Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planner reports ~116 potential nonconforming short‑term rentals; 42 registered and majority compliant
Summary
Staff reported on 2025 implementation of the short‑term rental ordinance: vendor review refined ~180 addresses to 116 potential nonconforming units; 42 properties registered as nonconforming and most of those obtained business licenses; four code complaints in 2025 were not from registered units.
Planner Zachary Smallwood updated the Committee on Murray’s short‑term rental ordinance enforcement and compliance for calendar year 2025.
Smallwood said a vendor list that initially showed about 180 short‑term listings in the city was refined to roughly 116 potential nonconforming addresses after closer review. Staff mailed two rounds of notices and achieved about a 56% response rate. Of the respondents, 42 properties registered as nonconforming and roughly 90% of those registrants have since obtained business licenses; nine notices were returned to sender and several property owners told staff they were not operating.
Smallwood said the city received four code‑enforcement complaints tied to short‑term rentals in 2025 and that none of those complaints were against properties that are registered and licensed. He told the council that a new administrative code‑enforcement team will allow staff to pursue compliance against roughly 51 addresses that have not registered.
Councilors asked whether grandfathered nonconforming units still must obtain business licenses; staff and the council confirmed that nonconforming land use status does not exempt an operator from a required business license. Council members also discussed noise and traffic enforcement as continuing code‑enforcement triggers regardless of registration status.
Smallwood recommended the council maintain the current approach of outreach, registration and stepped enforcement and said staff will return with any proposed code‑amendments if the compliance program shows gaps.
No formal council action was taken; the council received the report and asked staff to continue outreach and enforcement under the administrative code‑enforcement process.
