Orangeville opens public hearing on transient room tax, accessory dwelling units, business licenses and dog limits; no council votes on ordinances

The Orangeville City Council opened a public hearing Aug. 14 to discuss four proposed ordinances — transient room tax ordinance 2025-4, accessory dwelling unit ordinance 2025-5, a business-license amendment 2025-6 and a dog-owners/kennel ordinance 2025-7 — then closed the hearing and moved into the regular session without voting on those measures.

The hearing opened after a motion by Tracy and a second by Kevin; a voice vote of “Aye” closed the motion, and no public comments were offered during the hearing. “Any opposed?” a council member asked; none were voiced. After the ordinance discussions, Councilmember Carrie moved to close the public hearing and open the regular session; Tracy seconded and the motion passed by voice vote.

Why it matters: the items discussed affect short-term rental operators, homeowners seeking accessory dwelling units (ADUs), small and home-based businesses, and pet owners across Orangeville. Council members and staff emphasized compliance with state guidance and practical enforcement limits when outlining the proposals.

Transient room tax (Ordinance 2025-4) City staff described ordinance 2025-4 as establishing a 1% transient room tax (TRT) on short-term lodging such as hotels and short-term rentals so the city can collect revenues currently routed through the county. Amanda said the city is not yet on the county’s distribution list while other cities are, and the proposed ordinance would allow Orangeville to start collecting the 1% TRT. Amanda said, “So this isn't doing more tax. This is just getting what's already being taxed.” No final council vote on the ordinance was recorded at the hearing.

Accessory dwelling unit regulations (Ordinance 2025-5) Council members discussed proposed regulations for accessory dwelling units, which planning and zoning prepared and then tabled for further review. Seth of planning and zoning told the council the planning commission asked for more time to review whether ADUs can be built above garages and to clarify other conditions. Doug described ADUs as smaller, accessory living units—interior conversions, basement units, detached structures or garage conversions—located on the property of a primary residence. Council and staff agreed ADU rules will distinguish between short-term rentals and ADUs by length of stay; ADUs would not qualify as short-term rentals. The precise minimum rental length was discussed in the hearing (speakers referenced “30 or 31 days”), but staff did not state a definitive number at the meeting. Planning and zoning had tabled the draft, and the council likewise tabled further action pending clarifications; Amanda said the council could vote on a refined draft at the next meeting.

Business-license amendment for home-based businesses (Ordinance 2025-6) Planning and zoning proposed amending Orangeville City Code section 4-1-9(a) to remove language that excluded “home/premises occupation” business licenses from full council consideration. Seth said the change is intended to ensure the council is informed and has final approval authority for business licenses, including home-based businesses. “We just want the council to approve all of the business licenses,” Seth said, adding the council would continue to deny licenses it found unacceptable. No final vote on the amendment was taken at the hearing.

Dog limits, kennel definitions and related code changes (Ordinance 2025-7) Council discussion on ordinance 2025-7 focused on new definitions for “commercial kennel” and “hobby kennel,” and changes to the maximum number of dogs allowed in different zoning types. Under the proposed language discussed at the hearing, apartments would be limited to two dogs per household; other zones would allow three dogs without a kennel license. Amanda described the city’s approach as an operational compromise driven by limited animal-control resources: rather than auditing households for limits, staff would rely on animal control to respond to nuisances, she said. The draft also includes distance requirements for kennel licenses that participants described as strict (speakers cited roughly 75 feet from the road and about 100 feet from neighboring houses, with commercial kennels requiring larger setbacks). One council member said stricter licensing distances and the split between hobby and commercial kennels would make it difficult for some applicants to qualify.

Process and next steps No ordinances were adopted during the hearing. Planning and zoning had already tabled the ADU item for additional review; the council agreed to return the ADU ordinance for a vote after staff and planning complete clarifications. Staff indicated the TRT ordinance is intended to bring Orangeville into parity with other cities that already collect the 1% distribution from the county, and the business-license and dog-code amendments will be refined and returned to the council for future action. The council closed the public hearing by voice vote and proceeded to the regular session.

Quotes from the hearing are presented verbatim and are attributed to speakers who spoke during the hearing.