Grafton select board to rewarn short-term rental ordinance after publication error

The Grafton Select Board held a special meeting March 23 to address a procedural defect in how the town’s proposed short-term rental ordinance was warned and to outline next steps for re-warning and re-voting.

Chair of the meeting said the ordinance had been posted in four places but Vermont procedure requires five postings and a fuller summary of the STR provisions to appear with each notice. The chair said Bill Kearns, the town’s administrative officer, brought the defect to the board’s attention and that the board must republish a complete summary and rewarn the ordinance before a valid vote can be taken. “1 of the things, we warned we warned it in 4 places. We need 5 places,” the chair said.

Why it matters: under the timeline discussed at the meeting, re-warning affects when the town can lawfully adopt the ordinance and triggers a window during which residents may petition. The chair cited citizens’ petition rights under state law (discussed in the meeting as “24 VSA”) and noted publication timing and the statutory notice windows may require adjusting meeting dates and the town’s publishing plan.

Board members described the operational steps the town would take: republish a complete summary of the STR draft in the local paper (the chair said the plan was to publish in the Grafton News) and post the summary in the required local locations (website, library, town office, post office and an additional public board). The chair also said the select board had previously accepted review by the town attorney; that vote was recorded in the minutes as having passed 4–1 after attorney review.

Board members and attendees also debated which town body should have lead jurisdiction over STR rules. Bill Kearns said the planning commission has experience and authority over many land-use regulations and recommended consulting the commission on STR language and enforcement mechanics. “Short term rental is still that's part of land use,” Kearns said, urging use of planning commission expertise.

Other board members said STR oversight has historically been handled by select boards in Vermont and argued that a private dwelling used for short-term stays does not always change a property’s land-use classification. That difference in view remained unresolved at the meeting; the board agreed to bring the matter back for further discussion and offered a joint training with the Linden Regional Commission to clarify roles.

Enforcement and owner responsibility featured heavily in discussion. Board members emphasized the draft assigns primary responsibility for compliance to the STR owner or registration holder: enforcement steps would begin with warnings and escalate to fees or license revocation for repeated violations rather than immediate ticketing of transient renters. As one board member explained, the draft includes revocation language and escalating fees if an owner accumulates violations.

On numeric limits, a board member said the proposed cap of 47 STRs was derived as 10% of the town’s dwelling units (the speaker cited roughly 477 habitable spaces as the basis). Officials said the draft currently shows fewer than 20 registered units and that registration and renewal timing are included in the draft (the board discussed aligning renewals to a single annual date).

What’s next: the board said it would rewarn the ordinance, republish the full summary in local outlets and schedule the matter for a future meeting so members and the public can comment prior to a vote. The board recorded that, after a proper re-warning, statutory notice windows determine when a binding vote may be taken and when petition periods begin.