Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ordinance Residency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Solicitor presents draft to clarify 'residency' for short-term rentals and B&Bs; commission asks questions
Summary
Solicitor Clint Bailey presented a draft ordinance to clarify residency definitions in Chapter 155, proposing specific rules for business-entity ownership (51% voting interest and at least 10 months' primary residency). Commissioners asked about potential differential treatment; Bailey said he saw no immediate legal issue and will refine the draft for Council review.
Get email alerts on the Ordinance Residency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Solicitor Clint Bailey presented a draft ordinance on Jan. 20, 2026, proposing clarifying language for "residency" in Chapter 155 of the Village of Gambier Codified Ordinances. The draft focuses on residency requirements for short-term rentals and bed-and-breakfast operations and would add defined subcategories including "Residency ''Business Entity Ownership" and "Residency 'Trust Ownership."
Bailey said the draft is intended to improve consistency and completeness across the Code without changing the underlying intent. Under the proposed business-entity rule, one or more natural persons holding at least 51% of the voting interest in an entity would need to (1) maintain official Village residency as defined in the Code, and (2) occupy the dwelling as their primary residence for at least 10 months of the calendar year. Bailey noted the draft is not final and would not be adopted as an emergency measure.
Commission members discussed edge cases, including short-term rentals operated by LLCs and professors renting during sabbaticals or special events. Bailey said short-term rentals remain permitted if they are in the owner's primary residential unit or an accessory dwelling unit, or if the owner maintains their primary Village residence (subject to conditional-use approval). Chair Morgan Giles asked whether limiting operation to Village residents could raise concerns about differential treatment; Bailey responded that he did not believe there was cause for concern and added the Village would reassess if state law changes.
Bailey said he would share the draft with "Mr. Barr" and his legal counsel for review and would continue refining the ordinance before presenting a revised version to Village Council. The commission adjourned after the discussion; the record contains a timing discrepancy between the noted start and end times.
