Connecticut STR Rules: Clerks, Not Occupancy Ranking

Jul 29

15 min read

Updated: Aug 28

If you own a short-term rental in Connecticut , or you're weighing whether to buy one , you've probably already run into the state's central regulatory puzzle: there is no single answer to "is this legal here?" Connecticut regulates short-term rentals at the town level, not the state level, and which rules apply to your property depends entirely on which of Connecticut's 169 municipalities it sits in. A property in Groton, on the Mystic side, operates under a detailed, adopted zoning framework. A property forty minutes away in Kent operates under essentially no STR-specific rule at all , and so, despite some circulating claims to the contrary, does a property in Stonington, following a 2023 saga in which the town withdrew a primary-residence requirement on legal advice and then saw voters reject the pared-down ordinance that replaced it. Both Kent and Stonington properties are legal to list on Airbnb today, absent any town-specific STR ordinance standing in the way.

That patchwork isn't an accident of neglect. Until very recently, most Connecticut towns had no clear legal authority to regulate short-term rentals even if they wanted to. That changed in October 2024. This guide is the "start here" reference for understanding what actually changed, what didn't, and how to find out which category your town falls into , whether you're hosting in the Litchfield Hills, the Connecticut River Valley around Essex, or the Mystic and Stonington coastline.

Our primary source throughout is the Connecticut General Assembly's Office of Legislative Research (OLR) Report 2024-R-0044, "Municipal Regulation of Short-Term Rentals in Connecticut," published February 15, 2024 , the most thorough public accounting of how CT towns actually regulate STRs, town by town. Until very recently, most Connecticut towns had no clear legal authority to regulate short-term rentals even if they wanted to.

The One Fact That's True Everywhere: Public Act 24-143

Before October 1, 2024, Connecticut's short-term rental landscape was legally murky in a specific way: most towns lacked explicit statutory authority to adopt STR-specific licensing ordinances. A handful of towns had found workarounds , folding STR rules into zoning code, or passing standalone ordinances under general municipal police powers , but the legal footing was inconsistent and, in some cases, contestable.

Public Act 24-143 fixed that ambiguity directly. Effective October 1, 2024, the law gives Connecticut municipalities explicit statutory authority to adopt ordinances licensing short-term rental properties and regulating their operation and use, including the ability to hire consultants to help draft those regulations. The law defines a short-term rental as a furnished residence or similar accommodation, rented for 30 consecutive days or less, that isn't a hotel, motel, or licensed bed-and-breakfast.

Here's the part hosts often miss: Public Act 24-143 is permissive, not mandatory. It didn't create new rules , it created the legal doorway for towns to Keep their own. Whether any given town has walked through that doorway is a separate question entirely, and as of this writing, most haven't. This is the detail that surprises most hosts researching Connecticut rules for the first time: as of the OLR's February 2024 report, only three Connecticut towns were identified as having adopted STR-specific licensing ordinances , Stonington, Bozrah, and Simsbury.

What's Universal Regardless of Town Action

One requirement applies to every short-term rental operator in Connecticut, in every town, with or without a local ordinance: registration with the Connecticut Department of Revenue Services (DRS) and collection of the state's room occupancy tax, currently 15% on short-term rental income. This is a state tax obligation, separate from and unaffected by whatever your town does or doesn't regulate at the zoning or licensing level. If you host anywhere in Connecticut , Mystic, Kent, or anywhere between , you owe this tax and need a DRS registration regardless of local rules.

How Uneven Local Adoption Actually Is

This is the detail that surprises most hosts researching Connecticut rules for the first time: as of the OLR's February 2024 report, only three Connecticut towns were identified as having adopted STR-specific licensing ordinances , Stonington, Bozrah, and Simsbury. We need to correct that list here: Stonington does not actually belong on it. An earlier, January 2023 draft ordinance would have included a primary-residence requirement, but town officials stripped that provision in February 2023 on the town attorney's advice about legal risk, before the ordinance reached voters. The pared-down, registration-only version that actually went to referendum on March 13, 2023 was rejected by voters, 694-342, and no replacement has been adopted since , a fact confirmed by a separate, independent state report (the Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments' October 2023 survey, which lists Stonington's ordinance status as "No, defeated 3/23") and by Stonington's own current ordinance index, which has no short-term rental entry. OLR's inclusion of Stonington appears to be an error, most likely because Stonington's website still hosts the text of the withdrawn January 2023 draft ordinance, which reads as if it were adopted law and includes the residency language that never actually reached voters. We did not independently re-verify Bozrah's or Simsbury's ordinance status as part of this correction, so treat those two as unconfirmed-but-not-flagged rather than re-verified; the corrected count of towns we can confirm adopted STR-specific ordinances, as of this writing, is smaller than three. (The OLR report identifies a broader group of roughly a dozen towns with some form of express STR regulation, but most of those regulate through existing zoning definitions and use restrictions rather than a dedicated STR ordinance with registration and permitting requirements , a meaningfully lighter-touch approach than a standalone ordinance like Bozrah's or Simsbury's.).

Public Act 24-143 gave every town the legal green light to adopt this kind of ordinance. More than a year and a half later, most haven't , and Stonington, despite trying first, is one of the towns that currently hasn't. That's not a data gap , it reflects how politically contested STR ordinances tend to be at the local level. Stonington's own path, discussed below, ran through a failed referendum and stopped there; whether the town tries again is an open question, not a settled one.

Litchfield Hills: No STR-Specific Ordinance, Anywhere

If you're hosting or buying in Kent, Washington, Litchfield, or Salisbury , the core Litchfield Hills towns , the direct answer is: none of these towns has adopted an STR-specific ordinance since Public Act 24-143 took effect, and none appeared in the OLR's original list of towns with express STR regulation. That means, in practice, Litchfield Hills hosts are currently operating under general zoning and land-use rules that predate the STR conversation entirely, plus the universal DRS registration and 15% room occupancy tax obligation that applies everywhere in the state.

This is not a guarantee that it stays this way. Public Act 24-143 means any of these towns could pass an ordinance at any town meeting or board vote, and the appetite to do so tends to track visibly with STR volume and neighbor complaints , exactly the dynamic that pushed Stonington to act. If you're building a rental business in Litchfield County, checking your specific town's most recent zoning commission agenda is worth doing before you assume the current light-touch environment is permanent.

Shoreline & River Valley: Where the Actual Rules Are

The regulatory picture sharpens considerably once you move to the coast. Two adjacent jurisdictions around Mystic , the Town of Stonington and the Town of Groton , have taken almost opposite regulatory approaches, and hosts researching "Mystic rules" need to know which side of the Mystic River their property sits on, since Mystic itself straddles both towns.

Stonington: No Adopted Ordinance , Despite What the State's Own Report Says

Stonington is, in fact, a regulatory vacuum right now , the opposite of what some coverage (including OLR's own report) claims. There is no active, enforced Stonington short-term rental ordinance today. The pared-down, registration-only version that actually went to referendum on March 13, 2023 was rejected by voters, 694-342, and no replacement has been adopted since , a fact confirmed by a separate, independent state report (the Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments' October 2023 survey, which lists Stonington's ordinance status as "No, defeated 3/23") and by Stonington's own current ordinance index, which has no short-term rental entry.

The path there is instructive, and it's actually two rejections, not one. A January 13, 2023 draft ordinance would have required annual registration, a town-issued permit, listing disclosure of a registration number, a primary-residence requirement, and a set response window for complaints, backed by an escalating penalty structure. In February 2023, town officials stripped the primary-residence requirement out of that draft on the town attorney's advice about legal risk, before it ever reached voters. What actually went to referendum on March 13, 2023 was a pared-down, registration-only ordinance , no residency mandate, just registration, a local contact requirement, and fines , and voters rejected that version too, by a margin of 694 to 342. No replacement ordinance has been adopted since , we found no evidence of a Town Meeting vote, Board of Selectmen action, or any other adoption mechanism between March 2023 and today that brought a revised version into force. Stonington's Planning and Zoning Commission separately decided in 2017 not to regulate STRs through zoning, and an old, unenforced general provision requiring stays of 30 days or longer is the only thing on the books that even brushes up against the topic.

Why does OLR's report say otherwise?Report 2024-R-0044 lists Stonington as having an active ordinance with the exact provisions described above , including the primary-residence requirement , as if the withdrawn January 2023 draft had been both retained and adopted. This appears to be a documented error, most likely stemming from a document still hosted on Stonington's own website, dated January 13, 2023, which carries the residency language that was actually stripped out before referendum , not the pared-down version voters saw on the ballot, and not adopted law either way. Two independent sources contradict OLR here: the Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments' October 2023 report lists Stonington's ordinance status as "No, defeated 3/23," and Stonington's own current ordinance index has no short-term rental entry at all. If you're relying on OLR 2024-R-0044 for Stonington's status specifically, don't , check the town's own ordinance index or call the Town Clerk instead.

None of this means Stonington's situation is settled for good. The town tried once, Public Act 24-143 has since made a renewed attempt legally easier, and a future proposal , quite possibly resembling the one rejected in 2023 , is a real possibility. If you're operating in Stonington today, you're not violating anything by not registering, because there's nothing to register for; but it's worth checking back periodically rather than assuming that stays true indefinitely.

Groton (Mystic's North Side): Zoning Permit, No Residency Requirement

Cross the Mystic River into the Groton side of the village, and the framework changes. Groton has required a zoning permit for short-term rentals since May 2024 , the town approved its STR zoning regulations on April 9, 2024, with an effective date of May 15, 2024. From there, the town-level answer ranges from Groton's zone-dependent zoning-permit framework (a residency test in residential zones, none in commercial/mixed-use zones including downtown Mystic), to Stonington's and the Litchfield Hills towns' current absence of any adopted STR-specific rule , with the important caveat that Stonington's absence of a rule follows a real, contested 2023 referendum, not simple inattention.

The Groton approach runs through the zoning and planning department rather than a standalone licensing ordinance, and its primary-residence condition is zone-dependent: it applies in Groton's residential zones, but not in its commercial and mixed-use zones , including the mixed-use district covering downtown Mystic , where a non-owner-occupied rental can be approved through site plan (and, in some cases, special permit) review instead. Groton's regulations also impose their own conditions across all approved zones, including site plan or special permit approval depending on the zone, minimum off-street parking (generally one space per bedroom), nuisance and lighting standards, and standard compliance with building, fire, and electrical code.

Put Groton and Stonington side by side and the actual picture is this: Groton has a real, adopted, zone-dependent framework. Stonington has no adopted framework at all, following its 2023 referendum rejection , which is a lighter regulatory footprint than Groton's today, not a heavier one, despite what older or secondary coverage often implies. The Groton approach runs through the zoning and planning department rather than a standalone licensing ordinance, and its primary-residence condition is zone-dependent: it applies in Groton's residential zones, but not in its commercial and mixed-use zones , including the mixed-use district covering downtown Mystic , where a non-owner-occupied rental can be approved through site plan (and, in some cases, special permit) review instead.

The practical takeaway for anyone evaluating a Mystic-area property: "Mystic rules" isn't one answer. Pull the parcel's town designation first, then apply the correct framework , and don't assume Stonington's rules mirror Groton's, or that either town's status matches what a given secondary source claims without checking a primary one. A property forty minutes away in Kent operates under essentially no STR-specific rule at all , and so, despite some circulating claims to the contrary, does a property in Stonington, following a 2023 saga in which the town withdrew a primary-residence requirement on legal advice and then saw voters reject the pared-down ordinance that replaced it.

The Legislative Outlook: No Statewide Registry (Yet)

Hosts sometimes ask whether Connecticut is about to layer a state registry on top of all this town-by-town variation. As of this writing in 2026, the answer is no , but not for lack of legislative attempts. If you own a short-term rental in Connecticut , or you're weighing whether to buy one , you've probably already run into the state's central regulatory puzzle: there is no single answer to "is this legal here?" Connecticut regulates short-term rentals at the town level, not the state level, and which rules apply to your property depends entirely on which of Connecticut's 169 municipalities it sits in.

Two consecutive statewide STR registry bills have been introduced and both stalled short of a final vote:. Two adjacent jurisdictions around Mystic , the Town of Stonington and the Town of Groton , have taken almost opposite regulatory approaches, and hosts researching "Mystic rules" need to know which side of the Mystic River their property sits on, since Mystic itself straddles both towns.

HB 7238(2025 session) proposed a Department of Revenue Services registry requiring all STR operators statewide to register and report activity, alongside an optional municipal supplemental tax. It advanced with a favorable committee vote but died on the House calendar without reaching a floor vote.
HB 5536(2026 session) revived the same core registry concept and added a proposed $100-per-property annual state fee, which would have taken effect January 1, 2027, to fund registry administration. It cleared committee as well and, like its predecessor, did not reach a House floor vote before the session's adjournment.

The pattern across two sessions , committee approval followed by calendar death , suggests real appetite for a statewide framework but persistent difficulty getting it across the finish line politically. Hosts should expect this idea to resurface in a future session rather than assume it's permanently off the table. For now, though, the operative rule remains: no statewide STR registry exists in Connecticut, and your compliance obligations are set by your specific town (if it has acted) plus the universal DRS registration and room occupancy tax.

The Bottom Line for CT Hosts

Start every Connecticut STR compliance check with two questions: first, has my specific town adopted an ordinance under Public Act 24-143's authority , and if so, what does it require? Second, am I registered with DRS and collecting the 15% room occupancy tax, since that applies no matter what my town has or hasn't done? From there, the town-level answer ranges from Groton's zone-dependent zoning-permit framework (a residency test in residential zones, none in commercial/mixed-use zones including downtown Mystic), to Stonington's and the Litchfield Hills towns' current absence of any adopted STR-specific rule , with the important caveat that Stonington's absence of a rule follows a real, contested 2023 referendum, not simple inattention. None of those positions is fixed , Public Act 24-143 means every town in Connecticut can act at any town meeting, and the legislature has now tried twice to add a state layer on top. The town-by-town landscape is the real map, and it's worth re-checking annually, and worth verifying against a town's own primary sources rather than a secondary summary , as this guide's own correction on Stonington shows.

the Crest & Cove intro·local SEO keywords that actually book·the five elements of a converting hero·how to compare STR marketing agencies·OTA fees without leftover occupancy lifts·Groton and Stonington against AirROI town pins·Destin against AirROI, not leftover year·Groton vs Stonington clerks, not occupancy ranking.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is there a single Connecticut law that governs all short-term rentals?

Connecticut regulates short-term rentals primarily at the municipal level. Public Act 24-143 (effective October 1, 2024) gave towns explicit authority to adopt their own STR ordinances, but it didn't create one statewide rulebook , each town decides independently whether and how to regulate. Effective October 1, 2024, the law gives Connecticut municipalities explicit statutory authority to adopt ordinances licensing short-term rental properties and regulating their operation and use, including the ability to hire consultants to help draft those regulations.

What is Public Act 24-143?

It's the state law, effective October 1, 2024, that explicitly authorizes Connecticut municipalities to adopt ordinances licensing and regulating short-term rentals. Before this law, most towns had no clear statutory basis for STR-specific regulation. Before October 1, 2024, Connecticut's short-term rental landscape was legally murky in a specific way: most towns lacked explicit statutory authority to adopt STR-specific licensing ordinances.

Do I have to register my short-term rental with the State of Connecticut?

Yes, regardless of what your town does. Every STR operator in Connecticut must register with the Department of Revenue Services and collect the state's 15% room occupancy tax on rental income. This obligation is separate from any local licensing requirement. One requirement applies to every short-term rental operator in Connecticut, in every town, with or without a local ordinance: registration with the Connecticut Department of Revenue Services (DRS) and collection of the state's room occupancy tax, currently 15% on short-term rental income.

How many Connecticut towns actually have STR-specific ordinances?

The OLR's February 2024 report lists three towns , Stonington, Bozrah, and Simsbury , as having adopted dedicated STR-specific licensing ordinances, but Stonington doesn't actually belong on that list: an early draft with a primary-residence requirement was withdrawn on legal advice in February 2023, and the registration-only ordinance that replaced it was rejected by referendum in March 2023, with no replacement adopted since, confirmed by both a separate state report and Stonington's own current ordinance index. We haven't independently re-verified Bozrah's or Simsbury's status. A wider group of roughly a dozen towns regulate STRs to some.

Do Kent, Washington, Litchfield, or Salisbury regulate short-term rentals?

None of these Litchfield Hills towns has adopted an STR-specific ordinance as of this writing. Hosts there operate under general zoning rules plus the statewide DRS registration and room occupancy tax requirement , but any of these towns could pass an ordinance at a future town meeting now that Public Act 24-143 has cleared the legal path.

What are the rules for a short-term rental in Stonington?

Currently, there aren't any STR-specific rules in force. A January 2023 draft ordinance would have required annual registration, a permit, disclosure of a registration number in listings, and a primary-residence requirement, with escalating penalties for violations , but town officials stripped the residency provision in February 2023 on the town attorney's advice about legal risk. The registration-only version that actually went to referendum on March 13, 2023 was rejected by voters, 694-342, and no replacement has been adopted since. Some sources, including a state OLR report, describe the original draft's provisions as active; that appears to be an error.

Are the rules different in Mystic depending on which town my property is in?

Mystic sits across both Stonington and Groton. Groton requires a zoning permit (in effect since May 15, 2024) with parking, nuisance, and code-compliance conditions, and a primary-residence requirement in residential zones only (not in commercial/mixed-use zones, including downtown Mystic). Stonington currently has no adopted STR ordinance at all, following the 2023 referendum rejection , making it, on paper, the less regulated of the two towns today, though its history suggests that could change.

Is Connecticut going to create a statewide short-term rental registry?

Two bills , HB 7238 in 2025 and HB 5536 in 2026 , both proposed a state DRS registry and both advanced out of committee before dying on the House calendar without a floor vote. No statewide registry exists in Connecticut as of this writing, though the recurring legislative attempts suggest the idea isn't going away.

About the Authors

Crest & Cove Creative is a short-term rental marketing agency founded by Thomas Garner and Jacob Mishalanie. We build direct-booking brands, listing optimization systems, and market-specific content strategies for independent STR operators nationwide, including emerging corridors like Connecticut. Two independent sources contradict OLR here: the Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments' October 2023 report lists Stonington's ordinance status as "No, defeated 3/23," and Stonington's own current ordinance index has no short-term rental entry at all.

Sources

Connecticut Office of Legislative Research, Report 2024-R-0044, "Municipal Regulation of Short-Term Rentals in Connecticut" (Feb. 15, 2024): https://www.cga.ct.gov/2024/rpt/pdf/2024-R-0044.pdf
Connecticut Public Act 24-143 (House Bill 5474): https://www.cga.ct.gov/2024/act/pa/pdf/2024PA-00143-R00HB-05474-PA.pdf
Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments (SECOG), "Short-Term Rental Regulation in Connecticut" (originally Oct. 2023, rev. Oct. 2024): https://secogct.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Short Term Rental Regulation Oct2024.pdf , lists Stonington's ordinance status as "No," noting the town ordinance was "defeated 3/23"
Town of Stonington, referendum-rejected registration-only draft: "Ordinance Regulating Short-Term Rentals in Stonington, CT": https://www.stonington-ct.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif3851/f/news/str_ordinance_final.pdf (this is the version voters actually rejected March 13, 2023, not adopted law)
Town of Stonington, withdrawn January 13, 2023 draft (includes the primary-residence requirement later stripped out): ordinance_for_strs_final_draft_13_jan.pdf, still hosted on stonington-ct.gov , the likely source of OLR's error
The Day, "Stonington voters reject short term rental ordinance" (March 2023): https://www.theday.com/local-news/20230313/stonington-voters-reject-short-term-rental-ordinance/
Town of Groton, Planning and Development Services, "Short Term Rentals in Groton": https://www.groton-ct.gov/departments/plandev/rentals.php
Connecticut General Assembly, HB 7238 (2025 session) bill status: https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus/cgabillstatus.asp?sel Bill Type=Bill&bill_num=HB7238&which_year=2025
Connecticut General Assembly, HB 5536 (2026 session) bill status and fiscal note: https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/CGABill Status/cgabillstatus.asp?sel Bill Type=Bill&bill_num=HB5536
Connecticut Department of Revenue Services, room occupancy tax guidance for short-term rentals

Work with Crest & Cove Creative

Litchfield Hills has no STR-specific ordinance at all, while Stonington and Groton enforce different local rules under the same statewide baseline, and a single blended Connecticut compliance page misses that gap entirely.

We help Connecticut hosts keep Litchfield, Mystic, and shoreline listing and compliance copy on separate, town-specific lines instead of one blended state summary. Send your listing draft and we'll check which local rules actually apply.

Reach out at crestcove.co or (256) 998-7502.