Astoria council holds first reading of amended vacation-rental ordinance after heated public comment and targeted amendments

John Roberts, community development director, presented a proposed ordinance to license and regulate vacation rentals at the Astoria City Council meeting on May 19, 2025. Roberts told the council, "What's before you is a proposed ordinance to license vacation rentals," and outlined the city's work since 2014 to develop rules to monitor impacts and help preserve long-term housing.

The ordinance would establish a two-year licensing cycle, require fire/life-safety standards, create a wait list tied to a proposed cap of 50 vacation-rental units, and include an initial application fee staff proposed at $500 with a $150 renewal fee. Roberts said the fee recommendations follow Oregon statute ORS 215.416 and mock inspections that showed lower staff time than previously estimated.

The proposal drew extended public comment. Daryl Moore, a resident and former planning commission member, said he was "in strong opposition to this ordinance as it's been presented," arguing the cap is "arbitrary and capricious" and raised legal concerns about nonconforming-use rights and due process. Floyd Holcomb, who identified himself as a waterfront business owner, urged the council to "table ordinance 25-7 due to its economic harms" and said the city needed an economic study under state planning goals. Other operators and property owners testified that vacation rentals support local businesses and that many long-running short-term operators already comply with safety and platform verification procedures.

Councilors asked detailed questions about enforcement, fees, nonconforming-use (grandfathering) standards, and how the code would be aligned with the development code and state noticing processes. Roberts and Tiffany Taylor, a staff planner, said the ordinance is intended as the framework to bring existing nonconforming units into compliance, while the development-code (zoning) work would follow as a legislative process this summer and fall.

During deliberations Councilor Lum moved and Councilor Davis seconded amendments to the proposed ordinance that removed a new-applicant listing-platform requirement (identified in the code draft as section 8.745.8), changed renewal-language so that a missed renewal would make the applicant lose their place in the queue rather than be deemed permanently ineligible because of caps, and changed enforcement language in section 8.748(c)(2) so a license holder (not the property) would lose eligibility after repeated revocations. The amendments passed by voice vote.

After the amendments Councilor Lum moved and Councilor Adams seconded that the council conduct a first reading of the amended ordinance. The council held a roll-call vote on the motion to conduct first reading: Councilor Davis — aye; Councilor Adams — aye; Councilor Lum — aye; Mayor Fitzpatrick — nay. The first reading passed on that 3–1 vote.

Roberts said next steps will include returning for a second hearing with a revised fee schedule and beginning the more extensive development-code work to align zoning districts, overlays and operational standards. He said staff intends to use the city's permitting software to streamline application routing to building and planning for inspections and reviews. The council did not finalize the fee schedule at the May 19 meeting and directed staff to proceed with the next legislative steps and implementation planning.

The ordinance will return to council for a second reading and adoption vote after the staff completes the fee schedule and starts the development-code amendments and DLCD-required noticing for legislative changes.