Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-19-17 Public Comment - D. Campbell - Short Term RentalsFrom:Deanna Campbell To:Agenda Subject:[SUSPICIOUS MESSAGE] STR Comment Date:Friday, May 19, 2017 10:05:44 AM WARNING: Your email security system has determined the message below may be apotential threat. The sender may be posing as a widow to trick you into paying fees to transfer money. If you do not know the sender or cannot verify the integrity of the message, please do not respond or click on links in the message. Depending on the security settings, clickable URLsmay have been modified to provide additional security. To: City Commissioners From: Deanna Campbell 1015 South Grand Bozeman, Montana 59715 Re: Short Term Rental Regulations (STRs) I am writing to give a face to the STR regulations before you. I am a widow, retired on a fixed income. I purchased my property 26 years ago as my retirement investment with theintent to fund my retirement with this property. It is a triplex on the edge of the Bon Ton Historic District. I have been restoring, preserving and making improvements on it since I purchased it. My ultimate retirement plan was to travel a few months out of the year and use my dwelling asa STR to cover the cost of mortgage, taxes and maintenance on this lovely historic home. This additional income is critical for me to meet expenses and recoup the investment I made. Midway through an extensive remodel in progress last year the city put a moratorium on STRs, essentially trashing my life-long retirement income plan 26 years in the making. I consider the STR regulations before you a Regulatory Taking in the full legal sense of the term. The regulations effectively deprive property owners of an economicallyreasonable use of property to such an extent that it deprives them the utility and value of their property. On top of that, the map you have on the table creates a large class of elite, entitled landowners (green) free to do any kind of STRs and a large group of disenfranchised propertyowners(red, yellow and orange) deprived of this basic right. The categories are not based on any valid study substantiating such designations. The placement of my property into the orange R1, Type 1 category is arbitrary and lacks reason. I have a triplex with a triplex across the street and two duplexes down the street. The neighborhood turns over with every semester of MSU. What is R1 about that? Thecharacter of this neighborhood is largely transient. Type 1 means that if I have vacation tenants I must be present in the house with them. That is not a reasonable or safe condition toplace on an elderly single woman. Such burdensome regulations and subjective designations deprive me of the right touse my property in a reasonable manner as an income producing asset. Not to mention robbing me of the joy I have in sharing my beautiful historic home with others. This regulation is bureaucratic overreach. The city does not need to insert itself into the landlord tenant business which is already regulated by state law. Tenant problems such asnoise and nuisance are addressed by local ordinances. Building codes regulate the look and feel of neighborhoods. Landlord/tenant laws and prevailing business practices coverlandlord/tenant communication of rules. You would be hard pressed to prove the need for these regulations for health and safety reasons as they duplicate existing local and state laws. There has been no valid study to corroborate any negative impact on neighborhoods as a result of STRs. In fact the nature of the business requires landlords to be quite attentive tothe details of keeping their properties neat and tidy in a highly competitive market. So, the remaining argument on the table is that a few people somewhere feel they need neighbors theycan relate to on a long term basis. Are you willing to deprive property owners of basic rights for that? The vast layer of duplicate bureaucratic oversight these regulations require will simply end up costing the city more manpower and administration costs that lead to higher taxes andthere-by higher rents. Not to mention the cost of legal fees the city may incur to defend these regulations. In summary, I view these regulations as unwarranted Regulatory Taking. I sincerely implore you to reject them in total. Deanna Campbell