City Council members considered a set of changes to the short-term rental licensing enforcement process in Steamboat Springs Tuesday but stopped short of supporting an appeals process linked to certain licensing decisions.

Prior to council members providing direction on the changes at their work session Tuesday, Planning Director Rebecca Bessey provided an overview of the city's work to implement and enforce the city's short term-rental regulations, which were enacted in 2022.

On the enforcement side, the planning director said a city short-term revenue report hotline established in December had received 163 calls with 53% of those reports related to noise issues and 26% linked to reported parking violations.

The city has taken 17 cases linked to 10 short-term rental properties to municipal court. The outcome of those cases has resulted in two-year rental bans being issued to seven properties and $82,250 in fines collected, according to Bessey.

As of Aug. 23, the city counted 2,342 licensed short-term rental properties with 84% of those existing in so-called "green zones," including the commercially zoned downtown area near Lincoln Avenue and properties close to the base of the Steamboat Resort, where there are no restrictions to operating a rental property aside from procuring the appropriate license.

There are 135 licenses held by property owners in the city's yellow zones and 280 in the city's red zone, where like yellow zone owners, those who held vacation-home rental permits when the codes were enforced have been granted short-term rental licenses.

Bessey explained three ways that licenses are available for owners of properties within the city's yellow zones:

Council members gave support for the creation of a suggested "use it or lose it" requirement for licenses issued through a lottery practice in certain overlay zones in the city.

"We didn't necessarily want someone to be able to enter the lottery, receive a license and just never use it and only hold that license for the purpose of prohibiting someone else from using it," said Bessey.

Council also gave approval for the creation of a process that would see city staff maintaining a waitlist that would be refreshed each year.

"We think it would make more sense to maintain an individual waitlist for 12 months, at that time it goes away and if, at any point, in the future if a license becomes available, we will just run a new lottery," added the planning director.

A third change considered to the city's short-term rental code with respect to establishing an appeals system for the licensing process saw division among council members who ultimately voted against including any changes to the current code.

Bessey told council the current code does not include an appeal process because the intent of the code is to keep decisions over licensing "as objective as possible." She also said that only a "handful of folks" have approached the planning department with a request to file some sort of an appeal.

To create an appeals process, Bessey added, would require criteria for an objective review of what might be considered "special circumstances." She added that any requests for appeals received by the city have been those stemming from abandonment of legal nonconforming properties.

Abandonment is determined when a short-term license holder cannot show that they have booked a stay at their property within a 12-month period or if they fail to renew their license.

Bessey said abandonment decisions are made largely because of short-term rental license owners not performing due diligence.

"We do experience, in some cases, lack of accountability with some of our applicants. We provide renewal notices, and we try to hold people's hand to the extent we can," said Bessey.

"They are not appealing the license decision, they are appealing the legal nonconforming abandonment," she added.

For council members Joella West and Michael Buccino, the lack of a formalized appeal process to short-term rental licensing appeared to be a gap in the process.

"I wouldn't want to put a ginormous burden on this system that is up and running very well, but on the other end, there is no appeal process, literally no one is authorized to listen to you explain why something happened," said West.

City Attorney Dan Foote noted that while it may not be an "attractive option," individuals who wish to appeal a short-term licensing decision "have the ability to go to court and challenge these decisions."

West acknowledged the legal option put forth by Foote but said she remained uncomfortable with the lack of an appeal process.

West suggested that with the city's hearings officer, who is an attorney, guidelines could be set for an appeal process that accounts for "hardship or excusable neglect." But the thought did little to move other council members.

"If somebody does go to court, the city also has to provide a defense, so it is time-consuming and expensive for the city as well as the appellant," she said.

Council President Gail Garey and council members Dakotah McGinlay, Steve Muntean and Amy Dickson voted against city staff creating an appeals process.