prohibiting use of the property as a residence. But based on the agreement, it seems to me that he has a good case that the agreement’s limitation on use of guest quarters by guests simply doesn’t apply to use of staff quarters by staff.

[David Nieporent]

What staff quarters?

[santamonica811]

Yeah, what staff quarters? I believe that all staff there commute to work. The city would not (I think, and assume) have ever approved this if it meant having workers living full-time on the property.

[ReaderY]

My point is that Mr. Trump is staff.. so If Mr. Trump lived there, then obviously some of the staff wouldn’t be commuting to work.

[Queen Amalthea]

Is this language important?

"The use of the Land shall be for a private social club...any usages not specifically set forth in the Plan...are excluded from the Town's approval of the Pan...no subsequent deviation may be made from the application as approved by the Town Council..."

[hardreaders]

I agree it seems important and also with a similar response from ILK. There's a post of mine awaiting moderation that goes into more detail on these points.

[Noscitur a sociis]

As best I can tell, any post with more than one hyperlink gets flagged like that, and the awaited moderation never comes. So you should repost the information with only one link if you don't want to be awaiting a very long time.

[shawn_dude]

IANAL but I have been involved in city zoning activities and if I recall the story correctly, Trump bought the Post estate and rezoned it from residential to some form of commercial. This alone could be enough to prevent it from being his permanent residence.

[DaivdBehar]

This dispute is going to the Supreme Court, lawyers.

[hardreaders]

Oh for sure, if you mean the SC of FL.

And by a simple show of hands, it seems like his chances are good there. I count 3 DeSantis and 1 Scott appointees to make at least a 4-3 majority.

There could be some irony in his big-time FL legal showdown happening after he already lost the election. Will Rudy, Sidney, and Jenna et al. be making encore appearances?

Actually, I suppose it could go to SCOTUS too. Just argue a taking.

[Sarcastr0]

I thought Trump voted in Florida...

[shawn_dude]

If he claimed residency using his Club's address, he may have voted "fraudulently" since that cannot be his legal residence.

[Noscitur a sociis]

[Citation needed]

[David Nieporent]

Whether something is a "legal residence" — i.e., in this context, whether a place is zoned for residential living — is unrelated to whether it's a factual residence — i.e., where a person actually resides. If you actually reside there, you can vote from there.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Everyone I know who had a stylized signature like Trump's . . . well, there was something wrong with them.

[MK Ultra]

Goes back to that shifty fella John Hancock.

[Leo Marvin]

John Hancock had tiny hands. And need I ask what he was compensating for with that ridiculous phony name?

[Queen Amalthea]

We need a signature match audit!

[hardreaders]

LOL! Any signature done in Sharpie is automatically suspect, that's for sure.

[Moderation4ever]

A bunch of wealthy people fighting over property use. I cannot imagine anything of less interest to most of us.

That said I hope that Trump can be accommodated. He need to have a place to live and an island off the coast sounds Ok. Elba would be better but I am not sure its is available.

[apedad]

Nor was Elba effective.

[Martinned]

How about South Georgia? It's right next door to Florida, and I remember hearing something exciting about it in the news...

[hardreaders]

How about New Nevada State? With any luck that includes Yucca Mountain, which ought to help maintain his glowing orange complexion.

[Martinned]

Wow, how did I miss that! That's the coolest thing I've heard about in that direction since I discovered the - very real - Permanent Court of Arbitration case of Larsen v. Hawaiian Kingdom (2001), which unsurprisingly ended with the Tribunal concluding that the defendant was not a state under international law, and that in any event the alleged representatives of the respondent were not authorised to represent the alleged respondent.

[hardreaders]

Nice! Thanks for sharing this fascinating tidbit.

[shawn_dude]

Yucca Mountain is on Federal land. He cannot claim that as a residence either. It's also a very long way away from groups of fawning admirers so he's unlikely to enjoy living out there even if the lizards might look familiar...

[Milhouse]

South Georgia? Isn't that near Antarctica?

[Ghost of Patrick Henry]

More TDS from Josh. Hope you don't teach contracts. President Trump is the owner, not a mere member. He is not seeking to use a guest quarters, he would be living in the owner's quarters. Why would this covenant apply to him?
More importantly, why are you regurgitating lefty talking points?

[Martinned]

Are you forgetting about the concept of corporate legal personality? The club is the owner of the property, the owner of the club is, well, the owner of the club.

(And let's face it, if you're Trump you don't want to get the courts used to piercing the corporate veil.)

[shawn_dude]

He's also forgetting zoning and land use laws.

[Leo Marvin]

He got the important part right: Josh Blackman is all about the TDS!

[Sidney r finkel]

Given his history why anyone would ever expect Trumper to live up to an agreement is beyond me.

As for the technical issues raised above, that Trump is an owner and not a 'guest', well assuming Trump hires Rudy and company to argue his case you can mark that down in the 'L' column before the briefs are even filed.

[Moderation4ever]

You know for a guy that claims to be a billionaire he certainly goes cheap for his lawyers. If he wants to live at Mar Lago it would be a good idea to invest in some good lawyers.

[Queen Amalthea]

A key component of Trumpism is that the idea that there are experts is bunk. It's the Age of Jackson all over again.

[damikesc]

Well, given the press' fawning coverage of our fraudulent president-elect's imbecile wife, expertise is a laughable sham.3

[Moderation4ever]

That right they are calling her Dr. and she not even a man. Fortunately we have misogynists like you to call out this folly. Thank you.

[shawn_dude]

The Post estate is surrounded by many other major properties with owners that likely have just as much money, if not more, than Trump and may also have deeper connections into Florida politics. Maybe he can use some of his "Stop the Steal" donation income to pay for his lawyers.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

The lawyers Trump has been using for election litigation have been generally inept. Noncompliant filings, going to the wrong court, poor writing, arguments destined to precipitate fee-shifting requests and sanctions petitions.

There are plenty of competent lawyers in the United States. Why is Trump Election Litigation: Elite Strike Force (and its auxiliaries) nearly devoid of them?

That is a question the Conspirators and their fans will prefer to disregard.

[Bob from Ohio]

The document incorporates an unrecorded plan submitted to the town. You cannot analyze this document unless you read that plan document.

Looks like only the town can enforce it as well, not an adjoining owner. Makes sense, this is in effect a zoning/police power document. Can a citizen in Florida compel enforcement? I would think not but not in Florida.

[ILK]

The Agreement provides remedies available to the town, but it does not explicitly disclaim that there are third-party beneficiaries to the Agreement who may have remedies available. In fact, given that the Agreement explicitly provides benefits to third party adjoining landowners (membership in the club), it would seem likely a court would hold standing that they can enforce at least those provisions. More generally, adjoining property owners normally have standing to challenge zoning issues, assuming they can meet a pretty low bar of showing a legally recognizable interest which will be affected. See Renard v. Dade, 261 So. 2d 832 (Fla. 1972). Given that this Agreement was prepared and submitted as a condition to obtaining a special use exception to the zoning and it seems pretty clear that there is evidence that Trump's residence will be disruptive of the adjoining property owners' use and enjoyment of their property, it would again seem likely that adjoining property owners could establish standing.

[Noscitur a sociis]

The plan appears to be available (in an extraordinarily user-unfriendly format) here:

http://docserver.townofpalmbeach.com/TownClerkWeblink/0/doc/1149654/Page172.aspx

[hardreaders]

Not surprisingly, Wikipedia notes there's already been a history of litigation involving the zoning etc. issues.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mar-a-Lago#Legal_issues

If someone has time and is inclined, it would be great to research these and see what, if any, parts of the agreement have been put at issue and construed so far.

[ReaderY]

The answer here seems obvious. Trump is the head of the club, the host, not a guest. This means his home isn’t a guest suite. In general, staff in a hospitality business are not considered guests, and when they are given housing they live in staff quarters, not guest quarters. Trump’s role in Mar-a-Lago is clearly staff.

If “guest” and “guest suite” are given their ordinary common-use definitions, then I think Trump wins on this one. I’m not one who’s especially disposed to giving him breaks on his legal arguments, especially given recent events. But I think he has a case here.

[Jerry B.]

True. If a restaurant requires male diners to wear coat and tie, does the male staff, or the male owner, have to wear coat and tie when on the premises as well?

[shawn_dude]

The basic set of events as I understand them:
1. Trump buys the Post estate which is a residence in a residentially zoned area.
2. He applies to change land use/zoning to non-residential in order to run a business there.
3. The city grants the land use/zoning change with conditions that Trump agrees to.
4. Trump becomes president and the city/neighbors allow for exceptions for his term in office like a helipad.

Basically, if he makes it his permanent residence, he's violating his land use agreements and can be fined daily by the city/county until he comes under compliance or they change the land use/zoning to accommodate him. Since he's the guy who wrote "The Art of the Deal," I'm guessing he'll be able to fix all this quickly, right?

[ReaderY]

An agreement consists of words. So if Trump has an argument whose words don’t cover his conduct, then he has an argument that he is not violating the agreement.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I hope no lawyer wrote that sentence — although I suspect any member of Trump’s election litigation legal team could have written it.

[raspberrydinners]

Imagine being so hated that your neighbors want to kick you out.

I would venture to say a few commenters here are probably that person and don't know it.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Some disaffected, anti-social people seem to crave that circumstance.

[Gasman]

Could this work against his establishment of domicile in Florida? Some one looking to capture Trump taxes for the city and state of NY might see this as proof that he has not yet established Florida residence.