Park Township rental battle moves to state appeals court after judge backs ban

PARK TWP. — For decades, the white sand dunes and residential pockets of Park Township have hosted vacationers in short-term rentals, an arrangement many property owners believed was sanctioned by the local government. 

A recent court ruling, however, has upended that process, transforming this quiet coastal community into a legal battleground over property rights and the definition of a "home."

As of Dec. 30, it wasn't clear what 2026 will look like for the property owners, but one thing is for sure: It’s likely an uphill battle for the Park Township Neighbors, an association appealing the judge's ruling. 

Ottawa County Circuit Court Judge Jon Hulsing ruled on Nov. 4 that Park Township’s 1974 zoning ordinance effectively banned short-term rentals by equating them with motels and "tourist homes." 

The decision comes despite the judge’s own acknowledgment that township officials spent nearly 50 years telling residents the opposite.

“It is undisputed that for nearly 50 years the township did not take enforcement action against any homeowner who rented his property on a short-term basis,” Hulsing wrote in his opinion. He noted that various township employees, including former zoning administrators, “regularly opined that the zoning ordinance did not prohibit (short-term rentals).”

Nevertheless, Hulsing found those past administrative interpretations were "erroneous" and that the clear text of the law is what matters.

The Park Township Neighbors stated in its press release that they strongly disagree. 

“At least six different township representatives all provided written opinions stating that fact to those who inquired regarding short-term rentals. Many property owners were verbally told the same thing, up until at least early 2022.

Yet, the judge ruled in favor of Park Township, stating that upon statutory analysis, a nearly 50-year-old zoning ordinance from 1974 equated renting a house short-term to being a motel, despite decades of township employees interpreting and advising property owners that the zoning ordinance allowed short-term rentals.”

Park Township Neighbors is a 501c4 nonprofit organization, according to its site, whose members are “families, individuals, business owners and community leaders working together to improve everyone’s experience in Park Township.”

A shift in interpretation

The dispute reached a boiling point in 2023 when the township began enforcing a ban on short-term rentals in residential districts. In March 2024, the township board amended its ordinance to explicitly prohibit rentals of fewer than 29 consecutive days in residential zoning districts, according to court documents.

The Park Township Neighbors, representing many affected landowners, argued that the township was moving the legal goalposts. 

They pointed to a trail of internal communications showing township leaders previously admitted to a lack of regulations. Township officials did not return requests for comment.

According to documents shared by Park Township Neighbors, then-Township Manager Howard Fink told residents in a 2017 email that the township had "no regulations on the books regarding this issue." By 2020, Fink noted there was still "not consensus on how or what to regulate." 

Other officials, including the community development manager and the zoning administrator, echoed these sentiments, stating at the time that Park Township did not have short-term rental regulations.

Park Township Neighbors contend that these decades of official advice should "grandfather" in existing rentals.

The legal definitions

The court, however, did not agree. Hulsing’s analysis focused on how the 1974 ordinance defined a "dwelling" while explicitly excluding motels and tourist rooms.

Under the court’s interpretation:

• Rentals as motels: The court found that because short-term rentals provide lodging for compensation on a transient basis, they fit the 1974 definition of a motel.
• Commercial use: Hulsing determined that the act of renting property for short-term use is a commercial use, even if the activity is residential in nature.
• Zoning limits: Because motels and tourist homes were restricted to the C-2 Resort Service Commercial District, the court ruled they were never technically legal in residential zones.

The judge dismissed the weight of past township statements, writing that the fact that zoning administrators misinterpreted these ordinances through "ignorance, indifference or incompetence is irrelevant."

The road ahead

The ruling has left property owners, who represent roughly 1.2 percent of the township's housing units, in a state of uncertainty. Many invested in homes with the expectation of rental income, bolstered by the written and verbal assurances of township staff.

"If residents and property owners cannot rely on official emails, letters, statements and sworn depositions from township officials, then what can be trusted?" Park Township Neighbors said in a statement.

“All along, Park Township Neighbors has been asking current township leadership to simply do the right thing by honoring what previous township administrators and employees have told property owners for decades — that short-term rentals were legal.”

The group argues that the current leadership is attempting to skirt the Michigan Zoning and Enabling Act to deprive residents of property rights.

In response to the ruling, Park Township Neighbors has filed an appeal with the Michigan Court of Appeals, seeking to overturn Hulsing’s decision and preserve what they describe as a "West Michigan tradition."

For now, the township’s March 2024 amendment remains in place. 

— Heather VanDyke covers northern Ottawa County for the Ottawa News Network. Contact her at hvandyke@ottawanewsnetwork.org.