Ad hoc committee explores zoning gaps, registration models, neighborhood complaints, and emerging rental trends.
Greenville County Council’s Short-Term Rental Ad Hoc Committee convened for its first formal meeting Feb. 16, electing Councilwoman Liz Seman as Chair and beginning what members acknowledged could be a complex regulatory undertaking.
The issue has also surfaced in prior reporting by Rick Brundrett in The Nerve, where short-term rental owners and managers raised concerns that overly restrictive local ordinances could amount to discriminatory treatment of certain property owners. Those earlier discussions at both the county and state levels have framed the debate as one involving not only neighborhood impacts, but also equal treatment under the law.
The five-member committee includes Liz Seman, Frank Farmer, Curt McGahhey, Dan Tripp, and Alan Mitchell.
Chair Seman noted that the issue has surfaced repeatedly, including during discussions about development pressures near Paris Mountain and broader conversations about alignment between county and municipal policy.
The committee did not vote on any ordinance language but directed staff to begin compiling data from other counties and to return in March with comparative research.
A Debate Over Baselines
Early discussion revealed disagreement over whether Greenville County should use the City of Greenville ordinance as a starting point.
Councilmember Curt McGahhey suggested reviewing the city’s framework as a reference point, emphasizing that the county should not reinvent the wheel.
Councilmember Dan Tripp cautioned against that approach, arguing that the city’s framework is highly restrictive and may not translate well to unincorporated areas.
Tripp expressed concern that adopting a similar structure could harm small “mom and pop” operators and entrepreneurs, particularly in less densely populated areas of the county. He recommended examining other counties, such as Charleston, York, Richland, and Lexington for a more comparable model.
He also noted the absence of basic data, including a reliable method for identifying how many short-term rentals currently operate in the county.
How Many Short-Term Rentals Operate in Greenville County?
At present, Greenville County does not maintain a registry of short-term rentals, making precise counts difficult.
Third-party analytics suggest several hundred short-term rentals operate in the broader Greenville area, but those figures typically reflect city or metro search radiuses rather than strict county boundaries.
Market platforms estimate between 400 and 700 Airbnb listings in the Greenville market, depending on season and search parameters. When including VRBO and similar platforms, public-facing listings can exceed 800 properties across the greater area.
However, those figures do not distinguish between the City of Greenville and unincorporated Greenville County, nor do they separate listings within municipalities such as Simpsonville, Travelers Rest, Fountain Inn, Mauldin, or Greer.
As staff noted during the meeting, identifying the population of rentals may require complaint-driven discovery unless a registration framework is adopted.
Registration vs. Regulation
Committee members discussed the possibility of a free registration system that would require short-term rental operators to register with the county without necessarily imposing a fee.
Tripp emphasized that if public safety is a concern, a basic business registration approach may be reasonable. He suggested a light-touch model in unzoned areas, reserving enforcement for repeat complaints or violations.
During the same exchange, he also questioned whether regulating short-term rentals would be justified by the limited tax revenue such oversight might generate. In response, McGahhey emphasized that the effort is not about generating revenue.
“This is not about taxing,” he indicated during the discussion. “It’s about protecting the quality of life for everybody around it.”
Members also discussed whether enforcement could mirror complaint-driven models already used in animal control and nuisance ordinances.
When Property Rights Collide
The discussion repeatedly returned to the balancing act between private property use and the rights of neighboring property owners who argue that stability, safety, and quiet enjoyment are also fundamental components of property ownership.
For hosts, the argument is straightforward. If a property is zoned residential, why should renting it for three nights be treated differently than renting it for twelve months?
For neighbors who have raised concerns, the complaints are often specific rather than theoretical. Residents have cited late-night music, large gatherings, and rotating guests unfamiliar with neighborhood norms. Overflow street parking in subdivisions not designed for commercial activity has also drawn attention.
In rural parts of the county, questions extend beyond noise. Some residents have raised concerns about septic systems designed for single-family occupancy being overburdened by frequent guest turnover or large gatherings, as well as emergency access on narrow roads when multiple vehicles line the street.
While most short-term rentals operate without incident, committee members acknowledged that even a small number of high-impact properties can trigger calls for regulation.
Frank Farmer emphasized to The Times Examiner that the committee’s purpose is not punitive.
“My goal with this committee is to improve the quality of life of the neighbors in neighborhoods that have been having safety and noise concerns with STRs. Our mission is not to restrict people trying to make an honest living; we just want safe and quiet neighborhoods like everyone else.”
His comments reflect an effort by some members to frame the issue not as a crackdown on entrepreneurs, but as a response to specific complaints raised by residents.
The threshold question for Greenville County is whether frequent short stays transform a residential use into something more akin to lodging.
In 2023, the City of Greenville addressed this tension by limiting new short-term rentals of 30 days or less to mixed-use and commercial zoning districts. Traditional residential zones are largely excluded, and operators must obtain both an occupancy permit and a business license. That framework effectively draws a bright zoning line between residential living and short-term lodging.
Elsewhere in South Carolina, regulatory approaches vary. While Greenville adopted zoning-based restrictions, other counties such as Charleston and York have implemented registration and enforcement frameworks tailored to tourism demand. Policies differ widely depending on local zoning structure and development patterns.
Greenville County faces a more complicated landscape.
Zoned vs. Unzoned Areas
County zoning staff noted that most South Carolina counties with short-term rental regulations are fully zoned, while Greenville County remains partially unzoned.
If the county regulates through the zoning ordinance, those regulations would not apply in unzoned areas. If it adopts a standalone ordinance, enforcement authority and permitting structures would need to be clearly defined outside traditional zoning mechanisms.
The committee also discussed accessory dwelling units, or ADUs. Zoned areas of the county do not currently allow ADUs, but unzoned areas do. That distinction complicates how short-term rentals could be defined or regulated if someone builds a small structure behind their home and lists it online.
In some neighborhoods, private homeowners associations impose their own restrictions on short-term rentals through recorded covenants. Under South Carolina property and contract law, those private agreements are generally enforceable among property owners and operate independently of county zoning decisions. As a result, they may prohibit or limit rental activity even where local government permits it.
Beyond Houses: Pools, Cars, and Amenities
Perhaps the most revealing portion of the discussion involved the expanding scope of what is being rented.
Deputy Planning Director and Zoning Administrator Joshua Henderson also cautioned that the issue is not limited to homes alone.
Residents are now renting swimming pools for large parties through online platforms. Some properties have drawn complaints involving dozens of vehicles for single-day events. Others involve vehicle rentals where cars are left in parking lots for pickup.
The proliferation of rental platforms complicates regulatory definitions. If the county acts, it may need to determine whether it is regulating only overnight lodging or broader commercial use of residential property.
McGahhey suggested that definitions could include hosted rentals, non-hosted rentals, responsible parties, and amenities such as pools and large yard gatherings.
The conversation suggested that the committee may be confronting a broader sharing-economy landscape rather than a narrow debate over Airbnb.
How Much Authority Does a County Have?
South Carolina functions under a legal structure commonly associated with Dillon’s Rule, named for 19th-century jurist Judge John F. Dillon. Counties possess only those powers granted by the General Assembly or necessarily implied from those grants.
Greenville County derives its zoning authority from state enabling statutes that allow regulation of land use for health, safety, and general welfare. However, the legislature retains the power to preempt or redefine that authority.
If state law narrows local discretion, county regulation could be limited. If state law affirms local control, county councils may retain broader flexibility.
Statewide Framework and Pending Legislation
South Carolina does not operate under a single uniform short-term rental regulatory code. Instead, local governments adopt their own frameworks.
At the Statehouse, however, two competing bills could alter the scope of local authority.
House Bill 3861 would prohibit local governments from banning short-term rentals outright and would restrict certain state funding distributions to jurisdictions that attempt to do so. Senate Bill 442 would affirm local governments' authority to regulate, cap, or prohibit short-term rentals.
Earlier Times Examiner reporting, including commentary from Greenville County Council Chairman Benton Blount in his Substack newsletter, emphasized that the purpose of forming the ad hoc committee was to study the issue carefully, weighing neighborhood concerns alongside private property rights before recommending any course of action.
Blount further noted that any policy must also account for legal and constitutional considerations, including vested property rights, Fair Housing and ADA requirements, and overall legal defensibility, which necessarily involves the state’s authority over local governance.
Both measures remain in committee, underscoring the broader tension between state preemption and local control. Under South Carolina’s Dillon’s Rule framework, counties exercise only those powers granted by the General Assembly. That structure places ultimate authority with the state. Regardless of timing, any action taken in Columbia could ultimately influence the scope of authority available to Greenville County as it considers whether and how to regulate short-term rentals.
Why Cities Sometimes Appear Stronger
Municipalities such as the City of Greenville operate under similar state authority. However, cities are typically fully zoned and operate under comprehensive development codes that clearly classify land uses across their entire jurisdiction.
That structural uniformity makes regulatory lines easier to draw and enforce.
Greenville County presents a different landscape. Large portions of the county remain unzoned, creating additional legal and administrative complexity. A zoning-based regulation may not apply in unzoned areas, requiring alternative approaches if countywide standards are considered.
This distinction does not necessarily grant cities greater authority, but it often makes them appear more structurally equipped to regulate land-use issues such as short-term rentals.
A Matter of Time and Place
According to some, the debate may ultimately come down to context.
Activities that are normal and even enjoyable in one setting can become disruptive in another. Loud music at a Saturday afternoon gathering may draw little notice. The same music at 2 a.m. on a school night may carry a different impact.
Frank Farmer offered a cultural example to illustrate the point.
“Sabrina Carpenter isn’t as fun to listen to at 2 AM on a school night as it is when the sun is out.”
The comment was delivered with a touch of humor, but the underlying message was serious. For some residents, the issue is not whether short-term rentals should exist at all. The question is whether certain uses cross a threshold at which neighboring property rights are affected.
As Greenville County’s committee continues its work, the central question remains where one property owner’s rights end and another’s begin.
What Happens Next
The committee voted to reconvene on March 9 at 4 p.m.
Staff will compile research comparing all 46 counties to identify which jurisdictions impose registration requirements, tax-based oversight, or full standalone regulatory frameworks.
The next meeting is expected to move from general discussion toward more structured policy options.
