Bill Search

  • Introduced
    Apr 27, 2021
  • Passed House
    Oct 27, 2021
  • Passed Senate
  • Signed into Law
HB 4722
Michigan House Bill
Did you know we offer free bill tracking in Congress and 50 states, and a great mobile app? Sign up here
Land use: zoning and growth management; Michigan zoning enabling act; amend to include short-term rentals. Amends 2006 PA 110 (MCL 125.3101 - 125.3702) by adding sec. 206b.
Last Action See all actions
Do you support this bill?
Yay Nay

Official Summary/Bill Text

Comments on HB 4722

Lacey Howlind wrote 1 year ago

This will increase Michigan economy by giving investors and individual home owners opportunities to rent the properties that they own and encourages tourism and economy in Michigan.
Nancy Salvia wrote 1 year ago

Keep the control local. This is a local issue should not be legislated at the State level
Anne Fjeldheim Jackson wrote 1 year ago

I’ve owned my home with 6 acres in a subdivision for 22 yrs. I raised my children here and many of their friends you could say. It’s a gorgeous lot, beautiful natural rock, perennial gardens, a vegetable garden, hemlocks, white pine beautiful old hardwood, close to ski and mountain bike trails.. it’s a lot of work for me but I deal with it because I don’t want to give this up. My son is studying to be an attorney and would like to buy his childhood home some day. I have loved it here and so thankful to live here. Due to an unexpected situation 5 yrs ago, I have struggled on my own to keep this home. I was approved for a VRBO from Marquette township but my very wealthy neighbor from Pennsylvania came over and said I would be sorry if I did this. He told me to rent it out long-term instead, something I do not want to do because I don’t want my house trashed. I would have much more control by renting it out for a week here and there. He took me to court, he has the money to do it and based on our subdivision covenants for residential use only, he won. He also wanted me to put up a metal fence around the swimming pool because he now has a one-year-old grandson who might walk one and a half acres through dense woods and fall on to my pool cover. I won that one due to the pool cover legally being a vertical fence. Anyhow I know I am explaining too many things, just want you to get a picture of who I am, very hard-working, honest and respectful of my neighbors. The Township board said they had never had someone apply for a VRBO with so many respectful rules and consideration for the neighbors. Being able to rent out my house for 4 weeks a year would at least pay for my yearly taxes and help reduce the worry of having to sell my home and land that I take so much pride in. I just don’t understand why one builder who creates a subdivision, has the right to create covenants, that nobody follows by the way to make the decision for every homeowner in a neighborhood on what they can and can’t do. In regards to short term rentals, the township has noise ordinances which everyone has to abide by. My tenants were going to be for the silent sports enthusiasts such as skiers, bikers and runners, no noisy snowmobiles. We payed good money for the lot and home and have worked so hard at maintaining it. Our lots are quite large, in the city they are not and they are even allowed to have live stock such as chickens lol and we are not. Anyhow, again I’m so sorry about the long probably unnecessary writing. I highly support this new legislation! Thank you to all those that support this!! Anne J
John Zee wrote 7 months ago

There is no way this bill should pass and especially in Saint Joseph, MI. Things are already bad as they are with rentals, let alone if AirBNB will be allowed. Please don't pass this bill.
Zac Pullin wrote 10 months ago

Why restrict property owners rights even more?
JESSICA ROBERTS wrote 6 months ago

This bill is damaging to residential communities. These Airbnb’s are a nuisance, running loads of people through our quiet neighborhoods and lakes, they disrupt taxpayers ability to enjoy their home and property. No one wants to live next to vacation behavior 24/7!!! This bill steals from taxpayers and encroaches on their ability to enjoy their homes! Vote NO! They are also huge revenue earners and should be deemed commercial use! Stop the take and tax evasion! Stop destroying our communities!
Melanie Czekaj wrote 10 months ago

Been really sad lately. Just trying to process it. There are currently just two to three of us short term renting in my childhood neighborhood (all patron neighbors). Ive been so protective over who I let in as I love my community. Our guests have been amazing well to do families. After 3 yrs Ive found about 20 ways to vet our guests well and way better than Id ever be able to do w a long term tenant even with a good background check. We were led to believe we would be grandfathered in earlier this year, but suddenly the proposals hit us now and just want to ban us. There are a few who control us all in the neighborhood. the association was originally supposed to be just for maintenance but now want to control what we do with our hard earned properties. I know this may make some happy to hear unfortunately for whatever their reasons are. However, this will devastate our family. We are not rich. This allowed me to travel for work as Im a younger working mom and the times are changing. I have a baby due close to the day of the meeting to fight this too 🙁. They took my livlihood away. Its like they took my job without blinking an eye. The proposals of our historically rich resort neighborhood now look like they are copied exactly from the bylaws of a retirement complex. It almost seems ageist against younger families here. Please pray for our family. Also please fight for homeowner rights. This industry helps the middle class both guests and hosts in ways many dont realize esp being on the brink of a recession. I will truly miss my guests. The doctors who went out to help my neighbor who normally complains. The family during christmas that I was able to give a special experience to w my homemade decor. The family who just lost their sister and came here to grieve and heal, and so much more.
Elena Griffin wrote 2 months ago

Not only local business have a huge advantage of doing business with STR guests, but the same community would not as well develop modern technology and civilized conditions of living without STR money as from guest as well from owners paying taxes. There definitely should be rules, regulations and requirements but no limitations to how property owner should or should not use with their dwelling. If some community would like to be leave alone without changes or any sort of interruption of their quite life - probably it's better to be announce as "Senior/retirement living neiborhood". Michigan tries to promote "Pure Michigan Experience" to attract the tourist with their desire to spend money in our state, otherwise they will go to Florida for example, but in the same time very stiff locals want to stay living in the 19th century' quiet neiborhood. It doesn't work both ways - the local community needs funds to grow and develop modern and comfortable conditions of life as well as services, and local residents very often cannot afford it or there is not enough requests for modern services without support from the tourists and STR owners, whom tries to provide the best experience for their guests. People do not come back to bad experience or bad houses. The world moves forward so why to hold Michiganders from desire to move with it...The free country should be adequate regulated without restriction, especially from the neighbors, whom just want to set their own rules.


Whip Lists

  • Oct 11, 2022 | Senate
  • Oct 27, 2021 | Senate
  • Oct 27, 2021 | House
    • read a second time
    • substitute (H-1) not adopted
    • substitute (H-11) adopted
    • placed on third reading
    • placed on immediate passage
    • read a third time
    • passed Roll Call # 502 Yeas 55 Nays 47 Excused 0 Not Voting 7
    • vote reconsidered
    • passed; given immediate effect Roll Call # 503 Yeas 55 Nays 48 Excused 0 Not Voting 6
    • Reps. Sara Cambensy, Samantha Steckloff, Brad Paquette removed as co-sponsors
    • transmitted
  • May 25, 2021 | House
    • reported with recommendation with substitute (H-1)
    • referred to second reading
  • Apr 28, 2021 | House
    • bill electronically reproduced 04/27/2021
  • Apr 27, 2021 | House
    • introduced by Representative Sarah Lightner
    • read a first time
    • referred to Committee on Commerce and Tourism