Douglas County advisory board debates permit-holder "code of conduct" for vacation home rentals

Douglas County's Vacation Home Rental Advisory Board spent the longest portion of its meeting discussing a proposed "code of conduct" that would require each vacation home rental (VHR) permit holder to produce and post a property-specific set of rules for renters.

Board members and county staff said the provision grew from complaints about on-site behavior. "This was born out of a conversation with a commissioner, related to, past comments ... about inappropriate hats, urination off decks, pot smoke, walking around properties and, to name a few things," said Ernie Strehlow, Douglas County staff, describing why the county drafted a code of conduct provision. County staff presented sample language and said enforcement would rely in part on property managers and complaint-driven processes.

Board members pressed for clearer wording and enforceability. Some said the provision should not single out one legal activity (for example, marijuana use) and instead focus on effects such as smoke or odors that negatively impact neighbors. "The smoke or from cigarettes, marijuana, or whatever may not negatively impact a neighbor," said Lauren Romaine, chair. Several board members suggested changing the draft from phrasing like "consuming marijuana" to a broader formulation such as "smoking or generation of smoke or odors that negatively impact neighboring residences." Members also raised questions about whether fire-pit rules belong in the code of conduct or should be handled by fire-safety regulation and permit processes.

Board members emphasized that the new requirement should be enforceable in practice. Ernie Strehlow said the county added penalties that could apply to renters or property managers as well as owners, and described enforcement as complaint-driven: staff or the sheriff would verify that a permit holder had given renters a posted code of conduct and used "best efforts" to enforce it. Strehlow also proposed a posting location: "post it alongside the permit... when the sheriff knocks on the door and looks, he can see that." Several board members asked that the posting requirement be explicit so enforcement staff can easily verify compliance.

Outcome: The board did not vote on final language. Members instructed staff to revise the draft to (1) replace the most specific prohibitions with wording focused on conduct that "negatively impacts neighbors," (2) remove or relocate fire-pit specifics that duplicate fire department permitting, and (3) include a clear posting requirement next to the VHR permit. Ernie Strehlow said he would work with staff to produce a revised draft for the next meeting. The discussion was recorded as direction to staff rather than a formal action.

The board also flagged related agenda items for future meetings: expansion of nuisance examples (for inclusion in the code of conduct), and clarity on how enforcement would be routed among property managers, the sheriff, and county code enforcement.