Harris Township Finalizes Landmark Short-Term Rental Ordinance After Contentious Deliberation
On December 8, 2025, the Harris Township Board of Supervisors enacted a sweeping regulatory framework for short-term rentals (STRs), culminating months of intense public debate and stakeholder negotiation. Ordinance Number 382, officially the “Harris Township Short-Term Rental Ordinance,” establishes clear operational standards, permitting requirements, and a defined path for existing operators, signaling a definitive pivot toward managing the impact of transient occupancy on the municipality’s residential fabric. This new regime places Harris Township squarely in the evolving regional conversation surrounding property rights and neighborhood preservation, a dialogue that has intensified across the Centre Region throughout 2024 and 2025.
Controversy and Stakeholder Perspectives
The introduction of such comprehensive rules, particularly following a period where STR operations largely proceeded under a non-regulatory environment, inevitably generated significant tension. The narrative of the development phase was heavily colored by the assertive pushback from a group of existing property owners, who argued that the proposed solutions were excessively restrictive and posed a direct threat to their established business models.
Objections Raised by Current Property Investment Holders
A vocal faction of property owners, frequently represented by figures such as local real estate agent Eric Hurvitz, voiced strong and organized opposition to several elements of the draft ordinance, deeming them “unreasonable and discriminatory” during public sessions leading up to the final vote. Their concerns were multifaceted, touching upon regulations they felt crossed the established boundary from reasonable oversight into what they perceived as punitive overreach.
Among the chief complaints cited during the August 2025 discussions were requirements that the owners deemed legally questionable or unduly burdensome. For instance, an earlier draft included a proposed mandate for a substantial general liability insurance coverage amount—specifically, $500,000—which was argued to be excessively high and potentially discriminatory as it was being levied only upon STR owners, not the broader property-owning population. Furthermore, substantial objections were registered against specific language that would have prohibited owners of condominium units or those holding multiple properties within the township from engaging in short-term rentals, a restriction they felt constituted an unlawful limitation on the fundamental right to property use.
Other grievances shared by several operators during public sessions included requirements for documentation of septic systems and a pointed critique regarding the perceived uneven enforcement of general nuisance and criminal ordinances, suggesting that these standards were being selectively applied only to the short-term rental community. These concerted objections and the threat of legal action from property owners compelled the supervisors to table an earlier vote, allowing for a critical refinement phase before the final December 8, 2025, adoption of Ordinance #382.
The Township’s Stated Objective: Preserving Communal Character
In direct contrast to the financial concerns voiced by investment holders, the township leadership consistently maintained that their core objective was not to punish investment but to safeguard the essential character of Harris Township, a quality that even some residents and property owners agreed was “special”. Supervisor Bruce Lord repeatedly emphasized that the ordinance’s purpose was to manage the tangible impact of transient occupancy on the community fabric. The supervisors articulated a clear obligation to respond to consistent citizen complaints regarding specific issues such as noise disturbances, on-street parking scarcity, and the perceived transformation of traditionally residential neighborhoods.
While acknowledging the inherent difficulty in balancing the rights of property owners to fully utilize their assets against the right of neighbors to enjoy peaceful, stable residency, the township ultimately prioritized the latter in establishing the new baseline rules. This commitment to preserving the residential atmosphere is the clear justification for the resulting strict limitations on rental days and the prominent owner-occupancy mandate. Township officials view these regulatory tools as necessary mechanisms to ensure that investment serves the community structure rather than superseding its established quality of life.
Integration within the Regional Regulatory Landscape
The policy decisions formalized in Harris Township are not isolated events; they are an integral part of a broader, accelerating evolution of municipal policy across the entire Centre Region as various jurisdictions grapple with the same phenomenon of platform-based rentals. The final structure of Ordinance Number 382 reflects a calculated response to, and an alignment with, the regulatory environments established by its immediate neighbors in 2024 and 2025.
Comparative Analysis with Neighboring Municipal Ordinances
The newly enacted regulations situate Harris Township squarely within the regional continuum of short-term rental oversight, often using neighboring policies as a benchmark for acceptable thresholds. Specifically, the allowance of one hundred twenty (120) cumulative rental days per year aligns directly with the standard already established in State College Borough, suggesting a shared philosophical baseline for the acceptable annual threshold for non-primary residency use.
However, a comparative review reveals significant policy variation across the area, illustrating the diverse approaches local governments are taking:
- Ferguson Township: An early adopter in the region, Ferguson currently maintains no annual night cap but imposes a firm requirement for the owner to occupy the property for six months out of the year.
- Bellefonte Borough: This municipality employed a more nuanced approach to legacy use, grandfathering in earlier operations. It permits a maximum of sixty (60) rental nights per year for those existing rentals in certain residential zones, while offering no cap for rentals in other, less restricted zones.
- College Township: As another early regulator, College Township maintains a significantly stricter annual limit of only forty-five (45) cumulative rental nights. Furthermore, they demand that rentals be conducted in increments of fourteen (14) consecutive nights or less and mandate that all guest vehicles park entirely on the property.
- Patton Township: This municipality recently adopted a requirement that mandates a rental permit for any rental period exceeding one day.
- Halfmoon Township: As of late 2025, Halfmoon remains the only municipality in the Centre Region without specific STR regulations.
This regional comparison highlights that while Harris Township’s final policy is undoubtedly rigorous—especially with its new owner-occupancy standard—it is arguably less restrictive than some nearby municipalities in terms of the annual rental day limit, a critical point often leveraged by property owners during the debate.
The Broader Context of Evolving Sector Oversight in the Area
The policy development in Harris Township is symptomatic of a widespread, national trend where local governments, having initially lagged in addressing the proliferation of platform-based rentals like Airbnb and Vrbo, are now actively implementing detailed, non-negotiable permitting and operational codes. The structured dialogue that preceded this ordinance—involving planning commissions, resident groups, and the represented property owners—is a common feature of this municipal response across the United States. As more comprehensive data emerges regarding the sector’s impact on local housing availability, neighborhood cohesion, and compliance with lodging taxes, it is widely expected that these regulations will continue a trend of tightening and standardization across the Centre Region. The very existence of this synchronized, multi-jurisdictional conversation—involving College, Ferguson, Patton, and Bellefonte—signifies that short-term rentals are now permanently integrated into the conversation about local land use planning and housing policy, forcing every municipality to explicitly define its position on the delicate intersection of private property rights and community preservation.
Looking Ahead: Enforcement and Future Trajectory
With Ordinance #382 now the established law of the land following its December 8, 2025, enactment, the operational focus immediately shifts from legislative debate to administrative execution and the long-term integration of these new rules into the township’s governance structure. The overall effectiveness of the policy will ultimately hinge on the clarity and consistency of the enforcement mechanisms, particularly how the established, non-conforming uses—those that do not meet the new owner-occupancy standard—are managed as they transition toward mandated sunset clauses or face hurdles upon license renewal.
The Process for Certifying Existing Nonconforming Uses
For the approximately fifty (50) property owners who held non-owner-occupied licenses prior to the enactment, the immediate next step requires a formal application for the Certificate of Nonconformity. This application package, readily available on the township’s official website as of early December 2025, requires the submission of a fifty-dollar ($50) fee. Crucially, the submission must be accompanied by specific documentary evidence proving the property’s prior use as an STR within the critical sixty-day window preceding the ordinance’s adoption, a detail Township Manager Mark Boeckel noted was essential for accurate tracking.
Township staff are now tasked with the meticulous review of these submissions to confirm they meet the precise standards outlined in Chapter Twelve, Section Eight Point Three of the Township Code of Ordinances pertaining to nonconforming status. Successful applicants will be issued the official Certificate, which formally validates their continued, albeit temporary, operation under the grandfathered parameters. This administrative gatekeeping process is designed to ensure that the grandfathering is not merely self-declared but is officially recognized and tracked by the municipality, providing a clear, auditable record of which properties benefit from the temporary exemption and when that exemption is scheduled to expire, which generally occurs upon transfer of ownership or cessation of use.
Anticipated Impact on the Local Housing and Hospitality Economy
The full economic and social implications of the new structure will only become apparent over the coming calendar years, yet several immediate effects can be projected within the local housing and hospitality economy as of this December 2025 implementation date.
For the existing cohort of non-owner-occupied investors, the ordinance introduces a clear sunset risk associated with the eventual expiration of their nonconforming status. This regulatory certainty is likely prompting some investors to explore selling their investment properties sooner rather than later, or to proactively transition them into long-term rentals to avoid the stringent future requirement of owner-occupancy. This potential shift could lead to a slight, though perhaps minor, stabilization or increase in the available long-term housing stock within the township, which was an unstated secondary goal of the residency requirement.
For prospective new investors, the barriers to entry have been significantly elevated. The combination of mandatory owner-occupancy, the requirement for an annual license, specific parking stipulations (one space per bedroom), and the strict 120-day cap will likely deter purely passive investment, thereby curbing the potential for further rapid, large-scale expansion of the short-term rental sector within the township’s residential zones.
While reports indicate that one resident who had previously threatened legal action expressed a measure of understanding for the supervisors’ difficult task—acknowledging that both sides presented valid points—the final Ordinance #382 represents a definitive, measurable shift toward prioritizing residential stability over the unfettered commercialization of private homes. This development continues to draw considerable attention across the local media spectrum covering the short-term rental sector. The measured approach, balancing grandfathering for existing operators with strict future conditions for all properties, positions Harris Township as a key case study in regional governance for this rapidly evolving area of economic activity throughout late 2025.