After months of outcry from property owners and protracted debate among city officials, the Steamboat Springs City Council has taken its most definitive step yet toward more forgiving short-term rental enforcement — but many operators will still find themselves outside the city’s new leniency window.

At its regular meeting Sept. 16, council approved the second reading of an ordinance that carves out a one-time, 60-day opportunity for certain property owners previously found in noncompliance to reapply for an STR license.

The ordinance, approved by a 6-1 vote with Gail Garey dissenting, also requires the city to issue notices of violation to green-zone STR owners so they have an opportunity to remedy the violation before being issued a summons to appear in municipal court. 

The measure, building on council direction from August and an initial ordinance reading on Sept. 2, aims to produce a less punitive climate for small-scale STR operators caught up in procedural snags, while still holding firm on underlying eligibility requirements, zone restrictions and the dire need for more housing for local workers.

City Attorney Dan Foote opened the discussion at last week’s meeting by summarizing where council left off at its Sept. 2 discussion regarding modified enforcement policies. 

In Steamboat’s green zone — the least restrictive STR area — property owners who fail to renew a license will receive relief from the two-year property rental ban and can reapply for an STR license, so long as it’s a first offense and there’s no evidence of more serious code violations such as excessive noise, trash or building infractions, Foote explained. 

For properties in the yellow and red zones — where STR rules are more strict — relief is narrower. Owners who previously obtained but failed to renew an STR license may qualify to reapply only if their status as a nonconforming use remains intact, said Foote, while those who never held a vacation home rental, or VHR, permit or STR license are ineligible for such leniency.

Foote added that the new ordinance does not change how the city approaches legal nonconforming registrations and status abandonment, meaning properties where nonconforming STR status has lapsed due to missed deadlines are still ineligible, regardless of whether they are now facing prosecution. 

Providing notices of violation

Since the STR regulations were adopted in June 2022, the city did not issue notices of violation to any STR owners in noncompliance. At the Sept. 16 meeting, Rebecca Bessey, the city’s planning and community development director, detailed the new protocol for notices of violation.

Anyone operating in the green zone without a license will now receive a violation notice and 15 days to address it on their first offense, Bessey explained.

In the yellow and red zones, first-time offenders who have never held a license will continue to be summonsed directly to court, since no remedy is available under city law.

In all zones, STR license renewals will be flagged repeatedly. Owners will receive renewal notices at 60, 30 and 15 days before expiration, plus an additional expiration notice warning of possible penalties. 

Expired operators, having received all these warnings, will be summoned to court rather than offered further opportunity to address the matter.

Public comment spurs council to widen amnesty eligibility

Perhaps the Sept. 16 meeting’s most contentious point concerned properties in the red and yellow zones with a valid VHR permit that expired on or after June 15, 2022, when council approved the STR overlay zone and subsequent regulations.

At its Sept. 2 meeting, council had tentatively decided that only those who also obtained an STR license after that date receive a 60-day amnesty window — excluding owners whose VHR permit expired but never secured an STR license. 

Caroline Fisher, a property owner who has voiced her concerns at several previous council meetings and falls into that excluded category, opened the public comment period at the Sept. 16 meeting by pleading to city leaders to allow owners like herself to receive leniency.

“I’m a single person running one little house that is wonderful, and I would like to have the opportunity to do it again …include us in your amnesty, because I feel like we deserve it,” said Fisher, who paid a $21,200 fine for operating without a license.

Kim Haggarty, speaking on behalf of partner Pat Waters, another owner within that excluded category, reiterated remarks from previous council meetings that the city is “treating (them) like criminals” and vehemently urged city officials to “do the right thing.” 

Haggarty and Waters initially faced a $260,000 fine before being offered a plea deal of $53,000. Since council gave city staff direction in early August to provide discretion toward fine amounts that may seem exorbitant, the couple are now facing a partially suspended fine of $12,000. 

“I’ll pay the fine, but I want my license back,” said Haggarty. “Please just work with us. That’s all we’re asking.”

Councilor Bryan Swintek interrupted the public comment period following Haggarty’s remarks by asking her to show respect to city councilors.

“Kim, you’ve lived a wonderful life. You are a lucky, lucky person. You are allowed to come here and be angry, you’re allowed to be frustrated, you’re allowed to raise your voice at us, honestly,” said Swintek, “but please maintain respect.”

“We may or may not agree with you, but we all respect you,” he added. “We really ask you to do the same thing.”

Waters closed the public comment period by describing the evolving STR enforcement as an “emotional rollercoaster” and asking councilors to reconsider his case.

Council members wrestled with fairness and policy boundaries, with Councilor Amy Dickson noting that “we can’t make policy based on individual public comment.”

“What I don’t want to have happen is, in 61 days, people banging down our doors and a line of public comment that people are pissed off because they didn’t know about this,” said Dickson. 

Councilors Michael Buccino and Steve Muntean suggested opening the 60-day window to reapply for a license to property owners like Fisher and Haggarty, who had a VHR permit that expired after June 15, 2022 and did not obtain an STR license. 

Council President Gail Garey pushed back, citing the need to prioritize local housing for full-time residents and commuting workers. 

“I understand this is very personal, and this is really hard … but also, we know that we have a housing crisis,” said Garey, who referred to the Steamboat Springs Community Plan and its call for housing for locals — not for short-term visitors.

“If you have a home and you have a VHR permit or an STR (license), that increases the value of the home, because you know when you put it up for sale, that it’s advertised as having a VHR or an STR, so you’ve got a stream of income,” Garey added, noting that this isn’t an option for full-time workers. “So that’s where I’m struggling.”

Councilor Dakotah McGinlay supported the suggestion from Buccino and Muntean, noting that “basing policy off fairness is tricky” but that, in this case, “it’s a one-time thing.”

“I do hear everything you’re saying,” said McGinlay, addressing Garey, “but I think it’s just messy and I want to make it simple.”

Councilor Joella West concurred with McGinlay.

“I think this addresses issues of, ‘It was a little chaotic and there were some kind of unfair results — unintentional, but unfair,'” said West. “We have the ability to fix that without destroying the STR program.”