One person’s property rights shouldn’t trump another’s.”

Jim Crais

REGIONAL – Those who rent out their homes or cabins on a short-term basis may soon have to meet a new set of county regulations. The St. Louis County Board of Adjustment voted on Thursday, Dec. 12 to recommend new short-term rental rules to the county board, which will have the final say after a 30-day review period. The board of adjustment made its decision following a public hearing that sparked considerable testimony both for and against the new regulations.
Under the current ordinance, a short-term rental is defined as any building that provides sleeping accommodations to the public on a nightly or weekly basis for less than a thirty-day period for financial compensation. More simply put, renting anything from a room to an entire residence, will likely make a property subject to the new rules, assuming it isn’t already registered as a hotel, resort, campground, or other service-oriented business. That will require, among other things, that you will need to obtain a new performance standard permit, which must include the following:
Emergency contact information for police, fire, hospital, and septic tank pumper.
Contact information for the property owner/operator, which must also be provided to the St. Louis County Planning and Community Development Director.
Aquatic Invasive Species prevention guidelines for watercraft use.
In order to obtain the new permit, property owners will need to provide some type of visual demarcation of the property lines, whether on a map posted in the rental unit or on the property itself. Mark Drobac of Greenwood Township, who spoke at the hearing, said he found this aspect especially concerning.
“What happens if neighbors don’t agree on the property lines?” he asked. “It could cost $5,000 to get a surveyor out there to settle things.”
In fact, such surveys will now be a requirement for those who wish to rent, should the new language be adopted. The only way to avoid using a licensed land surveyor to locate the property lines is by filing an agreement with the county between the adjoining property owner and the short-term rental operator. If that’s not possible, property owners will need to have a survey completed, potentially adding significant cost. Drobac wasn’t alone in his concern, as a number of residents spoke to the issue.
Proposed quiet hours and screening requirements were another point of concern. Some believed these were important items to include, while others thought they imposed unfair rules on property owners who rent. Jim Crais of Hermantown liked the idea of quiet hours but said they should be implemented across the board rather than simply on renters.
“One person’s property rights shouldn’t trump another’s,” he told the board.
Crais, who rents out his family’s property from time to time to help defray the costs of owning a cabin, noted that he had recently removed some of the vegetation from his property as it posed a fire hazard. Anything new that was planted wouldn’t grow overnight, so there would need to be some type of timeline on when the new standards have to be met. The board mentioned fencing as an option, but as Crais pointed out, this could lower the property value.
Tony Sjoberg of Duluth noted that installation of fencing or planting vegetation would not be possible until spring. Should the St. Louis County Board choose to adopt the board of adjustment’s recommendation, however, the new regulations would likely go into effect almost immediately.
According to Commissioner Keith Nelson, this rush to pass the new ordinance wording is due to the fact that they want to give property owners time to prepare before the rental season hits. But some at the hearing noted that not everyone rents solely during the summer months. It’s unclear what those who rent during the winter will have to do about current bookings if the new regulations are adopted this winter.
In part because of such concerns, board member Roger Skraba argued that the county was moving forward with the changes too quickly and he urged the board to table the issue for further consideration of some of the concerns raised by the public.
One of these concerns is the proposed minimum buffer of 300 feet between short-term rentals, which Jeff Lovgren, of Lake Vermilion, raised during the hearing. He told the board it would lead to potential friction between neighbors if they both wanted to rent but only one could obtain a permit to do so. The ordinance does include a conditional use permit which would allow a way around this issue, but as Lovgren noted, a CUP would come with a different set of requirements, meaning one neighbor could end up paying a lot more to rent out than another.
This imbalance of power was one of Tanya Nichols’ main concerns. Nichols lives in Duluth and currently rents out her family’s property on Little Pequaywan Lake. She argued for a better way of resolving issues between rental property owners and neighbors, especially when it comes to heavily emotional situations. Sjoberg agreed with her, saying there should be an opportunity for corrective action rather than the owner immediately losing their permit.
Another one of the major concerns brought up during the public hearing was the potential for the new regulations to drive current rental property owners out of business. Several of those who spoke to the board stated that they would likely have to sell their properties if the new ordinance language was adopted. Mike Mellesmoen of Embarrass argued that people might dump their properties and drive down property values. He, and several others, said they were simply seeking fair treatment for all property owners, which they believe the proposed ordinance language changes are not currently providing.
There are several other regulations and standards that property owners will have to meet should the board adopt the new language, including:
Obtaining general liability insurance for the property in an amount consistent with St. Louis County board coverage requirements. A copy of the policy must be provided to and kept on file with the county.
Properties that are used primarily for renting purposes will be deemed Commercial Use-Class II properties and will be subject to ordinance requirements regarding commercial use.
Accessory dwellings cannot be used for rental purposes unless a permit is obtained for the overall property.
Performance standard permits for rental properties will not be transferable upon a change in ownership. This includes properties that change hands within a family.
Rental dwelling units must be located on a conforming lot.
Only one dwelling per parcel may be rented. Additional renting of recreational vehicles, tents, garages, accessory structures, pole barns, sheds, fish houses, boathouses, or other similar structures will not be allowed.
Conditional use permits may be applied for in the case of more than one dwelling unit being present on the same parcel or in the case of single units on contiguous parcels under common ownership. In some cases, this may also constitute a resort and will be subject to the applicable standards for such.
Obtaining and maintaining an applicable Minnesota Department of Health Lodging License and other applicable licenses. A copy of said licenses must be provided to and kept on file with the county. They must also be posted in a prominent location within the rental dwelling.
Sufficient on-site parking must be provided to the renters and no person shall ever be allowed to park a vehicle or motor vehicle on or within the limits of any road or right-of-way.
Providing a Minnesota tax identification number and other applicable identification numbers to the St. Louis County Planning and Community Development Director.
Sewage treatment and the disposal of solid waste must comply with St. Louis County Subsurface Sewage Treatment System Ordinance 61 and Solid Waste Ordinance 45 respectively, along with their successors or replacements.
Not everyone who spoke at the Dec. 12 hearing had hesitations regarding the potential regulations. Several people told the board they believed things were heading in the right direction and that they were pleased with the work the board was doing. Lisa Clausen and John Wilson, both of Big Pequaywan Lake, said that health, safety, peace, and quiet were all factors the board should consider.
Clausen, who lives next door to short-term rentals, said the impact of having a constant rotation of strangers has “ruined the dream” she and her husband had of living there. According to her, those who rent are using the buildings for commercial purposes in a residential zone. The turnover has been a lot for her family to deal with and the property owners don’t seem to care if there are issues unless it’s after 10 p.m.
Bonnie Dresen of Little Pequaywan Lake also had concerns regarding renters who come into the area for a short period of time. She and her husband have lived in their lake home for forty-eight years and are concerned about the renters not being invested in the area or the properties in the same way as full-time residents.
The new ordinance language is currently undergoing a 30-day review process. The full county board is expected to take the new rules up some time in January, and the public will have at least one more public hearing opportunity when they do. The county will announce that date once it’s set.