npr edvertisers
visitors movie times

Santa Barbara Weather: 48.0°F | Humidity: 99% | Pressure: 30.22in (Rising) | Conditions: Clear | Wind Direction: South | Wind Speed: 0.0mph [see map]

Free Newsletter
  login You create the news! Send items of interest to ed@edhat.com
    17874 Subscribers
      549 Paid (3.1%)
     0 Commenters
     2165 Page Views

Buy Edhat Bags
Buy Edhat Bags
Buy Edhat Shirts
Buy Edhat Shirts
Advertise on Edhat
Advertise on Edhat
Buy Edhat Hats
Buy Edhat Hats
News Events Referrals Deals Classifieds Comments About

more articles like this

The Growing STR Debacle and Now a Lawsuit!
updated: Mar 15, 2017, 7:22 AM

By Ernie Salomon

When STR's (Short Term Rentals) first started to escalate into a big business here some years ago, Mayor Schneider and the Santa Barbara City Council had the obligation and the opportunity to enforce our local Housing Code which prohibits short term rentals in residentially zoned areas of our city.

Instead, they chose to ignore the laws that they are sworn to uphold in favor of allowing the illegal rentals not only to continue, but to vastly grow in number, so that the city could collect ever increasing bed taxes on them. STR's also continue to remove available housing from the long-term rental market that local residents depend on.

Residents all over the city protested against the invasion of short term renters living next to or near them. Many vacation renters are rowdy, take up parking and make some residents feel unsafe for themselves and their children.

Last year, Mayor Schneider and the City Council finally were forced to act to stop the illegal STR monster that they helped to nourish by having the City Attorney and city staff take actions against the STR owners and managers. This has resulted in a lawsuit by short term renters against the city that has now been allowed to go to trial in a ruling yesterday by a presiding judge in Ventura.

Had Mayor Schneider and the Santa Barbara City Council enforced our housing codes from the beginning instead of prostituting themselves for residency taxes from an illegal STR system and letting it grow out of control, local residents would not be suffering from the loss of housing that STR's have wrought and we would not be facing the huge legal bills that are sure to come from this lawsuit.

These people don't care about our city and don't deserve to lead our city!

Remember in November!

Comments in order of when they were received | (reverse order)

 ISLAY RECLUSE agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 07:55 AM

A few homeowners make a little money, for a while. The City makes a little money, for a while. We all spend money in court, for a long time. Shrewd civic management. Forward thinking governence. Bravo!


 COMMENT 763531 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 07:57 AM

Obviously, the city and its leaders are failing at their duties. One need not look far for a plethora of examples of their failings (State St. for the curious). This issue seems to call to account the city's insatiable desire for more tax revenue to pay for its ever increasing costs and obligations. What I have never seen from this pack or any other are hard, tough prudent decisions that benefit the citizens and tax payers of this town. No. Instead they all take the easy route, refusing to do the dirty deed of cutting staff and expenditures and instead playing the easy hand and growing our debt, obligations and putting our town at grave risk of insolvency. We need leaders that will reduce our city's expenses while actually providing the core services we need. Pay mind people. The city is not in good health and voting for the same people will continue the current path.


 COMMENT 763533 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 08:00 AM

Seems like a part of this commentary is missing. What is the lawsuit about? Does it have a chance of winning?

My Westside neighbor who was renting out a room in his house to overnighters seems to have stopped. The person living next to him said the overnighters made a lot of noise and kept him up at night.


 195930 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 08:23 AM

My neighbor who was running a very prolific hotel with a revolving door of clientele has also seemed to have stopped. Reason? He is now a new father. The idea of strangers in his house not so appealing w beautiful baby in his world. Funny he didn't feel that way about the impact on our three children and the parade of strangers traipsing through our yard looking for his house.


 COMMENT 763541 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 08:31 AM

This country is governed by the rule of law. When rules and laws are not enforced, including the general disregard zoning ordinances, at best it fosters contempt and a lack of trust in our elected officials, and and worst promotes corruption. Regardless of where you stand on the STR issue we must all work to restore the rule of law, or go through the necessary steps to change the law, it's the only way our society will survive.


 COMMENT 763543 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 09:01 AM

541 - that applies to sanctuary cities and immigration too!!


 COMMENT 763545 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 09:11 AM

Is there anyoneeeee actually getting busted?

(Beyond those who, for reasons I will never understand, sign the papers the city sends allowing them to crawl all over your property?)


 COMMENT 763547 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 09:22 AM

The city needs to post list of STRs addresses and apply heavy fines for violators. The issue is not about the money it may bring. It's about destruction of residential neighborhood to meet selfish needs of some. No way.


 COMMENT 763552P agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 09:52 AM

547: I agree. Those fighting the battle to keep these illegal units in residential zoning are arrogant and self-serving. I think the City is winning this battle as the number of STRs and neighborhood problems seem to be declining. I see more houses for rent/sale which might bring prices down a bit so families/permanent residents could possibly get into the market. Neighbors need to continue to be vigilant. Check out VRBO/Airbnb websites to see what is still illegally operating in your neighborhood. Report illegal operations to the City immediately.


 COMMENT 763555 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 09:58 AM

It's almost funny to hear someone do the old "rule of law" routine - who's gonna enforce the "rules", those black-gloved ruffians in the SBPD?

What's up with the gloves, anyway? Are their hands cold? In the old days, the criminals always wore gloves, now it's the cops - I don't know what message the new chief is trying to send, but letting officers wear those silly black gloves is NOT good PR - they look like they're getting ready to "work someone over" or plant some evidence.

Anyway, where's the evidence that STRs are really a problem? All we ever get around here is hearsay from anonymous people, and it really should be obvious by now that we're being "played" by someone...


 COMMENT 763568P agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 10:53 AM

Will we have any new candidates for Mayor this November? I hope some bright, moderate candidates appear. I'm not competent to lead--I know it isn't easy. But I sure hope some other people step forward.


 COMMENT 763571 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 10:57 AM

But Schneider's a liberal, so we must just blindly vote for her yet again. It's the Santa Barbara way!


 COMMENT 763574 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 11:08 AM

Wow this is a very 1-sided piece with supporting 1-sided comments. Here's the other side, the facts. By allowing and collecting tax on STR, City of SB makes 30 million in revenue, by shutting it down and enforcing it, they lose 2 million a year. That's a 32 million dollar difference. Also during the summer all SB hotels are booked out. There are no available rooms. There were over 1000 operating AirBnB's. That's a huge loss in revenue for local businesses. Businesses in SB are dropping like flys. Macy's, soon sears, state street has over 15 vacancies in 6 months. Where's the logic people? Where the logic?


 COMMENT 763575 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 11:09 AM

547 and 552P – Exactly. AirBNB and VRBO and STRs all have a significant negative impact on the quality of life of other people, ie, your neighbors and your community.

And yes, there seems to be many more rentals on the market, even ones that advertise all utilities paid. Problems arise when the utilities are “propane only” and “outdoor shower only”. If said shower isn’t connected to the city water main and drains directly out onto the property, then these owners have a great big problem. In many instances property owners still can’t seem to get it right.

Property owners, we're watching you.


 COMMENT 763579 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 11:17 AM

574: The revenue argument completely misses the point, irrelevant. Sadly, the closest analogy of STR I can find is prostitution. Sounds nasty? Not at all. Do you want to legalize that too because it brings more revenue? To whom and at what sacrifice? I'm sure it'll benefit some people and add additional tax revenue etc. Some places do that. However, I don't think I'm in for abandoning our traditional neighborhood.


 COMMENT 763581P agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 11:22 AM


If your argument favors revenue over upholding existing laws, then why not tax illegal drug sellers and all other illegal money making operations. The issue is not the STR business; the issue is that they are Illegal in residential neighborhoods. I want to know who is living next door to my family, especially when I am away on business and so do many other local families. If you want to make them legal in residential areas, put it up to a vote of the people!


 COMMENT 763588 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 11:51 AM

574: Hotels have proper zoning, adequate parking, pay taxes, etc. Private rentals at this point are just taking money away from these legitimate businesses who are playing by the rules. Sears and Macy’s are not leaving because of a local tax issue—they’ve got bigger problems. Sure, renting out a room helps a few individuals in town but it jacks up the rent for all of us. Rental prices are skyrocketing—I’m paying close to double what I did five years ago! This is just one more problem pushing out the families just trying to live in Santa Barbara without some stranger living in their 3rd bedroom.


 COMMENT 763593 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 12:36 PM

581, "why not tax illegal drug sellers and all other illegal money making operations." We already do that with the California MJ stores. It is illegal according to our Federal government. It is really interesting how so many here in liberal Santa Barbara want some laws enforced such as private rentals but don't want the drug laws and illegal aliens enforced. Hypocrites much?


 COMMENT 763595 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 12:50 PM

Hotels in Santa Barbara had a vacancy rate of 23.3% in 2016. Residential Vacancy rate since 2013 has been .5%
Residential rents increased an average of 20% last year.

Entire apartment buildings in my neighborhood were illegal turned into Short Term Rentals. Neighbors are still illegally renting out their homes, second units and garages as Short Term Rentals.

AUDs, our new housing units, have been turned into illegal short term rentals! - 522 Garden St.

And Arlington Village Apartments turned in a application to convert 13 un-built residential units into hotels.

We need affordable house for our workforce earning $62,000 to $92,000 annually. The AUD is not producing any units for these income earners. And the illegal Short Term Rentals need to be closed NOW!


 COMMENT 763597 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 01:06 PM

While I rent out three of my units on Airbnb, I am very against STRs and all the rowdy tourists blowing through town. In truth I would like to get rid of long term rentals as well.


 COMMENT 763599 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 01:22 PM

And now these selfish and arrogant profiteers are descending on the County trying to get the OK for short term rentals in residential neighborhoods and in agricultural zones. They have no regard for zoning, and no interest in preserving the character of our neighborhoods or protecting agriculture.

They are selling out the long-term interests of people who live here for the transient pleasure of people who don't. Money, money, money......


 COMMENT 763606 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 01:52 PM

Watch out for the 3 new Accessory Dwelling Units that went into law this and last year.

"Granny" units are easier to create. No new parking requirements. And you can turn them into Hotels if you are in the right area.

If the City does NOT close these loopholes we are going to have a bigger problem than we have now.

Residents need homes. We don't need more hotel rooms.

And STRs operators are breaking the law. Period.


 RICHYRICH agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 02:15 PM

I second the motion that these are a bunch of one-sided arguments with no factual backing. I know a lot of people with STR's, they no longer need to advertise as they have a very good return clientele rate. They live under the radar and are very respectful to their neighbors. The vast majority of them will never get caught.


 COMMENT 763610 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 02:20 PM

looked like something out of the MMA @555.


 YIN YANG agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 03:19 PM

Pro-STR editorial, from "Save the Rentals" site.


I still can't figure out why this is being heard in a Ventura court, which is why I looked it up. Because it's a states' rights issue? Because Kracke owns and rents places in Ventura, while Paradise Retreats advertises as SB? http://www.paradiseretreats.com/


 COMMENT 763625 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 03:23 PM

Get Helene out and do not vote Murillo! That's all I can say. Beg a local that misses the SB we used to know and love to run for city council/ mayor, someone that will fight to stop all this madness and restore peace to our once sleepy town.


 COMMENT 763627 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 03:29 PM

Is everything that is wrong with America. "We're watching you..."
Other countries, people are friendly toward one another. Help each other. Look out for each other. Here, it's like H**ler is everyone's hero.


 YIN YANG agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 03:39 PM

Maybe it's in Ventura because the suit is against the state? the CA Coastal Act/State Coastal Commission.

This does give us the opportunity to read a SB News-(su)Press article. How does banning rentals "cause a development"?!
They argue SB City was obligated to go to Coastal Commission because they took away low to moderate-priced places to stay at the beach.



I've looked at News Press maybe four times in the past 10 or more years, looking into a vendor box or seeing one in a restaurant. Nice to get their point of view out to the public.

Yay! $9,000 a week rentals from this guy who is suing! http://www.paradiseretreats.com/


 COMMENT 763638P agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 03:50 PM

The company and person that filed the lawsuit rents out the Ablitt House/Jeff Shelton tower, among many other properties. Just go into the hotel business, please.


 COMMENT 763641P agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 03:52 PM

I think the current lawsuit you are referring to involves properties in the Coastal Zone only. I think there is a requirement to have affordable hotels/tourist access to coastal areas, but this would not affect inland properties farther inland than 1000 yards from beach.


 COMMENT 763703 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 07:24 PM

This is an interesting case. If you look more into it, Theo is using the Coastal Commissions letter stating that they do not support an outright ban. You can find the PDF by searching for it. However, where I think he will lose is that the Coastal Commission states that if there is reasonable units that give access to the coast, then it can be banned. If you look at where SB coastal access is, other than the 1000 steps beach there are lots of hotels right on the ocean. It will be an interesting argument that because there are no hotels near the 1000 steps that the city has to allow some STRs. The other interesting thing is the city can say, fine, we allow 2 units total and Theo could do nothing about it.


 COMMENT 763710 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-15 08:26 PM

yeah but we're talking about Santa Barbara because we live in Santa Barbara and there are many who care, a lot, about Santa Barbara and it's necessary for those who do care to watch over those who don't care. If those who do care see those who don't care trying to get away with breaking our Santa Barbara laws then the ones who don't care are going to hear about it from the ones who do care. All countries have laws and consequences for breaking them.


 COMMENT 763724 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 06:18 AM

We rented our studio to a regular long term renter who had loud parties, stopped paying rent, left the house with candles burning and water running and we had to fight months to get her out. We started short term rentals. People came to see the sights in Santa Barbara and were rarely on the premises. I never had a noise complaint or issue. They only brought a suitcase and not carloads of stuff. It was a far better situation for us and our neighbors to rent short term. Noise can come from any renter and any Owner - that is a noise ordinance issue. Parking problems can come from any renter or Owner - that is a parking issue. Short term rentals can work great. Air BnB blew the top off of something that was working quite well - now we all have to pay the price.


 COMMENT 763742 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 07:44 AM

At present, the SBPD does not sort out their noise disturbance complaints in residential areas by source--STRenters, long term renters, or owners. So much of the complaints are not supported by any statistics, until the police start tracking this issue. What is required here are solutions based laws, which implant reasonable STR rules, and not simply blanket bans. Otherwise, there will be legal challenges month after month.

For a city that looks the other way at illegal "immigrants" despite clear evidence that they are firmly implanted within the area. Perhaps when those residents are pushed back out of this area there will be more rental units available to Americans and legally-based residents.


 COMMENT 763761 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 08:31 AM

We had 2 STR's on our property. The neighbor next door had one as well as the neighbor across the street. There were never any noise complaints and parking was not a problem. The renters were usually a couple or a couple with kids or a dog. They would come in one car and be here for a weekend or a week. Now take those same 4 STR's and rent them out to 4 professional couples. Voila! Now you have 8 full time cars taking up parking instead of 4 part time cars. In my opinion it was the small percentage of STR's that the homeowner rented out the entire house and large groups such as wedding parties would rent it out, was the problem with rowdiness and noise issues.


 COMMENT 763775 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 09:14 AM

574- really? Your blaming the the retail crisis in SB and country wide on the lack of potential lack of Air Bnb/ STRs? Where is has your logic gone?

FYI: People have been illegally operating these for many years before it was an open discussion and the stores in SB are still disappearing so no Air Bnb is not going to save this town from insolvency.


 BONNER agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 10:24 AM

STRs are changing the character of long term residential communities into commercial enterprises as greedy homeowners (some out of town, or 2nd homes) convert into tourist-friendly stays that are not regulated like hotels are. There are many issues beyond losing available housing and rising market costs. Just because SB is a tourist-attraction now, what will it be like down the line when its' small town unique character is turned into every other coastal city greedy for tax dollars because they don't budget their priorities long term. Short term solutions that lead to long term losses on many levels, not just monetary. The City of Austin is now moving to eliminate STRs in sections that were erroneously allowed before the City could get a handle on it. The "New Sharing Economy" helps the few while leaving the working class behind to fend for themselves! Priorities people! Get rid of STRs in residential neighborhoods!


 COMMENT 763807 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 10:55 AM

As someone who is NOT a homeowner, I resent the short term rental situation, it has caused a crippling housing crisis and has driven rents up through the stratosphere. I'm a long time local and a California native, yet I cannot afford a home in my own homeland. I'm so sick of Santa Barbara catering to the tourist dollar... what about the LOCALS? What about the people who live here who are way under the upper crust bracket, you know, the people who server your food, watch your children, nurse you in the hospital, do your laundry? HOW are WE supposed to make it here with these STRs driving up prices and shutting down availability? The situation is dire. SB needs to step up and do something for the locals for once instead of chasing the almighty tourist dollar.


 RICHYRICH agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 11:21 AM

807, I feel for you and am in the same situation as you but I am not crying about it. Welcome to life in our modern-day world. Get over it. Just go to Hawaii and look at all the local people who have been there for generation after generation and can no longer afford a home because of all the wealthy folks from the mainland who will pay outlandish prices for a home just to have a vacation spot.


 CHACHA agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 11:44 AM

807, STRs have been outlawed in SB. Are rents starting to come down?


Now that we have cracked down on STRs how about going after the thousands of illegal long term rentals in this town?

How about charging renters TAXES so that they will start contributing to our local schools?

Sound good?


 COMMENT 763842P agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 12:30 PM

The City Council has decided to throw the baby out with the bath water because they are either not willing or capable of coming up with a plan that permits reasonable people renting space for short term stays. The council has not acted in good faith throughout this process. Short term rentals allow many people to visit Santa Barbara and creates a thriving economy for many homeowners who could not afford to live in Santa Barbara without the additional revenue and allows many people to visit the area on a reasonable budget without being fleeced by the hotel industry.
That being said the rentals do need some regulation which would include but not limited to providing adequate parking, rules regarding what structures are being offered, safety and noise control but to say that all short-term rentals are bad is not valid. It will take some thought and work to make it work smoothly and if the council does not have the ability or energy to do the work then maybe they should all retire.


 COMMENT 763843 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 12:41 PM

CHACHA the owners of the properties pay property taxes that go to the schools. Renters pay rent to property owners.

That's how the schools are paid for. Requiring an extra tax for renters (for schools) would be double dipping.


 COMMENT 763844 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 12:45 PM

I'm very much in favor of allowing short term rentals in the City and County of Santa Barbara. In particular, I believe that beach front areas, that have a long history of short term rentals, should be able to continue this practice.


 COMMENT 763845 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 12:46 PM

why can't this community use the tax dollars from the home share and vacation rental industry to build housing for all the people who can't seem to find a decent place to live. Outright bans do not work, government trying to tell me who can stay in my home is not right and I will not be voting for anyone on the current city council including the mayor. The zoning laws are outdated and this issue is not going away I have worked all my life, I have raised my children here and paid my taxes, yes I am one of the lucky ones who purchased my home many years ago before this town became one that only the wealthy can live in. I am sympathetic to those looking to rent but I blame the city for its strict zoning and outrageous design review boards that make development here so difficult. Many other cities all over the world have solved this problem. Progress means change, and ownership rights are as important as rental rights.


 MESARATS agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 01:19 PM

There have always been STRs in Santa Barbara, but increased in popularity during the recession. The technology provided a option during a time of massive loss of jobs, medical insurance and a banking industry that was getting bailed out, but refused to work with homeowners to adjust their predatory loans. Even those who had the down payment and solid income and finally could afford to buy a place due to the drop in price, faced a loan industry doing a 180 that wasn't even doing solid tradional loans. The middle class got screwed on that while the big money had the cash to buy at low prices. A lot of funk zone buildings and apartment buildings changed hands, mostly to out of area investors. People who focus blame on housing availability to STRs should also consider the hundreds of units that have been bought, long time tenants displaced to covert to high end student rentals. Did some people take advantage of the undefined STR rules, sure they did, but many are just trying to survive in a expensive tourist town where costs increase, but wages don't. Our government funded leaders with their secure retirement, time off and insurance funded by taxpayers can't relate to the working or struggling middle class. Common sense regulation should be considered, perhaps like Goleta. Instead, they decide for a total ban and will spend a lot of money and hired 3 more government workers to inforce it.


 COMMENT 763855 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 01:34 PM

ChaCha, 843, if a rental has been doing business for a while, they are not paying their share in property taxes. There is a house near the corner of Modoc and Eucalytus that was owned by a woman who put it into a trust. She is no longer alive. Because Prop 13 applies, the Trust pays her taxes of about $300 a year. In the mean time the house is rented out to 2-3 families who park 5 cars in the driveway. Three of them are expensive Ford trucks, lifted, oversize tires, etc. Something very weird going on there.

I guess the Trust might be paying some taxes on the rental income but they probably have some smart accountant figuring out how to decrease those taxes as well.

The only people paying their property taxes are the new buyers who plan to live in their home. My taxes are more than $6K/yr, and I don't even have kids to send to the local schools.

This is the new Santa Barbara.


 COMMENT 763861 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 02:04 PM

845- where the hell do you see more room in this town to build homes? I'd like to know! Been here my whole life and I'd say we're maxed out.


 CHACHA agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 03:43 PM

843, no it would not be double dipping at all. It's unfair that some people pay zero taxes to our schools though their children attend them, and some pay significant taxes though they have no children but are property owners.

It needs to be reformed so these renters stop getting a free ride.


 COMMENT 763894 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 04:17 PM


Landlord owns property - using simple math, pays 12k a year in property taxes. Landlord rents property for 2k a month, 24k a year. 12k of that revenue goes to property taxes. So to add another tax would be double dipping.

In regards to people who have owned property for decades and rent it, that is prop 13 for you. That has nothing to do with rentals, or anything at all other than prop 13.

For those of you that think that the property taxes are high here, you really might want to look at other states. Here a 1mm house is ~10k a year in property taxes. In South Florida that is about 30k a year in property taxes. In Dallas that is about 22k a year.


 COMMENT 763900 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 04:54 PM

ChaCha- Renters getting a free ride? Are you nuts? Rent is like 4,000 bucks for a decent track home. How is that free? Plus that free riding renter spends nearly all of their income here in town 365 days a year which contributes to our local economy big time.

I would love to know where you think renters get a free ride. What a comment.

Rent and Utilities about 4,000x12= 48,000 per year...FREE!??? Not even close.


 COMMENT 763903 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 05:00 PM

I'm "conflicted" on this issue.

Maybe some sort of compromise? In over-regulated Germany (where I lived), the "Guesthouse" is part of the culture. In these cases, the owner of the property lives in the home and rents a room or two, short-term. Typically breakfast is served too. I used these a lot myself ... the homes were usually hosted by wonder and kind "grandmothers" that made the stay even more enjoyable.

I think buying a residential home in a quiet neighborhood, strictly to turn it into a virtual hotel, is something I would oppose. A "guesthouse" with a vigilant owner is something I would support. Overall, I think it's the impact of the rental unit.


 MESARATS agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 06:03 PM

CHACHA. Renters pretty much drive the bond issues by voting for the parcel taxes, we had 3 or 4 this year including funding a footballl stadium and buying the Armory. All this with declining enrollment. That is a cost that gets passed to the renter.


 COMMENT 763941 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-16 07:54 PM

So awesome how 574 claims logic, but yet describes chain stores (Macy's, Sears )

Those are not local business, they care about as much as Airbnb operators do about the community they fleece.

Also, your math doesn't make much sense. "Make 30million, enforce it and lose 2 million. That's a 32million difference...."

No that's a 2 million dollar difference, can't lose 2mil to gain it later. Where is the logic?


 CHACHA agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-17 09:26 AM

900--my comment was specific, I said free ride on our local schools.


 COMMENT 764010 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-17 09:35 AM

This is a simple zoning issue. I cannot open a rendering factory on my property in the city, nor have farm animals, run a dry cleaner, a oil change business or any of the necessary industrial productions that we all rely on in society.

Those who have built their business off of the loopholes need to be shut down. Period. Want to run a boarding house? Buy property already zoned for it specifically or better yet, change the zoning laws. Good luck with that!


 COMMENT 764060 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-17 11:09 AM

Cha Cha- If you only knew the effort that those nasty free riding renters put into our local schools, the volunteer hours, donations, baked goods, fundraising, weekend school beautification clean ups, field trip assistance, PTA, and so much more. All of that adds up the amount you are taxed for schools, probably even more.

I know I shell out a couple hundred and put in hours each year for my little one, our home is owned and don't feel the way you do about "renters". I love when money goes to the schools, better than war or other government shenanigans.


 COMMENT 764159 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-17 05:35 PM

Fair regulation of Short Term Rentals is necessary and the fair thing to do. The vast majority of STRs, especially the home shares, cause zero problems. And there is a huge difference between vacation rentals (entire homes) and home shares (where owner is present). There is NO comparison between long term renters (roommates) and visitors when you are talking about sharing your home, which is usually the most valuable possession anyone has.


 COMMENT 765062 agree helpful negative off topic

2017-03-22 04:01 PM

It's unfair to fully take away the option of vacation rentals. With fair regulation we wouldn't have many of the issues that people are currently claiming. A healthy tourism industry promotes business for all of us and by completely abolishing all options of rentals, we are basically telling people we don't want them here. I believe fair regulation is the way to go!


31% of comments on this page were made by Edhat Community Members.


*** One comment was removed from this thread by the Edhat Board Nanny for violating Edhat Comments Board policy. Click Here to see it.


Add Your Comments

Edhat Username



Don't have an Account?

Don't know if you have an account?

Don't remember your account info?


ENJOY HAPPY HOUR! ... Between 4:00pm & 5:00pm only happy comment are allowed on the Edhat Comments Board.

If you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all.

Hide Your Handle, but show paid status (paid subscribers only)
NEW - use verified name and picture (contact ed@edhat.com to be verified)
Find out About Becoming A Paid Subscriber
NOTE: We are testing a new Comment Preview Page. You must hit OK on the next page to have your comment go live. Send Feedback to ed@edhat.com.

get a handle   |  lost handle




  See more articles like this

# # # #


Send To a Friend
Your Email
Friend's Email

Top of Page | Old News Archives | Printer-Friendly Page

  Home Subscribe FAQ Jobs Contact copyright © 2003-2015  
Edhat, Inc.