Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debate centers on conduct rules vs. 300-foot spacing in proposed short-term rental ordinance
Summary
Councilors and residents debated a proposed short-term rental ordinance (Ordinance 25004), with the sponsor favoring conduct-based rules and several residents and councilors urging a 300-foot spacing requirement; the sponsor said he will circulate a revised draft and post a redline online.
A debate over how to regulate short-term rentals dominated public comment and council discussion on March 4, 2026, as the Laws and Ordinances committee reviewed Ordinance 25004, a proposed code to regulate short-term rental operations in New Franklin. The sponsor said he had worked with the law director to clarify definitions and to allow transfers to an LLC owned and operated by the same person without forcing a new permit.
The sponsor (Mr. Almond) told colleagues the ordinance focuses on conduct-based prohibitions — for example, banning large parties and excessive noise — and argued that adding a 300-foot spacing rule now would create unnecessary burdens and could unfairly affect property owners who already hold short-term rental rights. "I always approach it as with how many rules do I not have to make?" he said, arguing the city should target bad conduct rather than broadly restricting where rentals may operate.
Residents and several council members pushed back. Carol Krosky (4147 North Trail Avenue) said she lives near two rentals closer than 300 feet and questioned whether the draft accounted for local lot-size differences. Gerald Wild (4794 Saybrook Drive) described a rental that produced multiple police calls and property damage, calling the experience "hell" and urging the council to be proactive. Greg Boland (4057 Milton) said clusters of rentals change neighborhood character and likened rentals in residential areas to commercial uses that can erode year-round neighbor relationships. Another resident, Robin, said it would be better to include the 300-foot rule now than to try to add it later.
The sponsor acknowledged those concerns but reiterated legal constraints raised by the law director: he said the city had been advised it could not use a prior criminal conviction alone to disqualify a rental applicant under zoning rules. He also said staff would post both a redlined version and an updated clean draft of the ordinance online after further edits by the law director. "I'm not going to vote on it tonight," he said, and added he would circulate the cleaned-up draft and have it posted for residents to review.
No final vote on Ordinance 25004 occurred during this meeting. The committee closed at 6:55 p.m. and the sponsor said he would continue to accept input and permitted other councilors to sponsor alternative measures should they wish to add a 300-foot spacing requirement.
