BAR HARBOR—A revised short-term rental ordinance will greet Bar Harbor home owners who rent rooms, or the whole residence, from their primary home after the town council unanimously approved new proof of residence measures and other changes that will take effect starting Wednesday.
However, the ordinance has been stripped of one of the components that had been worrying some residents, which was an inspection piece.
“The goal was to add some clarity,” Vice Chair Maya Caines said at the Tuesday meeting.
With that goal came some disapproval from some property owners.
Council Chair Valerie Peacock via Zoom said that the council had received a lot of written comments about the changes, especially worries about the inspection component.
Worries have included the expansion and punitive violations section of the ordinance, vague terminology, a lack of direct notification to property owners about the changes, and the language that many believe shifts the primary residence verification process to all individuals who could potentially claim the property, such as children or parents as the primary property owner who use the property as their legal address, but do not own the property.
Most of the worries, however, seemed focused on the inspection terminology.
Peacock said the original change required a lot of work toward getting a “pretty effective program” out there.
“I feel comfortable with the way the ordinance is written now [as far as] its legality and its intention,” Peacock said of the changes.
Town Manager James Smith, Peacock said, had offered an amendment that would take out the inspection pieces and remove that language to simplify and reassure people who were concerned about the inspection process.
“The biggest change here is the idea of straightening the primary residence requirements of VR-1,” Bar Harbor Planning Director Michele Gagnon had said at an October town council meeting.
Unlike other island towns whose voters have rejected restrictions on short-term rentals, Bar Harbor has a cap on short-term vacation rentals that are not the primary residence of the owner. The town categorizes these as VR-2s.
Those are not what these changes are about.
These changes are about VR-1s, which are short-term rentals that occur in someone’s primary residence. They can also be a secondary dwelling unit on the same property as someone’s primary residence. Each primary residence can have two VR-1 permits.
The first change is that people have to provide three documents out of a list of seven or people can undergo an alternative process. This is to show that the home they want to rent is their own home, their primary residence.
The second change would be guidelines for trusts or entities. The third change would be guidelines for family estate planning or residency.
The rewritten ordinance received scrutiny from some residents who questioned different aspects of the changes.
The only member of the public who spoke at Tuesday’s meeting was Charles Sidman who said, “I think this legislation is well intentioned but not yet ready for enactment.”
He said he believed it infringed on constitutional protections and predicted there would be legislative and judiciary resistance.
A housekeeping amendment with several word changes which included striking “or” and inserting a “comma” and changing subsection renumbering passed unanimously.
The main motion also passed unanimously.
The Smith memo, which Peacock referred to earlier, gave an option to remove the licensing condition, which Councilor Joe Minutolo motioned and was unanimously approved.
The minimum fine for operating without a valid registration is $1,500. The new version is over 11 pages. The previous version was six.
Both councilors Earl Brechlin and Steve Boucher stepped down and recused themselves. Brechlin owns a VR-1, Boucher owns a VR-2 and manages other rentals.
“Some commenters have raised concerns about conditioning a license on agreeing to inspections,” Smith’s memo reads. “The current draft includes a provision that states acceptance of a license includes consent to inspection when reasonable suspicion exists. It is our position that is a lawful and common tool in many Maine communities, but it still remains a policy choice. If the Council prefers that inspection procedures not be tied to a licensing provision, staff could still enforce compliance.”
Since that licensing condition has been removed, Smith wrote, it means that an owner refusing the code enforcement officer’s entry “could no longer be considered as part of the basis for suspending, terminating, or declining to renew a VR I registration. The town would still be able to conduct window or windshield exterior inspections from lawful vantage points, and interior inspections would continue to require either consent or an administrative warrant.”
Minutolo’s amendment, based on Smith’s suggestion involves striking a sentence within section 174-9(A) that reads, “‘By accepting registration under this Chapter, the applicant agrees to allow inspections of the property when requested by the Code Enforcement Officer,’ and by striking any other sentence in this section that conditions the issuance, renewal, or continuation of a VR 1 registration on consent to interior inspection. I further move that no replacement language be added so that inspection procedures follow the enforcement requirements already set by state law, including the need for consent or an administrative warrant for any inspection of the interior or curtilage of a private property.”
Smith’s memo also rebuffed the assertion that the amendment with inspection as a licensing provision was unconstitutional.
”The town attorney has confirmed that the ordinance is functional, aligned with Maine law, consistent with prevailing municipal practice statewide, and most likely to withstand legal challenges. Interior entry still requires consent or a warrant, and nothing in the ordinance changes that requirement. The criticisms now circulating relate to policy preferences not legal defects,” he wrote.
This story was originally published by The Bar Harbor Story. To receive regular coverage from the Bar Harbor Story, sign up for a free subscription here.
