30-Day Minimum Stay: The Rental Ban That Wins in Court

On August 19, 2026, U.S. District Judge Patrick J. Schiltz granted summary judgment to Bloomington and Apple Valley, Minnesota, dismissing with prejudice a property owner's claim that their 30 day minimum stay ordinances took her property without compensation. The opinion in Toupin v. City of Bloomington and the companion Apple Valley case ends in one practical sentence for hosts: a city can set the shortest stay you are allowed to sell, and that is not a taking.

Nine days later, Birmingham, Michigan set a September 28, 2026 public hearing on a zoning amendment imposing a 30 day minimum in every zoning district except two, according to Downtown Publications. Nothing connects the two events except timing, and that is why they matter together. The 30 day minimum has become the tool with the best courtroom record, and it is spreading while litigation over caps, fees, and registries stays messy.

Key facts

• On August 19, 2026, Judge Patrick J. Schiltz granted summary judgment to Bloomington and Apple Valley in Nos. 25-CV-2486 and 25-CV-2487 (D. Minn.) and dismissed the amended complaints with prejudice and on the merits (opinion).
• The rules are Bloomington City Code sections 14.577 and 21.209(c), treating rentals under 30 consecutive calendar days as prohibited transient lodging since 2015, and Apple Valley Code section 155.363, effective June 2023.
• The owner spent more than $35,000 renovating the Bloomington property in winter 2018 and more than $45,000 on the Apple Valley property in summer 2023, in both cases after the restriction existed or was imminent.
• Birmingham, Michigan adopted a six month moratorium on licensing dwellings rented for "30 days or less" on April 27, 2026 (City of Birmingham), and its commission hears the permanent 30 day rule on September 28, 2026 (Downtown Publications, September 4, 2026).
• Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(A), a notice of appeal was due within 30 days of entry of judgment, putting the Eighth Circuit deadline in mid September 2026. None was reported as of September 9, 2026.

What the court held, and what it did not

The owner brought two takings theories.

The first was a per se taking, which requires compensation automatically and covers physical invasion, loss of the right to exclude, and regulation wiping out all economically beneficial use. None applied. The court noted the owner could still occupy, improve, or sell the properties, and could lease them to tenants she chooses, at prices she chooses, "for whatever term she chooses (save only for terms under 30 days)."

The second was a regulatory taking under the Penn Central framework, which weighs economic impact, interference with investment backed expectations, and the character of the government action. This is the flexible test, and where hosts have their only real shot. It failed on the middle factor. Bloomington had prohibited stays under 30 days since 2015, three years before the 2018 renovation, and Apple Valley's ordinance took effect in June 2023, the same season as the $45,000 remodel. Expectations formed against a rule already on the books are not reasonable ones, the court held, since the analysis "is not designed to protect private predictions of regulatory change." It treated lost future profit with no physical restriction as a slender reed to rest a takings claim on.

What the opinion does not do matters as much. It is a district court decision, so it binds nobody outside that case, and it says nothing about state law claims or preemption statutes. Most importantly, it does not decide the case of a host who bought a property, operated it lawfully, and then had the rule changed underneath them. That fact pattern was not before the judge.

Why the timing of the ordinance decides your position

The usable rule here is a question you can answer about your own property in ten minutes. Did the restriction exist before you bought, renovated, or started operating?

If yes, a federal takings claim is close to hopeless, and this opinion is why. If no, and you were operating lawfully when the city changed the rule, you are in a different posture, because investment backed expectations are the exact factor that sank this case. That is the fight now running in California, where an owner sued Beverly Hills in federal court on August 31, 2026 over an ordinance banning every lease under 12 months. We covered what a 12 month lease minimum does and why it is the harsher rule when the suit was filed. The point is knowing which conversation you are having before you pay a land use attorney to have it.

Why cities are choosing 30 days instead of a ban

Caps and permit fees have been the losing side of the docket this year. A South Carolina judge voided Folly Beach's 800 license cap and its percentage of revenue permit fees, which we broke down in what makes rental caps beatable. Registries, caps, and fees create administrative machinery, and machinery creates procedural defects to sue over.

A stay minimum has none of that surface area. It is a number in the zoning code, needing no database, no permit queue, no revenue stream, and no decision about who gets a license, so there is no unequal treatment to allege and no fee to recharacterize as an illegal tax. It reads to a court as ordinary land use regulation, which draws deferential review. Bloomington's council studied its prohibition and voted on August 26, 2024 to keep it rather than build a permitting system (City of Bloomington).

What a 30 day minimum does to the business

The reassurance offered at these hearings is that you can still do mid term. You can, but it is a different business with different math, worth running before the vote.

The owner told the Star Tribune in its September 3, 2025 report on the Twin Cities disputes that she expected $350 to $400 a night short term. Use $375 and a 65 percent occupancy assumption. The short term month is 30 nights times 0.65, or 19.5 booked nights, times $375, which is $7,312.50 gross. Apply Airbnb's 15.5 percent host only fee and you keep $6,179.06.

Matching that requires a furnished 30 day rental grossing a little over $6,100 a month, and in most residential markets it does not come close. If your local furnished mid term rate is $3,200, you keep $2,979.06 less every month, which is 48.2 percent of the short term net ($2,979.06 divided by $6,179.06). Those are example inputs, not market data. Run them with your own numbers, because the ratio is the decision.

Two second order effects get missed. Occupancy risk concentrates: at 19.5 booked nights an empty night costs one night, while in a monthly model one unfilled month costs 8.3 percent of the year. And you trade six or seven turnovers a month for one, but also six or seven chances to reprice. The shift to monthly rentals is a real market, just a slower and thinner one.

The line where a guest becomes a tenant

Crossing 30 days is not only a pricing change. In many states it is where the occupant stops being a guest and becomes a tenant, with notice periods, eviction procedure, security deposit statutes, and habitability obligations attached. Removing someone who stops paying becomes a court process, not a cancellation.

The thresholds are not uniform, which is the trap. California bars an operator from requiring an occupant of a residential hotel to move or re-register "before the expiration of 30 days occupancy if a purpose is to have that occupant maintain transient occupancy status" (Cal. Civ. Code section 1940.1), which shows where that state draws the line and that it expects the line to be gamed.

Tax thresholds are separate lines that need not match. Minnesota exempts lodging rented "for a continuous period of 30 days or more under an enforceable written agreement" (Minn. Stat. section 297A.61, subd. 3(g)(2)), so a 31 night stay booked on a handshake can still be taxable. Florida sets its exemption at a bona fide written lease "longer than 6 months in duration" (Fla. Stat. section 212.03), so a Florida host converting to 30 day stays keeps collecting transient tax on every one. The number in your zoning code, your landlord tenant statute, and your tax code are three different numbers, and you need all three.

What to do in the next 30 days

1. Find out where your city stands: an existing stay minimum, a proposal on an agenda, or a moratorium. A moratorium is the loudest signal, since it usually means a permanent ordinance is already being drafted. Birmingham is the template, with a moratorium in April, a study session in May, and a hearing in September.
2. Date your own position. Pull the adoption date of any existing restriction and compare it to your purchase and renovation dates. That comparison decides whether you have a legal argument or only a political one.
3. Price the 30 day version now. Get a real furnished monthly rate from local listings and run the division above against your current net. That lets you speak at a hearing with a number instead of a grievance.
4. Read your own documents. HOA covenants, mortgage terms, and leases carry their own minimums, often stricter than the city's. That private layer is surveyed in what courts have actually held about short-term rentals.
5. Ask your insurer, in writing, what changes if occupancy runs past 30 days. A short term rental policy is written for transient occupancy, and a tenancy is a different risk with different exclusions.

One longer term point. Rules of this kind narrow what the OTAs can sell for you while leaving your own channel intact. A booking site on your own domain with a working email list is the one asset a zoning amendment cannot reassign, which is what Haven builds for hosts who want the guest relationship to outlive a rule change.

What to watch next

Birmingham's commission takes public comment on September 28, 2026, the first test of whether the 30 day model draws organized host opposition. The Eighth Circuit will or will not see the Minnesota case, depending on whether a notice of appeal was filed in mid September. And the Beverly Hills suit, raising the same theory against a rule that removes even the mid term fallback, will tell us whether courts treat a 12 month floor differently from a 30 day one.

If your state has a preemption statute, the local fight may never reach a courtroom. Our state by state map of what changed in 2026 is the place to check yours.

FAQ

Can a city legally require a 30 day minimum stay?

In most places, yes. A federal court upheld exactly that for Bloomington and Apple Valley, Minnesota on August 19, 2026, rejecting the argument that a 30 day minimum is an unconstitutional taking. The main exception is a state with a right to rent or preemption law limiting what cities may do.

Is a short term rental ban an unconstitutional taking?

Generally not, based on how courts have ruled so far. Takings protection covers physical occupation and total loss of economic use, and a stay minimum is neither, since you can still live in, sell, or long term lease the property. The stronger claim belongs to owners operating lawfully before the rule changed, because the Minnesota ruling turned on the restrictions predating the owner's investment.

If my city imposes a 30 day minimum, do my guests become tenants?

Often, though the threshold varies by state and is not automatically 30 days. Crossing into tenancy brings eviction procedure, notice requirements, and security deposit rules, so removing a non paying occupant becomes a court process. Check your state's definition before assuming a 31 night booking is a clean workaround, and check your lodging tax rules separately, since those thresholds frequently differ.

How is a 30 day minimum different from the Beverly Hills 12 month rule?

A 30 day minimum converts a short term rental into a mid term rental, a smaller and less profitable business but still a business. A 12 month lease minimum, like the Beverly Hills ordinance now challenged in federal court, removes the mid term option and leaves only conventional annual tenancy. That is why the 12 month version is harder for a city to defend.