Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners deny appeal, uphold first violation for 60 Hughes short‑term rental after bear‑attracted trash incident
Summary
After a public hearing, the Board denied an appeal and affirmed a first (warning) short‑term rental violation for 60 Hughes related to unsecured trash that attracted bears; staff said owners have since installed a completed trash enclosure but a survey is required to confirm right‑of‑way placement.
The Board of County Commissioners denied an appeal and affirmed the short‑term rental (STR) first violation for 60 Hughes on July 1, after Community Development staff presented photos showing trash scattered near a dumpster and evidence that the property’s new trash enclosure may encroach into the county right‑of‑way.
Community Development staff (speaker 9) told commissioners the property had previously been suspended, was recently reinstated and that staff issued the current violation for trash because bear‑proof containers were not secured at the time of the incident. Staff also noted the property had advertised an inflated bed count (28 beds) that had since been removed; zoning enforcement limited the current formal finding to the trash issue. “There’s no doubt that the trash was an issue,” staff said, adding the owners have built an enclosure but that a survey is necessary to determine whether it lies in county right‑of‑way and whether it exceeds the 10‑by‑12 size allowed without a building permit.
Owners’ counsel Kent Whitmer (speaker 13) and owner representatives described steps taken to prevent recurrence — a $15,000 trash enclosure, signage, rental‑agreement fines for noncompliance, routine messages and local monitors — and asked commissioners to consider mitigating circumstances and equitable enforcement. Whitmer argued the enclosure was essentially complete and that the incident occurred two days before the final garage door installation. "You can be a diligent, non negligent owner and still have bad things happen," he said, noting contractors and timing constrained completion.
The board found the evidence supported a first (warning) violation — a non‑monetary sanction that documents the offense and creates enforcement consequences for further violations — and denied the owners’ appeal. Commissioners volunteered praise for the owners’ corrective steps but stated enforcement of STR rules was necessary to protect neighbors and county infrastructure. Staff will require a survey of the enclosure’s location and monitor continued compliance; a second violation within two years could escalate penalties under county code.
