Sedona’s Home-Sharing Ban Struck Down

Arizona’s Court of Appeals has delivered a major victory for private property rights, ruling that cities cannot bar homeowners from renting out their residences as short-term or vacation rentals—period. This decisive ruling not only reaffirms the reach of Arizona’s first-in-the-nation home-sharing statute but also vindicates the Goldwater Institute’s long effort to defend the right to property.

In 2016, Goldwater helped craft and pass SB 1350, removing blanket municipal prohibitions on vacation rentals and reaffirming Arizona’s long tradition of treating private property rights as central to personal freedom. Sedona, however, attempted a local workaround. Claiming that the city’s thriving short-term rental market strained the availability of units for hospitality workers, city leaders argued that the Oak Creek mobile-home park fell outside the statute’s protections. In effect, city officials maintained that mobile homes were not “single-family residences,” not because of any statutory distinction, but because they did not want them used for home-sharing.

After enforcement actions, Goldwater—representing Oak Creek Mobilodge—filed suit against Sedona, arguing that cities cannot override state law by carving out a housing category. The legal question carried immediate consequences for ordinary Arizonans. Home-sharing has become an essential economic lifeline for many, helping families pay down mortgages, cover rising living expenses, and withstand unexpected financial shocks. Fundamentally, the idea has always been embedded in the American understanding of ownership: homeowners should be free to welcome guests on a temporary basis without the government dictating terms.

A lower court initially sided with Sedona. Had that interpretation stood, Arizona cities could have effectively banned home-sharing by selectively targeting manufactured-home communities, aging subdivisions, or any other zoning category not explicitly referenced in statute, but Goldwater appealed, and the Court of Appeals reversed the lower court.

The appellate panel held that state law broadly preempts municipal bans and applies to any dwelling unit—mobile-home, manufactured-home, or otherwise. The implications stretch well beyond Sedona. Numerous Arizona municipalities have sought ways to rein in short-term rentals amid housing pressures, but the court has now drawn a clear line. Cities may regulate noise, parking, occupancy, public safety, and nuisance conditions, but cannot ban or materially restrict home-sharing itself, a major win for property rights across our state.

For homeowners and small property operators, the ruling stands as one of the most consequential property-rights victories in recent memory, reaffirming Goldwater’s work to defend a basic freedom against local interference. The ruling underscores a vital principle in America: the right to use one’s home is not a discretionary local benefit controlled by local officials. It is a fundamental freedom we deserve to have in full.

Carl Paulus is a Senior Writer at the Goldwater Institute.