Residents and hosts clash at council meeting over short-term rentals; council to refine proposed ordinance after extensive public comment

Public comment at the New Franklin City Council meeting centered on short-term rentals (STRs), where residents described repeated noise, parking and safety problems near lakefront and dense neighborhoods and hosts urged the council to adopt measured regulation rather than an outright ban. The council is on the second reading of an ordinance regulating STR operations (ordinance 25-0004) and did not take a final vote at this meeting.

Multiple speakers described incidents they said were linked to STRs. Greg Bowman, listing an address in the township, said a recent large party at an Airbnb involved gunfire and several hospitalized guests; he told council he hoped action would come "pretty soon." Martin McDowell said a late-night incident produced tire tracks across his yard and loud disturbances behind his home, and said he no longer supports an Airbnb in his neighborhood. Other residents raised parking shortages on narrow dead-end streets, the closeness of homes on some lakefront lots ("5 to 6 feet apart" in one example) and the strain on emergency and police resources when hosts or platforms do not act quickly.

Short-term rental hosts who spoke said many STRs are family-focused, support sports and tourism, and bring tax and local spending benefits. Johnny Knight, who identified himself as a host, described permitting recommendations he supported: a two-night minimum stay, host-contact requirements, parking limits tied to the driveway capacity, and an annual permit fee but urged the council to reconsider a $1,000 annual fee as high. Another host, Shannon, urged the council to allow host-owner responsiveness (quick removal of problem guests via platform enforcement) and noted she requires two-night minimum stays and posts house rules and cameras to deter parties.

Council members and the mayor responded at length. The mayor said he was personally inclined toward prohibition in the most sensitive lakefront areas, citing the difficulty of enforcement and risk to neighborhood character, but recognized the legal and litigation risks such a ban could entail. Other council members urged continuing to refine regulations including spacing/distancing requirements between STRs, permit and inspection standards, noise-monitor or sound-limit options, and a revocation process for owners who repeatedly fail to control guests. Several councilors asked staff to continue the stakeholder process and to share proposed language with owners and neighbors before a final vote.

What the meeting did not resolve: final permit fee, the precise spacing distance between permitted STRs (residents cited examples from other communities such as 300 feet), and whether lakefront lots or very dense blocks would be excluded entirely. Council intends to continue committee work and public input before moving the ordinance to a final reading.

For residents: council staff said the next opportunity for public input will be follow-up committee meetings and the council's third reading; no final policy change was adopted at this session.