We Need Thoughtful HomeStay/STR Policy

We are asking the City to PAUSE further action on STR regulations until there is a transparent, inclusive process that solicits input on both the current regulations and proposed new regulations, and addresses the following questions:

1. What problems are we actually solving? Why do STRs require additional regulation beyond existing ordinances for noise, parking, and neighborhood conduct? The documented fire incidents in Charlottesville have occurred in traditional commercial rentals, not resident-operated STRs or homestays.

2. Why are current STR regulations not being applied equitably across all zones? We need to examine ALL short-term rental activity occurring in ALL zones. Out-of-town and local developers operating at scale are not held to the same safety or training standards, despite contributing more significantly to impacts. The playing field between resident-operators and developers in the same neighborhoods is not level, and that imbalance deserves closer examination before further restrictions are imposed. Why are resident operators—including young families—being limited for not having the ability to purchase buildings that are allowed to operate with less oversight?

3. How do STRs actually correlate with affordable housing? New York City banned most STRs in 2023—listings dropped 80%, but rents kept rising and vacancy stayed at historic lows. Meanwhile, in comparable cities, STRs represent less than 2% of housing stock. Are we solving a real problem, or creating new ones? We should explore allocating or marking taxes collected by STRs for Affordable Housing once "Affordable" has been defined.

4. How can STR regulations incentivize new housing creation? Without STR income, many residents cannot afford to build ADUs, convert basements, or rehabilitate older properties. Construction costs and interest rates have doubled. How do we ensure zoning reforms actually lead to new missing-middle housing being built? How can STR regulations help offset the costs needed to add new units of missing-middle housing?

5. Who has been consulted? The most recent city survey was based on fewer than 600 participants—less than 1.3% of the city's population. This is insufficient for policy decisions with far-reaching consequences. Meanwhile, STR and homestay operators—the people most affected—were not meaningfully notified or consulted. We need to ensure NDS has adequately heard perspectives from all stakeholders on this issue, not just from folks who send complaints to NDS.

We support safety and responsible management. But a pause will give us time to clarify what the City is trying to achieve, present ideas from all stakeholders, and craft a framework that:

- Encourages responsible management, ensuring that nobody infringes on the quiet enjoyment of anyone's home.

- Rather than limiting residents, explores how STRs can help the City—by enabling residents and young families to afford homeownership, supporting local tourism, and creating supplemental income and jobs for local households.

- Modernizes the STR and homestay codes in a way that is beneficial to both the City and its residents.

If safety and training measures are truly imperative, perhaps there is an opportunity to address those larger operators first, while engaging residents in an open dialogue about how to modernize the STR and homestay codes.

Rather than rushing through poorly-conceived restrictions, let's have the conversation that should have happened from the beginning.