Below are frequently asked questions regarding PTN’s lawsuit against Park Township:
Q. What is the status of short term rentals now in Park Township?
A. In March of 2024 the township passed Ordinance 2024-01. That ordinance prohibits short term rentals (of less than 28 days) outside of the C-2 Resort Service zoning district. This makes it clear that new short term rentals are only allowed in C-2. To our knowledge, no one is arguing against this.
Q. What’s happening currently regarding your efforts?
A. We appealed the ZBA’s 2025 decision to the Ottawa County Circuit Court, and a hearing was held on October 23, 2025 for this appeal of the ZBA ruling.
On November 4, 2025, Judge Hulsing issued his written decision. Unfortunately, the ZBA was affirmed in all aspects.You can read his decision here.
In light of this decision, the PTN Board will discuss the best approach moving forward with our attorney. We remain committed to achieving favorable resolution of this issue and will provide updates to members as they become available.
Q. What happened with the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA)?
A. We submitted an application to the Park Township Zoning Board of Appeals requesting an interpretation of the zoning ordinance on 4 sub-issues. “Did the 1974 Zoning Ordinance permit the use of short-term rentals (“STRs”) in residential zoning districts (in other words, did STRs fall under the definition of a “single-family dwelling”)?” was included.
The hearing for that was held in March 2025. The ZBA decided that short-term rentals fell under the definition of a tourist home from 1963 through February 7, 1974, and that since February 7, 1974, a short-term rental has only been a permitted use in the C-2 Resort Service Commercial District, and not a permitted use in any residential zoning district other than a Planned Unit Development where they were specifically approved. The ZBA decided that they could not offer a decision regarding estoppel or regarding whether or not the zoning ordinance was unconstitutionally vague.
You can read the ZBA’s report here.
We then appealed the ZBA’s decision to the Circuit Court.
Q. What happened with the original lawsuit?
A. On November 21, 2024 Ottawa County Circuit Court Judge Jon Hulsing dismissed the case and lifted the preliminary injunction. You can view the order here. The order also stated that “counts Ill and VI are not ripe for judicial review”.
Prior to that, on December 1st, 2023, Judge Hulsing had ruled in favor of PTN and granted our motion for a preliminary injunction. As a result, Park Township could not enforce its ban on short term rentals (which was originally set to take effect on Oct 1, 2023) while the injunction was in place.
Q. Why did you sue the township?
A. We believe existing vacation rentals (aka short term rentals) should be grandfathered in based on the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act, but the township disagrees. We are trying to force the township to follow the law.
(Particularly since the township spent years telling people there were no restrictions on STRs — see a sample of the evidence here.)
As this article explains, “A fundamental part of zoning in Michigan is that a zoning ordinance cannot be made retroactive.”
Grandfathering in is more properly known as non-conforming use, and this property right is important for everyone. Without it, every time an ordinance changed, people would be required to meet the new requirements.
So for example, without non-conforming use, if your house was 1500 sq ft and a new zoning ordinance was enacted that required all homes to be at least 2000 sq ft, you would either have to undertake a costly addition to add 500 sq ft to your home, or tear down your house in order to “conform” to the new requirement.
But with non-conforming use, something that was legal before the new ordinance took effect is legally allowed to continue, unless major changes are made to the property that would require it to meet the new requirements.
Q. Are you suing the township for money?
A. No, we are not asking for any money.
Q. Are you seeking limitless short term rental activity?
A. No. We are not seeking to expand the number of short term rentals in Park Township, which make up 3% or less of the housing. The March 2024 ordinance is valid and restricts short term rentals to the C-2 Resort Service zoning district.
Q. Are you trying to overturn Park Township’s new zoning ordinance that adds a definition of short term rentals and says they are prohibited in all zoning districts except for the C-2 Resort Service zoning district?
A. No, we are not trying to overturn the new zoning ordinance. We have no issue with a properly enacted ordinance, which this appears to be. We only want the township to following the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act by grandfathering in the STRs that existed prior to this ordinance.
Q. Who is paying for the lawsuit?
A. PTN members are paying to sue the township. The township is paying to defend against it using taxpayer money, which means that a number of PTN members are also indirectly paying to defend against it, because they are also Park Township residents.
Q. What happens if PTN wins the lawsuit?
A. Best case scenario would be that Park Township short term rentals that existed prior to Ordinance 2024-01 would be confirmed as nonconforming uses, and allowed to continue. This would not affect new rentals, which would continue to not be allowed under the new March 2024 ordinance outside of C-2.
Q. What kind of organization is PTN?
A. PTN is a 501(c)4 non-profit organization.
Q. The township and people on social media said that PTN is a PAC. Is this true?
A. No, it is not true. PTN is a 501(c)4 non-profit organization, and not a PAC. The township did eventually issue a retraction notice correcting their error.
Q. Who is funding PTN?
A. PTN is a 501(c)4 non-profit organization that is funded by donations from vacation rental owners, members of the public, and sponsors. As of the time of this writing, 189 constituents have contributed.
146 of those 189 are vacation home owners, 2 are real-estate related sponsors who contributed at the Benefactor and Ally level, and the other 41 are kind people who believe PTN is a worthy cause and gave in varying amounts. (If you would like to contribute as well, you can do so here.)
We have also been fortunate that the local, state, and national associations of Realtors directly paid Hope College’s Frost Research Center for the economic impact study, which PTN commissioned. The Realtors associations are not funding or involved in any way with the lawsuit.