Council adopts short‑term rental ordinance with grandfathering and business‑license requirement

The Kamas City Council on March 11 adopted an ordinance to regulate short‑term rentals by adding Chapter 15.39 to the municipal code. The measure allows existing short‑term rentals to continue as nonconforming uses if the operator provides evidence of prior established and continuous use, requires those operators to apply for a city business license, and places a moratorium on new STR licenses until the council and planning commission complete further regulations.

Scott, a planning staffer, told the council state law (House Bill 256) is changing how municipalities may use online listings as evidence for enforcement and that having local regulations in place will preserve enforcement options. Joel, the city attorney, explained his draft language would allow operators in continuous use before the ordinance’s effective date to remain in business if they provide evidence of prior use within 30 days; operators would be considered abandoned if they have not used the property as an STR for more than a year.

Council members debated several enforcement and policy details. Questions included what constitutes “substantial evidence” (examples included listing pages, redacted bank statements or documentation of rental income), whether owner-occupancy should be required, and whether managers must be local. Joel said municipalities generally cannot require that the owner live in town, but could require a local property manager as a point of contact.

The council added two clarifications before final approval: (1) the city will require STR operators who claim grandfathered status to apply for a business license and provide evidence (such as listing history or revenue records) within 30 days; and (2) the municipal transient room tax (TRT) and tax commission reports will be usable as additional data points for enforcement where available. The ordinance also clarifies that bed-and-breakfast establishments already allowed under the code remain eligible under their current rules.

The planning commission had recommended the ordinance after lengthy discussion and a public hearing; planners had been split between banning STRs outright and allowing limited numbers. Council members who spoke in favor said the ordinance strikes a compromise by protecting current operators while preventing a rapid influx of new STRs. Several councilors asked the planning commission to work with the council on a parallel timeline to develop a fuller regulatory framework and metrics (including neighborhood caps and possible point systems) within a defined schedule.

The ordinance passed on a recorded vote. The council directed staff and the planning commission to return with proposed longer-term STR regulations and enforcement details; staff also said the city will use its existing business-license process as the administrative vehicle to register grandfathered STRs and to supply required tax‑reporting information to the county when possible.

The ordinance becomes effective immediately; staff will post application procedures and the required evidence checklist online and will accept business-license applications from operators claiming existing use.