STARKVILLE — An attorney called out the city planner for being “unprofessional.” An alderman accused a local Realtor and her husband of race-baiting.

After nearly an hour of discussing the fate of the old Stark house at 400 Greensboro St., nothing had changed. Aldermen unanimously denied Will and Stephanie Arnett’s appeal to allow them to run a real estate business out of their second home.

The Arnetts bought the house earlier this year. Stephanie planned to use the first floor for residential purposes and the second floor as headquarters for her Mississippi Magnolia real estate agency, her attorney William Starks said.

On the advice of City Planner Daniel Havelin, Starks said Tuesday, Stephanie applied for a home occupancy permit in August, which would allow her to use it as a home and office space since it is in a traditional neighborhood zone. Planning and Zoning first approved the permit, but Havelin rescinded it after determining the home was not the Arnetts’ primary residence. The Planning and Zoning Commission upheld Havelin’s ruling Dec. 13, before aldermen followed suit Tuesday.

Starks, speaking to aldermen, argued the Unified Development Code does not clearly define “residing” and never mentions that a home occupancy permit can only be granted for a “primary residence.”

While the Arnetts are “happily married” with two homes, Starks said, Stephanie receives mail and is registered to vote at Greensboro Street and Will is likewise documented at the couple’s other home in south Starkville.

“She considers herself residing at both,” Starks said of Stephanie. “… If you own two homes, you reside in both.”

Havelin was not present Tuesday, but the board showed a five-minute video of his argument. He admits he was on vacation when Stephanie first emailed him about permitting the Greensboro Street property, when she called it a “second home,” and he did not see that reference until much later. In subsequent emails, she simply referred to it as “the home,” Havelin said, and he claimed she “blindly ignored” the standards for the home occupancy permit he had sent her.

He further explained in the video that if the board overturned his decision, it would open the door to properties in traditional neighborhoods in the city being converted to commercial. Renters also qualify for home occupancy permits, he said, meaning someone could rent a single family home and run a business without actually living there.

“As far-fetched as it sounds, that’s exactly what the Arnetts are trying to do,” Havelin said. “The only difference here is home ownership.”

Egos, ‘racist’ threats
Several Greensboro Street residents signed a petition to block Arnett from running the business at a home where she did not live, and Starks said Havelin, who he said acted “unprofessionally” throughout the process, bent “to the political winds” surrounding the issue.

He said Stephanie had done everything she could to cooperate with Havelin and follow city code, but at this point “(Havelin) will never find her in compliance because his ego and personality have gotten into it.”

During discussion before the aldermen’s vote, Ward 5 Alderman Hamp Beatty said he believed this was an example of things “being tested” in other areas of the city that would never fly along the South Montgomery corridor — the affluent area that includes the Arnetts’ other home.

He also pressed Starks on comments he had heard about coming from the Arnetts threatening to rent the Greensboro Street home to migrant workers or make it a Section 8 home under federal Housing and Urban Development guidelines if they can’t use it as a real estate office.

Beatty called those comments derogatory and race-based threats meant to scare the neighbors.

Starks challenged that the comments were “racist” but admitted the Arnetts would do what they needed to in order to make their purchase financially viable.

“Why is Section 8 housing racial? That’s economic,” Starks said.

“You and I both know it’s racial,” Beatty responded. “You know exactly what these comments were intended to say … to the residents of that neighborhood.”

Starks did not back down.

“We both know there are alternative uses that are permitted, and those are indeed absolute alternatives,” he said. “The Arnetts believe in fair housing for people, and they will provide that if they need to. I think they have even talked to the Starkville Housing Authority about possibly using that if (the Arnetts) can’t use it for their intended purposes. It’s not a threat. It’s just an economic reality.”

What’s next
Starks told The Dispatch after the meeting the Arnetts have 10 days to file a bill of exception with Oktibbeha County Circuit Court objecting to the board’s ruling.

A federal lawsuit is also imminent, he said, “for trampling the constitutional rights of my clients.”

At issue is a search warrant city code enforcement officials sought for the Greensboro Street home after the department received several complaints about work going on there. Officers had visited the home several times, Starks said, but were told not to come back without a warrant.

Starks said officers returned on Nov. 28 with an affidavit requesting a warrant, which was notarized by a municipal judge, and searched the home for 2 1/2 hours.

“They opened every drawer and every cabinet,” Starks told The Dispatch. “They even looked in the refrigerator.”

The warrant wasn’t valid, Starks argued, because the judge did not “adopt the position of the affiants” establishing probable cause when the affidavit was sworn in. Instead, he believes, a formal warrant wasn’t filed in the matter until weeks later.

The board met in executive session Tuesday to discuss a legal matter related to the Arnetts’ case but did not take any action.

Zack Plair is the managing editor for The Dispatch.