In September, the Austin American-Statesman published a three-part series on the growing conflict between the owners of some short-term rentals (STRs) and their neighbors. While the series was intended to demonstrate the need for more stringent enforcement of Austin’s STR regulations, it unwittingly demonstrated a more fundamental issue: the lack of principles underlying the entire discussion.
Part One begins by citing a common complaint about STRs:
The two houses on West 10th Street are charming and tidy, one yellow, one teal. But ask the neighbors and they’ll tell you some tales, of bachelor parties and noisy barbecues, of inflatable penises in the street and slamming car doors at 3 a.m. They’ll tell you the houses are basically a hotel they can’t get rid of.
Let us assume that these complaints are legitimate and not merely the exaggerations of neighbors who don’t like how others use their property.
The article goes on to cite some of the problems that city officials have in enforcing the regulations. In short, code enforcers must find a violation of the regulations before they can write a citation. But the regulations are not given to those who host noisy barbecues, install inflatable penises in the street, or slam car doors at 3 a.m. The citations are given to the owners of the STR.
The complaints against STRs are directed at the conduct of the guests who rent those properties. Whether the owners encourage that conduct or turn a blind eye to it, the fact is, it is the guests who are hosting barbecues, putting inflatable penises in the street, and slamming car doors at 3 a.m. They, not the owner of the STR, are the ones guilty of disturbing the peace and creating a nuisance.
Yet, it is the owner of STRs that Austin’s regulations have in the crosshairs. Indeed, those regulations call for all Type-2 STRs (those that are not occupied by the owner) to be phased out by 2022. The article notes that,
In the first 614 [obviously this number is wrong] months of 2018, Austin’s 311 number fielded 868 STR-related complaints about 427 properties. Code officers wrote 98 citations against 38 properties.
In other words, of the more than 8,000 STRs estimated to exist in Austin, 38 properties received citations. Less than one property in two-hundred received a citation, yet all Type-2 STRs are to be banished. Every STR owner is to be punished because a few guests have been disruptive.
If Austin officials (and those in many other cities) were principled, then they would address the real cause of the problem—disruptive guests. They would issue citations to those who cause disruptions, rather than issue prohibitions on the use of one’s property.
Of course, it’s much easier to simply outlaw STRs. That doesn’t require much thought or imagination. It doesn’t require the identification of any principles. All it requires is a willingness to appease a mob of angry homeowners.
When you lived ona small cul de sac and your neighbors conduct the type of business that means many cars are fighting for parking in front of your house blocking your driveway so you have to knock on doors to get out and you can’t plan a party at your home because all street parking will be taken and trash is left in your yard, this is a problem
I agree that there can be problems with STRs. But immediately blaming and punishing the property owner is not the moral approach. Instead, government officials should be dealing with those creating the disruptions.