Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Highland Park staff recommends defining 'primary residence,' buying rental-platform data and considering licensing; council leans against outright ban
Summary
Staff presented options to tighten enforcement of short-term rental rules (define primary residence, require demonstration at registration, buy third-party listing data, consider licensing or geographic limits, and evaluate applying the 5% hotel tax). In a nonbinding straw poll most council members favored staff study and enforcement tools rather than an outright prohibition.
City staff presented an informational briefing and requested feedback on short-term rental policy at the Feb. 23 Committee of the Whole meeting.
The staff presenter (Joel) reviewed the city’s existing short-term rental regulation (adopted Nov. 2020) that treats short-term rentals as an accessory use of a dwelling when the property is the owner’s primary residence. Joel said the city has relied on registration to learn about short-term rentals and enforce rules but that the code lacks a precise definition of "primary residence." To strengthen enforcement, staff recommended amending the rental-registration code to require documentation demonstrating primary residency, to explore purchasing aggregated short-term rental listing data from third-party brokers (staff cited an historical price estimate of roughly $3,000 a year), and to consider licensing, geographic buffers or zoning-based limitations to avoid concentration of short-term rentals in single blocks. Staff also noted a recent enforcement matter that produced more than $9,000 in fines for repeated violations of garbage-control rules.
On the question of scale, Joel said the city currently had a small number of registrants pending the most recent registration round ("we have 12 registered at this time," Joel said) but acknowledged online platforms indicate a larger number of listings may exist. Staff recommended a follow-up survey of other communities and additional research before drafting ordinance changes.
Council members expressed support for giving staff the tools sought (defining primary residence, the ability to request demonstrative documentation, using third-party data to monitor listings, and evaluating licensing) and generally opposed an outright prohibition in the straw poll. Several members supported the idea of moving from registration to licensing (which would allow revocation and limits), while a few members said geographic limitations merit caution because they can disadvantage individual homeowners. One member suggested applying the city's 5% hotel tax to short-term rentals for parity with commercial lodging.
The council took no final legislative action. Instead, the council directed staff to research peer-city policies, the technical feasibility and cost of third-party data, and ordinance language to define primary residence and develop enforcement options; any code changes would return to council for formal consideration and ordinance adoption.
What’s next: staff will research data-provider options and peer-city approaches, draft proposed code amendments if appropriate, and return to council for formal consideration. No prohibition was adopted at this session.
