Pennington County votes to actively enforce vacation-home rental ordinance, staff to consider compliance software

Pennington County Board of Commissioners ยท March 23, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After staff reported roughly 125 registered vacation rentals and an estimated 350'400 total listings, commissioners voted to direct staff to actively enforce the county's vacation-home rental ordinance and discussed buying data-mining software (roughly $13,000) to identify unregistered properties.

Pennington County commissioners voted to direct staff to actively enforce the county's vacation-home rental ordinance after a lengthy discussion about registration gaps, staffing and enforcement workload.

Planning staff reported the county has about 125 registrations or CUPs for vacation-home rentals but estimated total listings in the unincorporated county could be roughly 350 to 400. "We probably have, I would say, about a 125. I'm guessing we have upwards of 350, I believe, is what he's about 400," Britney said when asked how many were registered.

Britney told the board the county currently enforces vacation rentals on a complaint basis and has not achieved the compliance envisioned when the licensing approach replaced CUP-only review. She presented software options (staff cited Rentalscape and Granicus as examples) and said one product they reviewed costs about $13,000 per year and can do data mining, send notices and provide enforcement leads. "We would either like to be able to enforce it or not have it," Britney said.

Commissioners debated staffing, workload and legal consequences. Staff noted the ordinance includes civil penalties; during discussion a $250-per-day penalty after notice was referenced. Commissioner Durer moved to "direct staff to actively enforce vacation home rental ordinance," a motion seconded and approved by voice vote. The board discussed ensuring fees cover enforcement costs if the county pursues active compliance and asked staff to provide occasional updates.

What was decided: Staff was directed to pursue active enforcement and to explore software and fee structure to ensure enforcement is sustainable; the transcript records no formal vote to purchase software.

Next steps: Staff to bring back updates on enforcement progress, fee structure and software options.