Goshen delays vote on short-term rental rules; board weighs ban vs. permit regime

The Town of Goshen board adjourned its April hearing on three proposed local laws about short‑term rentals and set a revised timeline for review and public comment.

Town Supervisor (name given in the meeting as Supervisor Petra) said the board will place all three local laws on the November general‑election ballot and will circulate revised drafts to the board and public before a final vote. She described an internal schedule that would allow a draft for board review in mid‑April, public posting by May 1, and a possible vote at the May 8 meeting, while noting some calendar entries in the meeting were inconsistent.

The board and its attorney discussed two basic approaches under consideration: an outright ban on short‑term rentals or a regulated permit system (often modeled on a bed‑and‑breakfast or owner‑occupied permit). Attorney Rory (identified in the meeting by his email) cautioned about constitutional and legal exposure, saying there are “equal protection issues, dormant commerce clause” concerns the town must consider even though he had not identified a successful legal challenge that overturned a local ban. He told the board he would incorporate advice from code enforcement counsel and planning‑board counsel as drafts evolve.

Residents who spoke during public comment urged a range of positions. Some urged a complete ban to preserve neighborhood character, while others — including farmers and longtime residents — asked for carved‑out exceptions such as owner‑occupied accommodations, farm‑related short stays and “glamping” for agricultural operations. One speaker summarized a common compromise: “only owner‑occupied property may be used for short‑term rentals,” a formulation proponents said both limits absentee investor activity and preserves options for homeowners who live on the property.

Speakers and town staff identified enforcement as a core challenge. The county’s planned online registry for short‑term rentals — intended for data collection and to help collect any local occupancy or hotel taxes — will factor into the town’s compliance and enforcement plans. The town’s attorney said the registry could create a presumption that a listed property is operating as a short‑term rental for local enforcement purposes.

Supervisor Petra emphasized the board wants public feedback early in the process and will circulate drafts for comment. She said the goal is to collect comments by email or phone and to circulate material to board members so they can advise staff before drafts are finalized. The board instructed staff to post the published draft as early as feasible so the public has time to digest changes before the May public hearing.

The public‑comment period at the hearing included requests that the town explicitly accommodate farm worker housing and seasonal farm‑support rentals, and suggestions to limit short‑term stays by frequency (for example, a numerical cap per year). Several speakers asked that the town look at the Village of Goshen and other nearby municipalities for precedent on owner‑occupied restrictions and caps.

The board did not adopt a final law at the meeting. Instead, the public hearing on the local laws was continued; the board directed staff and counsel to prepare revised drafts, to circulate them to the public and board members, and to schedule further hearings and votes according to the timeline discussed.

Votes and formal motions at the meeting related to the short‑term rental item included motions to open and later to adjourn/continue the public hearings; the board did not vote on any substantive changes to the laws at this session.