Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lodging Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wells considers lodging‑fee framework and whether to fold Airbnbs into a licensing regime
Summary
Town counsel reviewed case law and said lodging or licensing fees must reasonably relate to administrative and enforcement costs; the board asked staff for occupancy, tax‑revenue and enforcement data to inform an ordinance that could include Airbnbs and fund inspections.
Select Board members and town counsel spent the Nov. 18 workshop reviewing legal guardrails for lodging and short‑term‑rental fees and the data the town needs to set defensible rates.
Attorney Lisonbee summarized the legal framework (citing Eno v. Bar Harbor and related precedent) that requires licensing and permit fees to bear a reasonable relationship to the municipality’s costs for processing, inspection and enforcement. He said fees cannot be a disguised tax and that municipalities may rely on direct and certain indirect administrative costs (multiple inspections, public‑safety responses, record keeping) when demonstrating a reasonable relationship.
Board members and staff discussed how to count those costs — from staff time to multiple inspection visits — and debated assumptions used in preliminary modeling (one staffer used an 80% occupancy assumption after applying a 20% deduction). The lodging committee and industry representatives stressed that cottage, campground and seasonal units are a distinct category that complicates occupancy calculations.
Several select‑board members urged the town to quantify: (1) total taxes and personal‑property revenue generated by lodging businesses and campgrounds (commission staff reported recent campground and seasonal tax receipts of about $1.36 million at current mill rates), (2) the proportion of visitor demand coming from hotels, campgrounds, Airbnb/short‑term rentals and seasonal residents, and (3) historical enforcement costs the town has borne in recent hotel compliance actions. Staff and industry attendees warned data collection will take time but recommended a targeted list of allowable fee elements that could be used to construct defensible fees.
The board also discussed enforcement and inspections: moving lodging safety inspections to the fire department, which would give inspectors greater enforcement 'teeth,' and the estimated loaded cost of a combined fire/code inspector position (roughly $175,000 including vehicle and benefits). Members asked staff to scope options — including phased hiring or a three‑quarter position in a budget year — so the cost could be assessed against projected fee revenue.
Next steps: staff will return with the requested tax and occupancy breakdowns, clearer estimates of enforcement and legal costs associated with lodging, and draft ordinance language (including options for how Airbnbs would be treated) for further workshop and a possible June ballot timeline if the board chooses to pursue a voter referendum.
