A Compromise in San Antonio

San Antonio has become the latest Texas city to regulate short-term rentals (STRs). The city’s new regulations limit the number of STRs on a block, require owners to register with the city, and require owners to pay the city’s hotel occupancy test.

Many opponents of STRs wanted a complete ban on the activity. While opponents weren’t satisfied with the increased restrictions, they reluctantly accepted the new regulations. One opponent of STRs said, “While the ordinance is not ideal, it takes steps toward ensuring the incredible investment of neighborhood time and treasure into San Antonio’s historic districts will be conserved.”

In truth, the regulations are a complete victory for STR opponents. Opponents may not have received the ban that they desired, but they established the principle that will make a complete ban inevitable. (Action by the state Legislature may prohibit or restrict local efforts to ban STRs, but that is a different issue.) Restrictions and prohibitions on STRs are founded on the same principle; the only difference is in the details of implementation.

In principle, restrictions on STRs are founded on the premise that the community may properly dictate and control land use. The details of those controls are just an issue of political expediency. Today, the community supports restrictions; tomorrow is may support a ban. Today, it supports restrictions on short-term rentals; tomorrow long-term rentals may be the enemy. If land use can be restricted and controlled, then the only issue up for debate is whose property and to what extent.

Unfortunately, the victims voice support for new regulations and controls. They believe that if they compromise on their property rights, then they can avert more draconian measures. For example, both Airbnb and HomeAway endorsed the new regulations.

But as we have seen time after time in regard to other property rights issues, such compromises only embolden those who want more severe restrictions or outright bans. Billboard and anti-smoking legislation are just two examples. (See our paper “A History of Compromise” for details.)

Short-term rental owners may have gained a reprieve, but they have morally disarmed themselves in the process by abandoning the principles of property rights. In time, the opponents of STRs will demand more controls and regulations. And sadly, they will have principles on their side.