Council Recap: Short-Term Rentals

The Richardson City Council met March 2, 2026, with two business items on the agenda. First, the council reviewed the city's regulations for short-term rentals (STRs).

Second, the council held the 2025 annual review of the police department. Given that courts have at multiple times ruled that ICE actions have been unlawful or unconstitutional, Richardson should be credited for not participating in those unlawful activities. In any case, there were no public speakers on the topic of the RPD annual review. Not anticipating any news, I didn't even attend that portion of the meeting. Consider that a win for the city. ;-) That leaves STRs for me to cover.

---

The Long-Term Problem with Short-Term Rentals

92 single-family properties in Richardson are currently registered with the city as STRs, with 43 more pending registration. The Police Chief Gary Tittle said that in 2025, the RPD had 38 calls for service out to 26 separate locations. In contrast, he said the RPD responded to about 52,000 calls for service in total from the community. So, do STRs represent a deluge, an epidemic? The answer seems to depend on just how close an STR is to your own home. One public speaker complained of having an STR next to her house and another behind her house across the alley. Another spoke of having four STRs within 750 feet of her house. She had 19 like-minded neighbors with her at the meeting. (Full disclosure: I live in that neighborhood.) The city adopted its STR ordinance in 2022. Everyone here, and I mean everyone, including council members, thinks it's time to do more. Clearly, there's a long-term problem with short-term rentals.

First, let's note that there are things that courts have already said cities can NOT do. Courts have ruled that cities cannot fully prohibit STRs. Courts have said cities cannot conduct interior inspections without approval of either the property owner or tenant. Cities cannot jack up registration fees solely to remove the incentive for homeowners to list their properties as STRs. Fees must be in line with the city's cost of providing the service. Cities can adopt noise, trash, and parking ordinances, but these must apply to all residences, not just STRs.

So what's left that the city can do specifically about STRs? Here's what Richardson is proposing to do.

• Acquire new STR software to identify and track STR listings
• Review the STR registration fee as part of the annual budget review
• Require STR applicants to provide a list of all advertising platforms and update the list within 72 hours of any changes
• Require owners of STRs to collect hotel occupancy taxes
• Include grounds for revocation of an STR license in the ordinance
• Update the "Be a Good Neighbor" guide to include revised parking guidance for cul-de-sacs
• Review options for overnight occupancy limits at STRs
• Review options for density-based zoning limits on STRs. The only successful zoning-based restrictions that have held up in court are those that had a thorough study process beforehand. Expect Richardson to go down this road.

Most of that was presented before the city council members spoke. They are the ones who have to approve any changes to ordinances. Let's hear from them. What did they have to say about STRs? Here are some noteworthy statements.

Council Member Curtis Dorian: "I'm looking at these as two separate things. I'm looking at a short term rental being an individual structure on the premises of that property...And then I'm looking also at, hey, we have investors coming in and purchasing properties, and they're utilizing the entire home as an STR." Dorian's distinction wasn't in the city's own introductory slide, which said an STR applies to "residential property - a single-family dwelling, garage apartment, guest house or a unit in a multi-unit building, including an apartment, condominium, cooperative or timeshare."

Council Member Jennifer Justice: "I would just sort of caution all the neighbors to call in as often as you possibly can and report this so that when we get the numbers, it reflects a legitimate government interest in us needing to regulate in some way to enforce these STRs." Chief Tittle said, "Let's not call 911 simply to build the numbers."

Council Member Joe Corcoran: "I think that unregistered STRS are a huge, huge problem...I'm fine with everything that's drafted. I think that there's a lot that needs clarification, and it's good, but unregistered STRS are a huge problem."

Council Member Arefin: "I heard that there was some incident that they were blocking the alley from both sides. Is that something allowed?" City Manager Don Magner replied, "No, absolutely, not. All they need to do is call the police. They can address that immediately." Arefin wasn't done. He asked for confirmation that blocking a driveway isn't permitted either. He was given that confirmation...sort of. Magner added, "So if someone is temporarily blocking an alley to unload something, for instance, again, context matters. I'm not going to answer anything unilaterally or say this is the way it always is." What does this have to do with STRs? Apparently, Arefin felt that STR occupants are more likely to be violators. What he didn't say is what changes he wanted to see in the STR ordinance to ensure STR renters follow existing parking ordinances.

Council Member Dan Barrios: "I know I would, if I lived in the middle of this [showing a map of STRs], I would be up in arms, and I'd be very, very upset. But I also know that, based on what we're hearing, we're trying to put as much teeth into it without crossing any lines and put our city in jeopardy."

Mayor Pro Tem Ken Hutchenrider: "If Curtis decides tomorrow to have a birthday party and he invites 50 people to that party, whether he's in a short term rental or his own residence, the law would be the same for both of those. Is that correct? Right?"

Mayor Amir Omar: "I am curious [about] the scenario of calling a moratorium while we evaluate, or whatever the right wording is. Is that something that you've seen people doing? Is there a period of time where something like that might be defensible?" The mayor was told that some cities that called a moratorium were challenged on it, and some were not. The mayor asked for "some level of a risk assessment on something like that." What was he thinking about? He said it was "the knowledge that we all have that FIFA is around the corner, and I imagine that a lot of people will get sucked into the opportunity to be able to rent their home out for $2,000 a night, or whatever the number ends up being...I'd love to just kind of understand what kind of risk we might be looking at." I imagine Mayor Omar's comments could be used against him in court by someone questioning the real motive of imposing a moratorium right before the World Cup.

---

Quotes have been lightly edited for clarity and brevity.

---

"Ninety-two doorways
open to weekend strangers.
Storm? Or passing squall?"
—h/t ChatGPT