The Oregon Court of Appeals recently ruled on a significant case involving Lincoln County's short-term rental licensing program, affecting numerous property owners in the area. The court's decision, filed under docket number A183535, addressed claims of vagueness in the county's regulations and the applicability of certain state statutes to the county’s actions.
The case arose when a group of plaintiffs, including Peter Briggs and several other property owners, challenged the county's licensing program for short-term rentals (STRs). They sought declaratory and injunctive relief against Lincoln County and its Sheriff, Curtis L. Landers, who oversees the licensing authority. The plaintiffs argued that the program violated provisions in Oregon law and the state constitution, claiming it was unconstitutionally vague.
The dispute began after Lincoln County adopted Ordinance 487 in 2016, establishing a licensing program for STRs. This ordinance aimed to regulate the increasing number of short-term rentals in the county, which had led to issues such as noise complaints and overcrowding. The county later amended this program multiple times, culminating in Ordinance 523 in October 2021, which included new rules and restrictions for STRs.
In response to the county's actions, the plaintiffs filed their case in circuit court after the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) determined that the county's actions were not land use decisions and thus outside its jurisdiction. The circuit court ruled in favor of the county regarding the statutory claims but found three provisions of the short-term rental program to be unconstitutionally vague.
In the recent ruling, Judge Hellman stated, "None of the statutes in ORS chapter 215 that plaintiffs rely on apply to the county’s actions in this case because they were not land use decisions." The court affirmed the circuit court's dismissal of the plaintiffs' statutory claims while reversing the invalidation of the three provisions the circuit court had deemed unconstitutional.
The specific provisions in question included a ban on events such as weddings and rehearsal dinners at STRs, as well as rules regarding the delegation of authority to the county's licensing authority. The court found that the circuit court had erred in its determination of vagueness for these provisions, stating that the county's regulations were not overly broad or lacking in clarity.
This ruling has significant implications for property owners in Lincoln County, as it upholds the county's authority to regulate short-term rentals while clarifying the legal standards for such regulations. The court's decision reinforces the idea that local governments have the power to implement licensing programs aimed at managing the impacts of STRs on communities.
Moving forward, this ruling may set a precedent for similar cases involving local government regulations on short-term rentals across Oregon. Property owners and local governments alike will need to be aware of the court's interpretation of vagueness and statutory applicability in the context of STR regulations.
As for the future of this case, it is possible that the plaintiffs may seek to appeal the ruling to the Oregon Supreme Court. However, as of now, there are no indications of related cases pending that could further challenge the county's short-term rental licensing program.