Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the ADU Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ADU enforcement, deed restrictions and who pays: debate surfaces at San Miguel County workshop
Summary
At the workshop, participants debated low ADU uptake, enforcement limits and historical deed-restriction policies; county participants said enforcing deed restrictions would require new staff and resources and noted past options to pay fees in lieu of restrictions.
SAN MIGUEL COUNTY — Community members and county participants at a housing-code workshop flagged enforcement and practicality concerns for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and deed-restricted employee housing.
At the meeting, Participant 5, who described himself as having experience “in my time as a commissioner,” said the county currently lacks an enforcement arm to verify ADU occupancy and deed-restriction compliance and that any enforcement regime would require additional staff, a vehicle and possibly difficult in-person follow-ups.
Participant 4 corrected some counts and described the local history of deed restrictions and mitigation fees: earlier rules dating to the early 1990s required deed-restricted units in some commercial or subdivision contexts; in later years the county moved to an employee-housing mitigation fee and, more recently, updated that fee to better reflect actual construction costs. Participant 4 said some owners chose fee-in-lieu options in the past.
Why it matters: Several consultants and residents said that without verification or enforcement, ADUs and deed restrictions can drift from policy intent—used as guest units or short-term rentals rather than long-term housing for locals. Participant 5 told the group that attempts to verify compliance by registered mail or email produced low response rates, suggesting spot checks or active enforcement would be costly.
Numbers and uncertainties: Participants offered differing snapshots of ADU counts. One speaker said the county “has 33 ADUs of which 8 are currently occupied” (Participant 5, questioned); another said about “34, 35 that are derestricted” and that verification responses to county outreach were limited. The transcript does not provide a definitive, county-verified ADU inventory.
What's next: The conversation concluded without formal action; consultants flagged enforcement capacity as a topic for follow-up. Any policy or code change that expands ADU allowances or attaches occupancy requirements will likely include a discussion of compliance mechanisms and potential staffing or funding to support enforcement.
