Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Homeowner urges select board to reconsider STR grandfathering after town attorney advises appeals go to court
Summary
A Londonderry homeowner asked the Select Board to reconsider who qualifies as 'grandfathered' under the town's short-term rental ordinance after a town attorney's opinion said appeals must be taken to superior court under Vermont Rule 75 because the ordinance provides no local appeals board.
A town staff member read a legal opinion from the town attorney advising that, under the current short-term rental (STR) ordinance, the Select Board has no authority to hear appeals of the STR administrator’s decisions and that affected property owners should seek review in superior court under Vermont Rule 75.
"While I think it would be prudent for the Select Board to amend the STR ordinance ... in the meantime I think that the Select Board needs to route any property owners who wish to appeal a denial ... to superior court for an appeal under rule 75," the staff member read from the attorney's opinion.
Homeowner Tyler Fisher told the board he purchased his Route 11 house in spring 2024 and initially believed ownership alone would exempt him from the ordinance. He said he was not properly registered and had since tried to comply.
"I'm here tonight to appeal you all to reconsider what constitutes someone as being grandfathered through the STR ordinance," Fisher said, asking the board to treat long-standing owner-occupants differently than commercial operators.
Board members and staff explained that the ordinance's grandfathering language applies only to properties that were registered in the first program year (July 1 through June 30) and that people who were never registered are not eligible for grandfathering as written. The staff member urged affected residents to consider the attorney's guidance and suggested the Select Board consider ordinance amendments to create a local appeals process in the future.
The board did not take formal action on an amendment during the meeting but encouraged continued participation in the annual review process to inform any changes to limits, night caps or appeal procedures.
