A controversial ordinance in Winona capping the number of rental houses could result in a slippery slope on city zoning powers, attorneys argued before the Minnesota Supreme Court on Thursday.
If Winona can regulate who uses a house — a homeowner vs. a tenant — it could potentially try to regulate all kinds of things about who lives in a neighborhood, argued an attorney representing homeowners challenging the law.
But an attorney for the city countered that if cities can't regulate the commercial use of people renting out their houses in order to preserve a neighborhood, they could potentially be restricted from all sorts of other zoning, including where certain types of businesses are and aren't allowed.
In a case being watched by local government leaders around the state, justices questioned attorneys about Winona's law, which limits the number of rental properties to 30 percent per block in some lower-density neighborhoods.
Passed in 2005, the ordinance was meant to ease parking problems and protect the neighborhoods from decline. Three homeowners who were denied long-term rental licenses sued, arguing the rule infringes on their property rights.
A few other Minnesota cities have similar rules: Mankato, Northfield and West St. Paul set rental caps in varying percentages.
"There are tens of thousands of homeowners in Minnesota that are affected by laws such as these," said Anthony Sanders, an Institute for Justice attorney representing the three Winona plaintiffs.
Zoning power
Most oral arguments Thursday centered on a municipality's zoning power and what it means.