Committee forwards amended short‑term rental moratorium, asks sponsors to add legal justification for owner‑occupied exemption

The Annapolis Economic Matters Committee voted March 4 to forward an amended ordinance (04025) placing a temporary moratorium on new non-owner-occupied short‑term rental licenses and requested that the sponsors add explicit legal justification for owner‑occupied exemptions before full council consideration.

Assistant City Attorney Ashley Leonard told the committee that moratoria affecting real property can be legally risky: a moratorium can be considered “what's called a taking,” and if exemptions discriminate between owners and non‑owners or in‑state and out‑of‑state actors the ordinance could trigger dormant commerce‑clause scrutiny. Leonard recommended the ordinance’s whereas clauses clearly set out the factual basis for any owner‑occupied exemption.

Committee debate focused on several amendments that reshape timing, reporting and residency proof. Key committee actions included no recommendation on amendment 1 (definitions/residency proof) and a positive recommendation on amendment 1A (simplified residency proof), no action on amendment 2 (interim report timing), a favorable recommendation on amendment 3 (harmonize with existing annual reporting) with a committee amendment to remove a specific “60 days prior” timing clause, no recommendation on amendment 4 (monthly reporting, judged burdensome by staff), a favorable recommendation on amendment 5 (shortening the moratorium from 12 to 6 months — committee voted to remove the built‑in 60‑day prior reporting requirement tied to amendment 5), and a favorable recommendation on amendment 6, which clarifies the ordinance applies only to non‑owner‑occupied units and adjusts several whereas clauses.

Alderman Rob Savage, who sponsored several changes, said amendment 6’s explicit language on owner‑occupied exclusions and the other edits were intended to acknowledge existing city regulations and to make sure any exemptions are legally justified. Several members — including one who said he was generally not a supporter of the underlying moratorium — suggested sponsors work with the law office to formalize the reasons for the owner‑occupied carve‑out before the ordinance reaches the full council.

City staff and the city manager cautioned that shorter moratoria compress the time available to collect data and craft code changes. The committee agreed to ask sponsors to work with legal staff to ensure the ordinance’s justification language is complete; the committee sent the amended 04025 to the council with that recommendation.

No final ordinance adoption occurred at the committee meeting; the committee’s action was a motion to forward 04025 as amended with the additional request that the sponsors address owner‑occupancy language for legal sufficiency.