Follow-up to June 10, 2026 City Council Discussion on Hotel Development
I would like to clarify information presented during the June 10, 2026, Newport City Council meeting regarding Agenda Item #20, which concerned a resolution requesting a review of ordinances, zoning provisions, and land use regulations related to NEW hotel development within the City of Newport.
During the discussion, it was stated that the matter before the Council was the same issue considered at the March 4, 2026, meeting. That characterization is not accurate.
The March 4th meeting involved a public hearing and FIRST READING of several proposed zoning ordinance amendments, including changes to parking requirements, definitions, and permitted uses. The proposed amendments included revisions to Chapters 17.04, 17.104, 17.08, 17.14, 17.56, and 17.60 of the Newport Code of Ordinances. Most of the discussion at that time centered on parking-related provisions and administrative updates.
As these items were before the Council on first reading, I supported moving them forward for additional review, public input, and discussion. A first reading is intended to advance a proposal through the legislative process so that residents, stakeholders, and Council members have the opportunity to further evaluate its potential impacts before any final decision is made.
Following the March 4th meeting, many residents expressed concerns that certain proposed ordinance changes could negatively affect owner-occupied short-term rentals and their ability to continue renting their properties. Residents shared that rental income helps them remain in Newport, maintain their homes, or care for family members while continuing to reside in the community.
As a result of those concerns, when the ordinances returned to the Council on March 11th for a SECOND READING, the Council voted UNANIMOUSLY to refer the matter to a workshop for further discussion and analysis. No final decision has been made on those proposed ordinance amendments.
It is important to note that the ordinances discussed in March were not related to hotel development. The June 10th resolution was a separate matter that requested City Administration, Planning and Zoning, and the City Solicitor’s Office to review existing regulations governing hotel uses and future hotel development. These were distinct issues with different objectives and policy considerations.
It had also been suggested that the June 10th resolution conflicts with the City’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The resolution specifically included Planning and Zoning as part of the review process and was intended to complement the ongoing Comprehensive Plan update by ensuring that the impacts of future hotel development are fully evaluated as part of that broader planning effort.
My approach remains consistent: when residents come before the Council and express concerns about how development, land-use decisions, or municipal policies affect their quality of life, it is our responsibility to listen, gather facts, and carefully consider whether adjustments are warranted. The June 10th resolution was intended to begin that review and discussion process—not predetermine its outcome.
During the public hearing, testimony reflected a range of perspectives. Speakers discussed the importance of tourism to Newport’s economy, the potential infrastructure impacts associated with visitor growth, and the role future hotel development may play in the community. These are important conversations that deserve thoughtful analysis and public engagement as the City continues its long-term planning efforts.
Steph Smyth
Newport City Council
