Cities Struggling To Crack Down On Airbnb Renters (latimes.com) 260
An anonymous Slashdot reader writes:
A California man has been charged with eight misdemeanors for renting several apartments under his own name, and then subletting them all. "Apartments in Santa Monica that might fetch $3500 a month as ordinary rentals, are worth three or four times that on a daily or weekly basis," reports one newsweekly, and the subletter notes that he only received two years of probation plus a $3,500 fine, "what one of my properties makes in a month."
On Wednesday three prominent U.S. Senators "called for a regulatory probe into whether short-term rental websites such as Airbnb are taking housing away from long-term renters and pushing up prices," but the number of Americans planning to use Airbnb this summer has apparently already doubled since last year.
The Hotel and Lodging Association of Alaska is complaining that the state's renters "are not required to follow the same state and federal safety mandates that are required for other hotels and lodges creating an unsafe and unfair market for consumers as well as hoteliers." But it seems like currently the only pushback is coming from local and city officials, like the short-term rental rules that Airbnb is currently fighting in their home city of San Francisco. For example, in Maine, the owner of one of Portland's 425 rentals units is now fighting a city order "demanding that he stop renting out part of his home through Airbnb. "Portland has a limited staff to enforce zoning rules, so it comes down on the most egregious cases, said City Hall spokeswoman Jessica Grondin."
I laughed at the quote from the City Hall spokeswoman. "It's kind of like speeding on the highway. You know it is illegal, you do it anyway, and you get caught."
The Hotel and Lodging Association of Alaska is complaining that the state's renters "are not required to follow the same state and federal safety mandates that are required for other hotels and lodges creating an unsafe and unfair market for consumers as well as hoteliers." But it seems like currently the only pushback is coming from local and city officials, like the short-term rental rules that Airbnb is currently fighting in their home city of San Francisco. For example, in Maine, the owner of one of Portland's 425 rentals units is now fighting a city order "demanding that he stop renting out part of his home through Airbnb. "Portland has a limited staff to enforce zoning rules, so it comes down on the most egregious cases, said City Hall spokeswoman Jessica Grondin."
I laughed at the quote from the City Hall spokeswoman. "It's kind of like speeding on the highway. You know it is illegal, you do it anyway, and you get caught."
Not even close to Speeding (Score:5, Insightful)
When I speed, I'm not forcing people with smaller cars off of the expressway and onto dirt roads, far far away.
These people are driving up the rents and prices of homes in communities, while not being restricted by the laws that hotels/motels/holidayinns have to follow. So for those who want decent housing at decent pricing, they have to live far away, or in worse areas.. driving the next people to live farther and worse-er.
Re:Not even close to Speeding (Score:5, Insightful)
Get real, dude. Rents in Santa Monica were sky high before Airbnb. Rents there will continue to be outrageous until the city government allows enough housing to be built to meet demand. Restrictive zoning - and the macroeconomic relation between the money value of land versus labor - is the cause of high rents, not short term rentals.
Re: (Score:2)
Socialists and Liberals have no idea about value in a scarce commodity. They artificially make scarce a commodity (real estate zoning / rent control) in a vain effort to force private people into their own will, only to have it backfire repeatedly. And the excuse for continuing the repeating the failed social experiments is ... "This time, we'll get it right"
The government should not be creating artificial restrictions for social purposes. It doesn't work, makes things worse, and in the end, screws everyone
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Speeding endangers lives; airbnb renting does not. Therefore, speeding is much worse. Let them do what they want with their property.
Well that certainly depends. What if the property they are renting on AirBnB is unsafe? Doesn't have all of the safety accommodations that one might expect in a rented lodging? Hell, you could die in a fire because the place doesn't have smoke detectors or a fire extinguisher. AirBnB is just like Uber: they flout the rules that drive up the cost of the service industry they are competing and act as though they are somehow different than those services themselves. They are not. And certainly the people
Re: (Score:3)
So, you want every home (remember every home is a potential airbnb place) inspected by the Governments? Your friends come to spend the weekend. You want the Governments to come and Tax you for "Lost Revenue"? Your family comes, a foreign exchange student comes, a refugee comes, a co-worker comes, a visitor of any kind comes. How do you prove that You aren't an airbnb-er. Do you want to pay Taxes to have a guest? The Governments just love this idea – inspect every home, tax every home for every visitor, make the home owner, home renter pay, Pay, PAY! That's the ticket!
Oh please. The government is not trying to inspect every home or tax you for your visitors. How do they know you're not an AirBnBer? Because you don't file a 1099 from AirBnB! That's how. The IRS knows if AirBnB is paying you more than $500 a year. And if you're renting out your place for less than $500 a year, I don't think anyone in the government would want to waste their time bothering with you anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh Please yourself. When the Libertarians are rejected for "Somalia" and "dirty air and water", people like yourself cheer. Here is a REAL example of something government is likely to do, and you're "oh please", dismissing it.
Fact is, AirBNB is allowing people to make an extra buck on the side. The government can't figure out the difference between a person who is on AirBNB to make an extra buck or two, and one that is there to make a lot of money. Nor should it care. And that is the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
So, you want every home (remember every home is a potential airbnb place) inspected by the Governments?
Of course not. They would only have to be inspected when they are placed on the market. In fact, even that is not necessary. Instead the government could just publicise the requirements, and offer a reward for turning in violators. So, if I stay in an Airbnb, and there is no smoke detector in my room, I can report the violation and receive a portion of the fine.
Disclaimer: I rent several rooms on Airbnb. They all have smoke detectors, as required under California law.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, what *I* want is for the government to leave alone owner-occupied homes that they rent out all or part of for part of the year, while cracking down entirely on short-term rentals in residential zoning for houses and apartments that aren't owner occupied.
If you're renting it short term, and you aren't doing so as a secondary use to your own residence as the owner, then your doing commercial renting and should be subject to all commercial renting rules and regulations, including zoning regulations.
W
Re: (Score:2)
Why should government be involved at all? There is very little difference between renting month to month, and renting week to week. In fact, there are whole communities that are built around weekly even daily rentals (tourist, vacation homes), that have VERY little government oversight.
This just smells of "We have to do something, this is something, therefore we must do it" kneejerking
Renters are not guests (Score:2)
So, you want every home (remember every home is a potential airbnb place) inspected by the Governments?
Homes ARE inspected by the government. I just had my hot water tank upgraded and the township came out to inspect the work to make sure it met code. If I sell the house I'll have to have the government come out to inspect it. Not the common theme here - when money is exchanged the government gets involved to make sure things are done properly. It is easy to show there is a compelling public interest in them doing so. There are a lot of laws that apply for rental properties and governments enforce thes
Re: (Score:2)
And if you didn't have to have your water tank replaced, the old water tank was "Grandfathered" in, and was about as safe as the new replacement, except for the fact that now you've had to have a government inspector involved, paid additional "fees" and you likely delayed repairs because of the added expense. And if you hadn't, there are others that have. Getting Government approvals doesn't actually help, and may actually be problematic. But we can't actually look at those aspects, can we?
Re: Not even close to Speeding (Score:2)
I'm not sure I understand why Airbnb rents remain so high though. Even if you try to rent out a place for a month it's significantly more than a typical month long rental. Shouldn't competition drive prices down?
Re: (Score:2)
AirBnB gets a percentage of the money. Why would they do anything to encourage price wars?
Re: (Score:2)
When I speed, I'm not forcing people with smaller cars off of the expressway and onto dirt roads, far far away.
These people are driving up the rents and prices of homes in communities, while not being restricted by the laws that hotels/motels/holidayinns have to follow. So for those who want decent housing at decent pricing, they have to live far away, or in worse areas.. driving the next people to live farther and worse-er.
Prices communicate information. When prices rise, it means that there is a shortage of the commodity being traded with respect to current demand. The rising price causes three very good things to happen, in this order:
1. Conservation: people find ways to economize on housing costs;
2. New supply: more housing gets built, unless you're in California where it is illegal to build anything new;
3. Replacement: Big single-family houses get replaced by condos and then high-rise condos as is typical in an urbanizing
Re: (Score:2)
Now think about this. It works this way with ANY commodity.
Except when government central planning (i.e. "rent control") doesn't account for supply/demand from Econ 101
Re: (Score:3)
These people are driving up the rents and prices of homes in communities
The rents are driven up by housing shortages. The NIMBYs and BANANAs have stopped nearly all housing construction in most big American cities. In SF, more than 95% of building permits were rejected last year, and most prospective builders didn't even bother to submit a request. So new growth is forced out into the suburban sprawl. Blaming the shortage of urban housing on Airbnb is silly.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
They own the houses, they can do what they feel like.
Hey neighbor! I hope you won't mind the composting and recycling operation we'll be opening up in our front yard. The trucks will be by twice a day, so you may want to time you entry and exit to miss them. The nighttime lighting will be pretty bright, so you might want to get some blackout shades too. And we'll be having an all-day hip-hop jam to kick things off the first Saturday of each month!
Re: (Score:2)
That's fine. I have set up my backyard Shooting Range. Sorry about any stray bullets.
Simple solution (Score:3)
Crank up the fines and forbid people from renting at more than one location.
Start at $10,000 per violation.
Re: (Score:2)
$10,000? Assuming you get caught (see quote about limited resources to police zoning violations) that's still not a lot of a deterrent.
There is a lot of money involved here. Consider that as a property investor you can get triple the return if you let your apartments through Airbnb.
The other impact is that this drives up rents across the city for "normal" people.
Re: (Score:3)
Well that would suck... I live in Ventura but work 3-4 days a week in San Francisco. So I have places in both cities (it's cheaper to rent an apartment in SF than to do hotels for 2 to 3 nights a week). I guess I pay a violation because my commute is long enough I choose to stay overnight?
Rather than renting more than 1 location, make the penalty for illegally subletting a place (which is what many AirBNB places are - a person rents an apartment then starts to rent it out to others for considerably more
the usual suspects (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, it sure is pushing down prices for hotels. Which is probably why crony capitalists get all pushed out of shape about this. As for housing prices and the housing shortage, AirBnB isn't responsible for that, it's zoning laws, rent control, and the interference of the federal government in the mortgage markets. But, hey, leave it to the usual suspects (Warren, Feinstein) to first wreck people's lives and then blame "big evil corporations" for the mess they created.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Property owners charge more to short term renters than to long term renters because short term renting is riskier.
Short term housing and long term housing are indeed in competition for housing units; but based on what do you prefer one to the other? Why is it better to arbitrarily force property owne
Isn't this standard way to do business? (Score:2)
Isn't this the standard way to do business in America? I mean buy something and resell it for a profit.
Re: (Score:3)
The landlord rents out unfurnished space on a long term lease. It's a passive business, a way to make money from ownership of capital.
The Airbnb host hires out a fully furnished, immediately habitable living space on a very short term. It's an active business, a way to make money from the application of labor to relatively little capital.
The old struggling to fight off the new (Score:4, Insightful)
Be it Uber or AirBNB, the pattern is the same — the old way of doing things is struggling against the technology-enabled new way.
We lived through this, when automobiles replaced horse-drawn transport, we are witnessing it now...
It is decidedly no less "safe" than the overpriced "real" hotels/motels. And it is only unfair because of the costs of government-regulations, which those "real" establishments have always passed on to their customers.
With the immediately-available customer ratings offered by the new companies, the government regulators are simply no longer necessary. If "fairness" is a concern, the hotels should be left alone — and unregulated — too.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
New ways to cause old problems (Score:3, Insightful)
This is definitely one of those cases where technology has rendered moot the underlying reality that forced the need for regulation in the first place.
I disagree, technology is simply providing a new way for people to evade the laws and recreate the same problems that -- long ago -- caused the laws to be created.
Now, there is some virtue to "shaking things up", but the underlying issues here are not actually computational at all, they are issues about monetary-incentives, damage and accountability, and various tragedies of the commons.
Re: (Score:2)
But you won't let that stop you from doing so - right from the envelope without even diluting it with water first as per the instructions.
Oh? How exactly does does the 'new instant availability of information' replace regular
Re:The old struggling to fight off the new (Score:5, Insightful)
It is materially less safe than the existing hotel market. A simple example is hotels are held to a much higher standard for fire safety. Being held to those higher standards imposes a cost on a business. If you can operate in the grey areas without those costs you have a significant commercial advantage at the risk that a fire may kill / injure people that wouldn't have been killed or hurt if your building had been compliant.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
It is materially less safe than the existing hotel market. A simple example is hotels are held to a much higher standard for fire safety.
I call bullshit -- that is, if you care about actual outcomes as opposed to bureaucratic box checking. Show me one Airbnb death from fire. One. If you can find one, then we can go on to discuss whether Airbnb's effective per-room-night death rate is higher or lower than the hotel industry's, which in the U.S. alone has thousands of fires and double-digit deaths each year [fema.gov].
Re: (Score:3)
Impossible to compare AirBNB stats as the information is completely unavailable.
However there were 1.24 million building fires in the US in 2013. Which claimed the lives of 3240 people. Of those fires 7700 were in high rise buildings. Those high rise fires contributed 27 deaths. That gives you a fatality chance per fire of .35% in a high rise and .26% in all fires. So this is a relatively low difference. This low difference comes about because high rise and high density buildings have stricter fire co
Re: (Score:2)
You come up with "worse than useless" when the regulations make an inherently more dangerous structure have outcomes that are almost identical to the wider population?
Seriously, think that through. Prior to regulations high rise fires killed LOADS of people. There are lists of hotel fires that killed more than 10 people because these are deemed to be historically significant and yet there is only 1 in the last 30 years! And it was a deliberate arson for which the perp is serving multiple life sentences.
I
Re: (Score:2)
You are replying to the kind of person who believes that Y2K wasn't an issue because nothing happened. Only because companies payed millions of dollars to thousands of contractors and employees to make sure it would be a non-event, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, think that through. Prior to regulations high rise fires killed LOADS of people.
Prior to [the past several decades], individual house fires killed LOADS of people too -- hopefully we can at least agree on that. And United States fire deaths have decreased dramatically over the past several decades [fema.gov]. So in an intellectually honest universe, there are a number of confounding factors you would have to work through before simply declaring that hotel "regulations" (whatever those might be) are responsible for an allegedly significant decrease (that you have yet to quantify) in hotel deaths
Re: (Score:2)
And come on -- given how much publicity there was over the dude who was killed by the falling tree branch/tire swing, how many deaths from fire at an Airbnb property do you really think could sneak under the radar? That's why I challenged you to simply find one.
The reason that one incident got so much publicity was because the family of the victim was able to recover "sufficient" renumeration from the insurance company of the property owners. They never signed any agreements with AirBnB.
The articles about that death covered the fact that AirBnB sweeps in with cash in exchange for confidentiality in the event of mishap, effectively hiding most deaths' associations with AirBnB.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The old struggling to fight off the new (Score:5, Insightful)
How would an immediately available customer rating know if the carpets were fire retardant or not? That all the electrical items were tagged and tested regularly? That food handling procedures were up to standard, that kitchens were clean?
Re: (Score:2)
If I don't have fire-retarding carpets where I live, I shall not require them, where I choose to stay for a few days.
If anyone gets food-poisoning, they'll mention it in their review of the place — that's all it merits.
Same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
You know people die from food poisoning right? It's not just a case of getting the shits and puking. This is why you have a food safety board and health inspectors that check restaurants. But I suppose a review after the funeral is ok, right?
Direct from CDC..... CDC estimates that each year roughly 1 in 6 Americans (or 48 million people) get sick, 128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die of foodborne diseases.
Re: (Score:2)
And this happens despite all the efforts to monitor food supply and food-preparing establishments by the government.
You now need to demonstrate, that it happens more often in places like AirBNB apartments (the tiny minority of them, that may be offering the "breakfast" part of the BnB).
But that's all besides the point — people wishing to stay only in th
Re: (Score:2)
No I don't need to prove that the risk is higher. You need to prove that the risk is the same or lower. You are the one advocating for the change not me.
People have always always always picked the cheapest option. They pick the cheapest option even though it is demonstrably less in their favour. What's more is people will choose an option that is significantly more expensive even if it only appears cheaper at the first glance.
Regulations came in to existence to address a problem. That regulation may ha
Re: The old struggling to fight off the new (Score:2)
The telecom industry of the past 30 years provides a dissenting view.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
There may be a greater potential for death, because you have more people concentrated, but your regulation and fire requirements work to prevent that. For example it doesn't matter how short the sprint is if the only exit is on fire. Lots of people put bars on their home windows that cannot be opened from the inside. This is the sort of thing that wouldn't be allowed in public accommodation.
I'm not in the US so I'm commenting on my own local regulations. But if you are a B&B for example, you are req
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your fire regs are different to ours then as there are differences here based on what the building is to be used for and not just its size.
Re:The old struggling to fight off the new (Score:5, Insightful)
Horseshit.
Horseshit. A real hotel controls it's keys so that only I and the hotel staff have access to my room. Such control is virtually impossible in an AirBNB situation. In addition, a real hotel has a front desk staff and usually some form of security staff keeping an eye on the premises. A random rental from AirBNB does not. And that's on top of the fire safety and other issues raised by other commenters.
Presuming the ratings are honest - which I do not trust them to be. Customers have no interest in honest ratings, and can be penalized for them if they cast aspersions on the service. The rental agency itself has no incentive to be scrupulously honest because they don't want to piss off too many providers. Etc... etc... Not to mention, few customers will rate (or even have the technical know how to rate) such things as the fire protection system.
Re: (Score:2)
This is incorrect.
You, then, have my permission to stay at the hotels certified by the loving, caring, and benevolent officials of the local government. The government, over which you — a visitor from afar — have no control whatsoever.
I'll take my chances with AirBNB or someone like them, whose business model is based on the integrity of the ratings (similar to Uber and, to a large extent, Amazon [bloomberg.com]).
Ah, you'll say, but
Not even a nice try, complete fail. (Score:2)
Oh? Then how come you are completely unable to refute a single one of my points? You didn't even try. (You need not answer, because I know the answer - you can't.)
Nor do I need any control, because it's in the goverment's interest to maintain s
Re: (Score:2)
This is incorrect.
Not where your posts are concerned.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, the same thing should happen with banks, insurance companies, childcare and hospitals. Let's get the government regulations out of the way and rely on Yelp reviews and Facebook likes. FREE MARKET!
Re: (Score:2)
You got it!
The reviewing and certification agencies will themselves compete with each other. Some people may prefer Yelp, others — Consumer Reports, or Angie's List, or Good Housekeeping, or whoever else decides to enter this market.
If there is demand for certification, there will be supply. And if there is not, then the rent-seeking bureaucrats should not exist.
There may still be work to do in insurance an
Reviews solve everything (Score:2)
Sounds like a plan. Of course next time you book wirh Airbnb and the "palace with ocean view" turns out to be a shithole and the hosts asks for an extra $200 cash, I'm sure your reviews on Angie's List will help righting that wrong, since bad reviews on Airbnb are bad for business and usually fade in the digital void. You could also put up a Facebook page or post a rant on Craigslist.
There's been great success stories with deregulation and the free market, such as energy (Enron), investment banking (Lehman
Re: (Score:2)
If this ever actually happened, you'd have included a link... But, hey, it could — and the "real" hotel you booked may also disappoint and overcharge. No obvious differences on this front — except it is easier for you to warn others via Yelp, AirBNB's feedback and similar channels, than trying to complain to a local government official.
Re: (Score:2)
If this ever actually happened, you'd have included a link
Are you kidding? Just google "airbnb horror stories", even the huffington post has an article about this.
And there's a website full of those too: airbnbhell.com, it has stories from both points of view (hosts and guests).
Re: (Score:2)
Like this [nypost.com] you mean?
(Do study, how to embed links in your own Slashdot postings.)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the same thing should happen with banks, insurance companies, childcare and hospitals. Let's get the government regulations out of the way and rely on Yelp reviews and Facebook likes. FREE MARKET!
Because clearly if person ever expresses the opinion that one particular regulation or set of regulations should be repealed, that person is forever committed to arguing that every single one should be repealed. And conversely, if one ever argues that a regulation has positive worth, they are permanently banned from arguing against any other. Analyzing each regulation independently and concluding that (like many other things) some are useful and some aren't (and a few really perverse ones are downright coun
Re: (Score:2)
economics (Score:3, Interesting)
The reason housing prices are high and there is a housing shortage in desirable areas are simple: government keeps pushing up demand for housing in such areas through various housing subsidies (low income rent programs, Section 8, government support of mortgages), while at the same time discouraging the creation of new supply through price controls (rent control, affordable housing unit requirements, special taxes on developers) and regulations (zoning, usage restrictions, etc.).
I know, dear Elizabeth, you're just a greedy lawyer and a rabble rousing politician, but please, learn some basic economics: you and people like you are responsible for the housing shortage. And restricting the ability of people to rent out their places for short periods, as on AirBnB, will make the housing shortage worse. In fact, the reason AirBnB is likely so popular in the first place is because AirBnB hosts don't have to deal with all the other rental regulation bullshit people like you have created; in a free housing market, AirBnB would be much less attractive, since landlords could get similar income without all the risk associated with an unpredictable succession of short term renters. So, if you restrict AirBnB rentals, people will probably either leave their apartments empty, or they will convert them into expensive luxury condos. See, Elizabeth, you can certainly stop people from engaging in some economic transactions by wielding your big senatorial stick, but you cannot force them to engage in economic transactions against their will.
uber all over again... (Score:5, Insightful)
uber is a fake taxi, avoids taxes, and avoids regulations and requirements designed to protect the public.
airbnb is a fake hotel, avoids taxes, and avoids regulations and requirements designed to protect the public
Re: (Score:3)
Simon says no (Score:2, Interesting)
The cities and towns who want to regulate this and Uber and the like are doing so not because there is some sort of crisis or need for regulation. By their own admission, they do not have control over it now and yet there are very few reports of problems, which strongly suggests there aren't many issues.
No, they don't want to solve anything. They're just mad that somebody is doing something without asking permission and paying for licenses and other crap. An awful lot of government is devoted to making p
Re:Simon says no (Score:5, Insightful)
The cities and towns who want to regulate this and Uber and the like are doing so not because there is some sort of crisis or need for regulation. By their own admission, they do not have control over it now and yet there are very few reports of problems, which strongly suggests there aren't many issues.
No, they don't want to solve anything. They're just mad that somebody is doing something without asking permission and paying for licenses and other crap. An awful lot of government is devoted to making people ask for permission to do things and making them pay fees to get that permission.
If people realize they can do things just fine without permits, then all hell will break loose of people doing stuff on their own for free! How can bloated bureaucratic governments survive and justify their own existence if people just DO stuff?
You're right. There's absolutely no need for permits to do things like electrical wiring. And no reason whatsoever to mandate that property owners have smoke alarms and fire extinguishers on their properties. Nothing has ever gone wrong in the past, all of these rules and regulations just came to be out of thin air because some bureaucrat thought it would be a great way to make money.
Re: (Score:2)
You obviously never applied nor got inspected for said licenses. They are just taxes on renovations. I've had 6 permits in the last 2 years, 2 electrical ones, 1 for a repair and 1 for a renovation. The licensing office requires you to have a building permit for the renovation, a building permit for fire sprinkler system, a water permit to connect the backflow preventer for said fire sprinkler system to the pipes, a sewage permit to make sure you don't connect the drain for said fire sprinkler system direct
Re: (Score:3)
You obviously never applied nor got inspected for said licenses. They are just taxes on renovations. I've had 6 permits in the last 2 years, 2 electrical ones, 1 for a repair and 1 for a renovation. The licensing office requires you to have a building permit for the renovation, a building permit for fire sprinkler system, a water permit to connect the backflow preventer for said fire sprinkler system to the pipes, a sewage permit to make sure you don't connect the drain for said fire sprinkler system directly to the sewage, a fire marshal inspection, an electrical permit for the electric. Each permit is ~$120.
The inspections are a joke, I did the work all myself which is permitted as the homeowner, half the inspectors asked me why they were there, They never heard of anyone doing a fire sprinkler system so especially the water and sewage inspector were wondering why they were there, then I had to point it out and they said: well, for residential fire sprinkler we can't test the system, you pass. All inspectors spent 5m looking around and say "looks good" on both rough and finish inspections, didn't even have to show the entire renovation. They do require you to submit plans for ~3 months and then hound each inspector for 3 days to show up and the building inspector I've been calling for 3 weeks now.
You have electrical permits because working with electricity can cause fires and death. You have a sewage permit to make sure that you're not making a change to the line that would cause sewage to spill into the ground. A water permit to make sure that you're not going to cause a water problem for yourself and all your neighbors. A building permit to make sure that you do all of the structural modifications according to code. I've had to get permits to do work before, I know how the process works. When
A couple weeks a year is ok (Score:2)
What's the fuss? (Score:2)
How is any different than renting out a beach house?
Re: (Score:2)
The fuss is that many/most of these rentals are in formally-quiet residential neighborhoods.
I just moved from a place where the neighbor across the street frequently AirBNBs. One weekend, quiet Japanese tourists. Next weekend, college kids from Arizona whooping it up and getting into fights. And ALWAYS Uber drivers honking, alcohol-serving limo-busses making a bad problem worse, etc. etc. etc.
This is expected - to some degree, at least - in a beach area, hotel district, etc. (But the hotels, at least, have
prefer airbnb to exist (Score:2)
As someone who rents I dislike the idea of AirBnB pushing up prices. But as someone who travels AirBnB has been the best thing in years. Hotels are fine if you're on your own, but I usually travel with my family. Staying in a slightly run down home is way better than a very nice hotel or holiday home when your kids are going to run around in it. Not to mention seeing into other peoples lives and houses.
I travelled around the US with my family and our 3 cats. I know some hotels let you have pets, but the lim
What Is Old Is New Again. (Score:2)
Now and again one of our neighbors is caught sub-letting his apartment.
The complaints come from all sides --- because this undermines the security and stability of the entire apartment block. The location is ideal for small children and retirees and rentals are affordable. The sub-lets have been nothing but trouble. The kind that has you dialing 911.
Free Market (Score:2)
So they want to limit the free market to allow only unattractive rentals?
Face it, there is a need for short term high rent rentals, not for long term low rent ones. People who can't find a long term need to search for areas, where they can find one.
AirBNB is a local corruption test (Score:3)
Why do we continue to put up with law after law after law that is not in our best interests.
Is AirBNB perfect, nope. But any problems can be regulated to solve any problems for the greater good. For instance if someone had three houses on a quiet street that they AirBNB'd for party houses, then you deal with that issue. But a blanket ban is just anti citizenry which would be an action only take if there was some inducement or incentive for the lawmakers.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is an example of the type of thing commercial rentals are inspected for that AirBNB homes are not:
https://medium.com/matter/livi... [medium.com]
Re:Can't let the money fall into the wrong hands! (Score:4, Insightful)
If by "little people", you mean folks that can buy 425 properties, you and I have very different definitions... The article is all about the abusing that people with plenty of money are doing to a system would have worked if it was only done on a small scale.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Neither do neighbors who chose to buy and rent in a residential district and partake in the benefits thereof, including a reasonably slow-changing population of neighbors.
Then they can live in a community with an HOA that prohibits transient rentals. Otherwise, they have no right to be telling me what I can do with my property.
Re: (Score:2)
What would it be?
Re: (Score:2)
That's fascinating (and sad). I don't suppose you could point me towards a news story about it?
Re: (Score:2)
HOA power varies from state to state. Here in VA, we've been told that it costs, on average, over $60k for an HOA to take legal action. Had the original developer left yet in your case? Typically, they control the HOA until the development is completed. As for the dues, is that really different than a tax?
Re: (Score:3)
In Soviet America, land owns you!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know the situation in the US but landlords are not all 1-percenters. A lot of them are just "little people" investing.
OTOH the guy subletting apartments to AirBnB may very well end up in the 1% : $3500 per month per apartment is a lot.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say that if you own more than one property you're already a medium person.
Re: (Score:2)
Yet they have enough money to gas up their SUV and drive to Starbucks everyday.
In my city:
Cost of a Starbucks latte: about $4
Cost of a gallon of gasoline: about $4
Cost of modest-sized house: about $4,000,000
Re: (Score:3)
So if you can't afford to buy a house in one of the most expensive real estate markets in the world, then there is just no point in investing at all?
Your words, not mine.
I have relatives nearing retirement with $0 in IRA/401k, living in a trailer park, who think exactly the same way. But they can always find the money to go to Starbucks and buy the latest iPhone.
Good to know you're much far more clever and deserving than those feckless trailer-dwelling proles.
Re: (Score:2)
The free market is the base natural state of any economy. Control, legislate, regulate all you want, but the free market interprets socialism as damage and routes around it.
Re:Can't let the money fall into the wrong hands! (Score:5, Insightful)
The "natural state" is me hitting you and taking your stuff.
So this is the "natural state"? (Score:2)
The "natural state" is me hitting you and taking your stuff.
Which is exactly what is happening here. In deference to several thousand years of progress though the weapons of choice to hit you with are either armies of lawyers or, in this case, new laws (or rather new interpretation/enforcement of existing laws). Plus ça change.
Re: (Score:2)
Post your address. I would like to render pig carcasses upwind. Don't worry, I'll be incorporated and cash out long before my offal pond floods your property.
Or do you actually believe in zoning regulations? Okay then, let's zone long-term housing differently than short-term housing.
Re: (Score:2)
OMG, the "little people" are making money!
Well, I don't think that is really the issue here - there are two things at play: the fact that the hotels are not happy about having "unfair" (= "any") competition, which hard to sympathise with, since the hotel trade appears to be booming in many, from the basest "budget" hotels to the perversely luxurious ones. At least, new hotels seem to be built on a regular basis wherever I go. But the more serious issue is that the professionals that are needed by the cities, like nurses, doctors, teachers, and a lo
Re: (Score:2)
EditorDavid has an idiot?
Yeah, someone with that kind of grammar has no right to call someone else an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't matter whether they're regulated, most contractors for developments go with the cheapest products and then when you start noticing the problems (5-10y down the road), it's already past the 1y warranty.
I currently live in one of those DIY kit houses from the early 20th century, this thing is rock solid and besides the regular wear and settling, no major structural issues.
Re: (Score:2)
Its all well and good to say "but someone will build more supply" and that may be true in some cities but its not always possible. But try building any kind of housing anywhere near San Fransisco for example.
Re: (Score:2)
"protecting rights"
You mean like the right to choose a residential neighborhood that is not full of transients? Zoning is all about protecting the rights of people who own land - to ensure stability and compatibility of uses. People who are staying for 1-7 nights have very different lifestyles/uses than those of a year or longer. And if you start allowing incompatible uses into a residential neighborhood, you are interfering with the economic activity of everyone who holds their home as a significant porti