Summit County homeowners filed a federal lawsuit on Monday, Aug. 14, to halt new regulations on short-term rental properties in unincorporated parts of the county.

The lawsuit alleges the Summit Board of County Commissioners imposed “successively more severe, wide-ranging, misguided and unlawful regulations” when they voted to implement caps on short-term rental licenses and limits on bookings earlier this year.

For decades, short-term rentals “have been a fixture across Summit County and have supported the county’s economy,” the lawsuit states.

It claims the new regulations treat county homeowners differently, threaten their livelihoods and violate a number of property rights under the United States Constitution and Colorado state law.

In a statement provided to the Summit Daily, Todd Ruelle, a county homeowner who is listed as a plaintiff, wrote, “Summit County commissioners have ignored the voices of hundreds of responsible homeowners who provide a valuable service to visitors to Summit County who contribute greatly to our local economy … The county’s regulations will hurt many, many homeowners who rely upon short-term rentals to help pay their mortgages and taxes.”

Summit County Resort Homes Inc., a nonprofit representing 89 county property owners, is listed as a second plaintiff. Richard Mason, one of its directors, deferred to Ruelle for comment for this article.

Summit County Commissioner Tamara Pogue, in a statement to Summit Daily, defended the county’s policies, stating, “Our consideration of the vast array of potential regulations proposed by the participants, our staff and even the board itself over a period of years illustrates the open, interactive nature of our rulemaking efforts. We took every impact, including financial ones, into consideration.”

Pogue’s statement continues: “I believe the regulations are fair and reasonable and protect the interests of the community as a whole. Our actions are reflective of the efforts made by communities across Colorado and the nation; we are all attempting to address the valid concerns of our citizens, neighborhoods, and industry participants in this dynamic, ever-evolving aspect of our economy —especially in highly desirable resort communities.”

Commissioners have been anticipating legal action over their short-term rental policies since at least late March when they became aware of a post in a Facebook group run by property owners that outlined potential litigation against the county.

“We believe the claims that have been threatened are without merit,” said County Attorney Jeff Huntley during an April 4 commissioners’ meeting. “We think that we would be able to successfully defend any litigation against the county.”

The county’s regulations, set to go into effect in September when short-term rental licenses are renewed, were approved unanimously by commissioners on Feb. 15. In doing so, they joined elected officials from the towns of Breckenridge, Frisco and Silverthorne who had all previously approved short-term rental restrictions in their respective boundaries.

The new rules limit the number of properties that can hold short-term rental licenses in the unincorporated county’s various basins, ranging from 5% to 18%. There is no limit in areas defined as “resort overlay zones,” such as Copper Mountain.

According to officials, resort zones account for roughly 63% of all short-term rental properties, while neighborhoods where caps will be in place account for 37%. In total, the caps are projected to decrease the number of short-term rentals from 1,659 short-term to 1,290 between 2025 and 2030.

The rules also limit the number of annual bookings for short-term rentals to 35.

Some exceptions exist, such as an exemption to the license cap for full-time county residents who work more than 30 hours per week in the county or who’ve retired and have a history of working in the county for at least 10 to 15 years. Licenses will also now be transferable between parents and children, spouses or domestic partners, siblings or grandparents and grandchildren.

Commissioners said the rules were designed to mitigate short-term rentals’ impact on housing supply while ensuring homeowners can still use their properties as an economic driver.

Alleging harm to property owners’ livelihoods, the lawsuit states that short-term rentals remain “a supplemental source of income for homeowners, many of whom rely on that income to pay for their mortgages or for other basic needs.”

The complaint goes on to list multiple plaintiffs who it claims will lose tens of thousands of dollars and will not be able to pay their mortgages because of the regulations. It also states the license cap exception for full-time residents creates a “discriminatory treatment of out-of-state residents and, thus, is not legitimate.”

The voices of short-term rental supporters “were ignored by the county,” the lawsuit reads.

Pogue, in her statement, said as the county drafted its proposals it heard “a tremendous amount of input from all sides.”

Published on SummitDaily.com.