Teresa Arthur, City of Sedona’s short-term rental specialist, will report to the Sedona City Council on the success of Sedona’s STR permit program and strengthen regulation of STR within city limits during a Priority Retreat on December 12th. The outline of the plan was explained.

“Short-term rental growth has been pretty flat since we started the permit program,” Arthur summarized, while also outlining a range of ideas he would like to introduce to create “tighter regulations around short-term rentals and citations.” Ta. This began with the enforcement of new permitter unit requirements that went into effect Dec. 1 for rental properties advertising multiple units on the same lot.

“We’ve identified 97 properties that are doing that, which is fewer than we thought. We thought it would be around 300 people,” Arthur said. “We anticipate there will probably be two audits a year and we will be able to catch whoever decides to open a second unit.”

According to the city council’s Dec. 10 report, the number of STRs in Sedona was 1,203, an increase of 5.7% from 1,138 in December 2018, while the Dec. 12 report showed the number of STRs was 1,157. cases, or 6 cases, an increase of 1.7%. year.

Arthur also plans to audit STR’s compliance during the first quarter of the new year.

“They have to provide evidence of neighbor reporting and sex offender testing,” Arthur said. “Those who don’t have a paper list need to use AirBNB consistently. Someone else has to submit documentation on my behalf or I get cited.”

City Attorney Kurt Christianson has urged city lobbyists to continue pursuing changes to state law that would allow cities to cap the number of STRs allowed in small municipalities such as Sedona. He said city officials will give instructions.

“One of the things I would like to work with Kurt on is stronger language around how permits are not transferred from one owner to another,” Arthur said, also adding: It also suggested updating the city code so that “if you make a reservation, you do so.” Short-term rental with expired permit, this is a citation. ”

Arthur explained that the city’s past practice was to issue violation notices to property owners before issuing citations.

“If the property comes into compliance before the 30-day period before the court date, the citation will be dismissed,” Arthur said. “Less than a dozen people have actually been charged, because the rest are compliant. I’ve had a few repeat offenders who have been fined twice, but… The third time they got charged, they got a fine. I think that’s what we want…compliance, not necessarily a citation. It’s not about that.”

“There’s no need to file a violation notice. It could be an immediate violation at this point, and that’s what the City Council announced,” Christianson said, adding that the city would automatically issue a $500 fine. This means that there is a possibility of imposing He added that the permit can only be revoked if the city records three violations without taking corrective action against the property owner.

“We understand that there is some discussion about the possibility of a fee being charged even for having law enforcement write a citation,” Arthur added.

Arthur said he has discussed the possibility of pursuing criminal charges rather than civil charges with the city court. “But the judge said the fine for the criminal charge is $1,000 less than the civil maximum, so there is no exorbitant fine.” The city stands to lose if there are significant incentives to move people forward with criminal charges. ”

“Are there actually any closures?” Deputy Mayor Holli Ploeg asked.

“No, not yet,” Arthur said. “It will really take a lot of time to prove gross negligence by a particular owner to trigger the mechanism to revoke the permit.”

“I struggle with that,” City Councilman Brian Fultz said. “I’m surprised no one has closed it down at this point. Haven’t you gone to lock the front door?”

“I don’t know if it’s legal,” Arthur said.

“Doors can only be locked for reasons such as nuisance, health or safety,” Christianson said. “You can’t lock people out of their homes.”

Councilwoman Kathy Kinsella suggested posting the names and addresses of those who received citations on the city’s website.

“It may cause more backlash than benefit us,” Arthur said.

“What legal leeway do we have when it comes to testing?” asked City Councilor Derek Pfaff. “If there’s room to regulate, let’s regulate…I’m just looking at it from the standpoint that there may be other ways to reduce the desirability of owning short-term rental properties.”

“State law allows cities to regulate short-term rentals in two ways. One is for health and safety reasons,” Christianson said. “We’re not really going in that direction because we’re not a fire department, we’re not really a health department, we’re not really going in that direction…The city council is There wasn’t much interest in implementing that type of model.” Staff resources.

“Another way the city can regulate short-term rentals is through ordinance regulations that apply equally to all housing,” Christianson said. “Those are the only two options available right now.”

“We don’t have a problem with the huge party houses and short-term party rentals that are happening in Scottsdale,” Christianson added.

“At least half, maybe two-thirds, are probably individuals, couples or family trusts,” Arthur summarized Sedona STR’s ownership breakdown.

Corporate status

During a previous discussion on STR on Dec. 10, Mayor Scott Jabrow referred to STR as a business. Jaburo later said he has the right to define the term independently and that short-term rentals are required to maintain his business license.

Asked for clarification, Christianson said: “I think he’s referring to it more colloquially than legally.”

The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled in Village of Oak Creek Association v. Bonham that STR is not a business use, a decision upheld by the Arizona Supreme Court.

Neither Sedona City Code Chapter 5.25 nor Arizona Revised Statutes §42-5042 define STRs as businesses or require STR operators to obtain a business license. Both laws require STRs to obtain a trading privilege tax license, which is not a business license.

Following the passage of SB1131 in the 2023 legislative session, long-term rentals of more than 30 days will no longer be required to obtain a TPT license starting January 1, 2025.