The Astoria City Council on June 2 conducted a second reading and adopted Ordinance 25-07, establishing a vacation-rental licensing, permitting and enforcement program and a cap on new vacation-rental licenses.

The ordinance, which passed on a 4-1 roll call vote, sets a licensing framework that city staff and supporters described as focused on fire, life-safety inspection and compliance. Mayor Fitzpatrick cast the lone dissenting vote.

The measure’s supporters, including John Roberts, Astoria’s community development director, told the council the ordinance creates “a regulatory framework” to monitor and evaluate administrative and enforcement impacts and removes certain burdens identified during the first reading. Roberts said amendments adopted after the May 19 hearing removed a requirement to list third-party platform information on new applications, clarified renewal timing and made revocation apply to the operator rather than the property when warranted.

The proposed fee structure discussed in the meeting would treat operators who already received land-use approvals as renewals and charge a $150 renewal fee plus about $25 per additional unit; reinspection fees would apply if multiple reinspections are required. The city indicated fees would be collected into the billing department fund and intended to be self-sustaining for the program. “We thought it made sense if you’ve already received your land use approval … this should be treated as a renewal,” City Manager Spence said when describing fee options.

The council and staff repeatedly framed the program as code-compliance-oriented rather than punitive. City Attorney Blair Henningsgard told the council licensing is separate from land-use status and noted jurisdictions commonly require their own inspections, even when properties carry commercial or insurance inspections. Roberts and Tiffany Taylor, planning staff, said the focus is on ensuring buildings that operate as lodging meet life-safety standards, especially where commercial buildings are converted to residential uses.

Public comment filled the meeting chamber and online. Andy Kipp, president of the Astoria Housing Alliance, urged adoption, saying similar programs in neighboring towns had limited the proliferation of vacation rentals and that the Alliance was "not anti short term rental. We are pro housing." Several commercial property owners and operators pushed back, calling the ordinance excessive and harmful to small businesses that rely on short-term rental income to maintain historic structures.

Karen Allen, owner of Pier 11, said her family’s downtown waterfront property depends on income from short-term rentals to pay tens of thousands of dollars annually in maintenance and pilings work. “By enforcing your code 25-07, you are choosing to take away potential income for Pier 11 and the ability to maintain our properties,” she said. Other speakers, including Bob McGee and Claudine Gregory, described the ordinance as discriminatory against small local lodging operators and raised questions about motives, fees and enforcement capacity.

Councilors debated the policy’s intent and likely impact. Councilor Davis and others described the cap as designed to prevent future unchecked growth in short-term rentals rather than to remove existing licensed units. Councilor Mozzarella, who missed the first reading, emphasized the council’s commitment to not put current operators out of business and asked staff to clarify that longstanding operators would be treated as renewals.

Council discussion addressed legal risk. Councilor Lam asked whether revocation of a license could trigger litigation over nonconforming use rights. Roberts and Henningsgard said outcomes depend on specifics and generally the city seeks to reserve revocation for egregious, unremedied violations; the licensing program itself is separate from land-use status.

The council adopted the ordinance after debate and the public comment period. The formal motion to conduct the second reading and adopt the ordinance was made by Councilor Lam and seconded; roll call later recorded votes as follows: Councilor Davis — aye; Councilor Mozzarella — aye; Councilor Adams — aye; Councilor Lum — aye; Mayor Fitzpatrick — nay.

The ordinance includes enforcement provisions, a renewal process with a 60‑day window for lapsed applicants to reapply before being treated as new, and life-safety inspection requirements. Staff said they will monitor and report on program administration and that implementation details such as the exact fee schedule will return as a fee resolution for council confirmation.

Councilors and staff flagged next steps: adopt the implementing fee resolution, finalize inspection procedures that avoid unnecessary duplication with insurance or third-party inspections where practical, and track compliance workload for planning and code staff. Several council members said they were open to amending the cap in the future if larger property owners that previously paused plans (for example, properties that had not pursued short-term use) ask to enroll.

The vote concludes a months‑long effort by the council and staff to address perceived impacts of vacation rentals while formalizing safety standards and enforcement tools.