Of course you have a right to say who comes and goes in your neighbors properties and what kinds of things they are allowed to do, as I am sure you would insist were they to open a concert venue or dog fighting arena.
> Of course you have a right to say who comes and goes in your neighbors properties and what kinds of things they are allowed to do
Why? I have a right to intervene if their behavior affects me (ie. noise) but I certainly don't have a right to decide what my neighbors do.
If my neighbors want to host a swingers' party next door, so long as it's quiet then it's absolutely none of my business. Similarly, if they want to do short-term rentals, so long as noise levels are kept acceptably low I don't see what say I should have in the matter.
If they want to host a swingers party, advertise it on the internet, and charge admission that's an entirely different story.
The idea that Airbnb is "sharing" is cute, but these are commercial transactions we're talking about, specifically short term lodging rentals. This not a free speech or free association issue as long as that's the case.
> Of course you have a right to say who comes and goes in your neighbors properties and what kinds of things they are allowed to do, as I am sure you would insist were they to open a concert venue or dog fighting arena.
Noise complaint is a valid argument up to a certain point. Of course, I don't want anyone to have a concert upstairs.
Don't get me wrong. I am no fan of Uber or Airbnb or many of the things they represent. However, we must agree that the ends do not justify the means. This is just one step away from FUD like "Oh, if we have Airbnb we might have {{insert trendy to hate -- black, Hispanic, Arabic, Chinese, Canadian}} people staying over for the weekend next door and who knows what they're going to do to me in my sleep". I think if you subscribe to this idea then we should throw the baby away with the bath water as well. Nobody is allowed to visit anyone in their homes. Absolutely no parties even if you own your home. Only the legal registered occupant may be present at any time (I guess we will add provisions for EMS and law enforcement).
I will agree with you the day I can get a fellow passenger kicked out of a train or an aeroplane for failing to quiet their devil spawn that won't stop wailing for over n hours.
I am not accusing you of malice but please realize that the anti-Airbnb rhetoric is no more of a "grass-roots" movement than the so-called "tea party movement". Yes, there are people with valid concerns. No, they are not the ones driving this train. It appears we share a common goal with "them" but we do not.
I think - hope - we see a crackdown from insurance companies as airbnb-style sharing becomes more common. They should have more data as to accidents/claims/etc. This is part of the 'free market' wrt sharing that hasn't really played out yet. Most people renting out their house are not telling their insurance companies that they're effectively running a business from their home, and this will effect claims/premiums.
A short term rental is residential use, just like a long term rental is residential use. In both cases the property is used by people to live and sleep in.
The question is does local government have the right to regulate the duration of a rental lease?
I would argue it doesn't, and it's a blatant violation of sacred property rights for a government to take that power.
The answer to problems of noise is to enforce noise ordinances. Guests will keep quiet if they are told that the town hands out $500 fines for violations of decibel levels after curfew.
There are simple market and incentive based solutions but so many Americans are so quick to jump on the "Ban! Regulate!" knee jerk train these days.
> The answer to problems of noise is to enforce noise ordinances. Guests will keep quiet if they are told that the town hands out $500 fines for violations of decibel levels after curfew.
Because as we know, if there's one easy thing to get, it's "pay later" fine money from tourists. And if there's one thing that really sparks police springing into action, it's an urban noise complaint.
> There are simple market and incentive based solutions but so many Americans are so quick to jump on the "Ban! Regulate!" knee jerk train these days.
"$500 fines for violations of decibel levels after curfew" is a regulation - what twisted world is it where something involving the word 'curfew' isn't considered a regulation?
So what are you going to do when tourists can't afford to immediately pay a $500 on-the-spot fine? Drag them off to jail? Are you really willing to jail people over a noise complaint? Your local Chamber of Commerce is going to love that.
> narrowly tailored ... broad
Obviously enforcement of the existing broad regulations isn't working, so we should create new narrowly tailored ones instead.
Thats a nice straw man you created there and then argued against.
Of course we can fine people that live in other jurisdictions as we do with speeding tickets, and no one is dragged off to jail and fines are not collected on the spot.
Speeding tickets are where the government holds all the information on the person. Fining a tourist AirBnBer requires getting a warrant to get information out of a private company. How much effort do you think is going to go into pursuing a noise complaint? If you're not on-the-spot fining, just how many resources do you think the police will throw at pursuing that?
Are you aware also that tourists come from outside the country? Speeding tickets aren't particularly enforceable in that case.
AirBnB has entered into tax collection and information sharning agreements with State governments. Can we not add a system for sharing information for legitimate police noise complaints? I think we can.
I would like to see us come up with creative and tech based solutions for potential problems with vacation rentals, rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
There are a lot of good coming from vacation rentals, and a lot of people love them.
I am just very much against the idea that if any new thing inconveniences or even potentially inconveniences anyone in even a minor way, we should outright blanket ban it. And that is what the people pushing for punitive bans are saying.
Find solutions. Penalize bad actors. Don't practice group punishment. Screen guests with more and better data. Don't just ban the "other"
> A short term rental is residential use, just like a long term rental is residential use. In both cases the property is used by people to live and sleep in.
Similarly, the Indy 500 is exactly like a parking lot, they're both pieces of pavement with cars on them, only difference is the variation in speed.
In real life your examples are not the same. One is a residential building and one is a hotel. Those things are different.
The United States Conference of Mayors disagrees with you [1]
Short term rentals are residential use from a zoning perspective. A vacation rental is not the same thing as a hotel. There are key differences. A hotel has a front desk and is open 24 hours a day. A vacation rental does not.
