St. Charles committee hears range of options to regulate short‑term rentals; staff to study tax and registry

Russell Colby, community development staff for the City of Saint Charles, told the Planning and Development Committee on the evening of the meeting that short‑term rentals—“offerings of residential properties either for nightly or weekly stays, generally less than 30 days”—have grown in the city since the last review in 2019.

Colby said staff located 47 listings on Airbnb and VRBO and that revenue tracked by a commercial data provider has trended upward, with local short‑term rental revenue “trending up about 25% versus last year.” He estimated that, if the city’s hotel operators tax were applied to short‑term rentals, last year’s collections could have been about $72,000.

Jenna Sawicki, tourism staff with the City’s business alliance, told the committee that short‑term rental guests often stay longer and spend in neighborhoods beyond the hotel corridor: “The average short term rental guest stays longer than a hotel guest. That’s by 72% longer,” she said, citing AirDNA and national averages.

Colby outlined regulatory options for committee feedback: (1) amend downtown zoning to permit short‑term rentals by adapting the city’s bed‑and‑breakfast definition; (2) regulate locations across zoning districts; (3) impose a hotel operators tax and explore automatic collection via listing platforms; (4) create a registry of property managers and listings for city and business‑alliance use; and (5) establish a licensing program with operational standards and the ability to rescind licenses.

Committee members and the public described differing neighborhood experiences. Aldermen and committee members said some wards report no complaints while others—particularly the Second Ward—are seeing disruptive incidents and expressed concern about proximity to schools and children’s safety. A resident, Andrea Witsicker, described repeated recent disturbances next door and said she no longer felt safe: “I was walking my 3 year old and my 1 year old and walking past the front porch. Someone was sitting on the front porch smoking pot, laying in the backyard in their underwear 2 mornings in a row.”

Other residents said short‑term rentals increase parking and noise risks, and can change neighborhood character and long‑term housing supply. Arthur Lemke and Steve Loeffler recommended limiting minimum stays to reduce one‑night party rentals; Lemke said a three‑day minimum had helped in another jurisdiction. Several committee members favored starting with a registry and a hotel‑tax approach to level the playing field with hotels and to give the business alliance contact information to promote and manage listings.

Colby cautioned staff and the committee that the city’s zoning ordinance does not currently define short‑term rentals. Without definitions, short‑term rentals may be classified inconsistently—as a residential occasional use, a commercial use, or a bed‑and‑breakfast—creating enforcement and legal risks if restrictions are imposed without clear code language. He also noted nuisance‑abatement procedures could be applied to properties that repeatedly violate code, but that enforcement is more challenging when occupants change frequently.

After questions and public comment, the committee indicated majority support for two initial steps: staff study applying the hotel operators tax to short‑term rentals and creating a registry of listings/property manager contacts. Colby said staff would return with legal analysis, administrative cost estimates, and options for geographic or use‑type limits, but no formal motion or ordinance was adopted at the meeting.

The committee asked staff to bring back: the 2019 record on prior review, more complete listing data (the presentation used 47 identified listings but staff acknowledged that number may be incomplete), estimates of administrative costs for a registry or licensing program, and potential language for zoning or licensing options to address whole‑home vs. owner‑occupied (partial) rentals and separation distances or caps.

The committee’s discussion closed with a direction to refine options that could address problem concentrations without unduly restricting areas that have seen no complaints, and to return to the committee for further direction.