Featured Story

Shelter Island Editorial: Time to regulate STRs

BEVERLEA WALZ PHOTO The scene in the school auditorium April 7 where the Town Board held a public hearing on proposed legislation to regulate short-term rentals.
BEVERLEA WALZ PHOTO The scene in the school auditorium April 7 where the Town Board held its second public hearing on proposed legislation to regulate short-term rentals.

During the long and spirited public debate about proposed regulation of the Island’s short-term rentals (STRs), sound arguments have been made by both sides.

Bu sadly, vitriol has marred discussions at Town Board meetings, during two public hearings and in letters to this newspaper. Longtime observers of town issues have said they’ve never seen anything like it.

Absurd demands have been made for board members’ resignations. Public and private accusations and insults have been traded of  turning the Island into a “police state” with “Gestapo” tactics and “collusion” by public officials who are building a constituency among residents to influence opinion. As said in a previous editorial, the latter is known as “democracy.”

There have been loud noises made, too, by those advocating for no regulation, who claim — falsely — that the government has no right to say what they can do with their property.

That STRs don’t yet have a comprehensive set of rules is partly because the technology that has facilitated their proliferation is relatively new.

The IRS has promulgated rules relating to income associated with STRs; New York State has made plain that its municipal governments may regulate STRs; and Suffolk County has a mandatory registry for operators of STRs.

There is no question that STRs have become widespread on Shelter Island, where hundreds of homes are offered on sites run by the two most popular platforms, Airbnb and VRBO/HomeAway. On one street that dead ends at a creek, 40 percent of the houses are offered for at least part of the summer as “entire home” STRs, meaning the owner is not present during the stay.

People who contribute greatly to our collective life here have made a compelling case that their STR income enables them to remain a part of the Island community. On the other side, we sympathize with those surrounded by STRs.

They aren’t anti-stranger, as some have said. They’re understandably upset to find themselves living in de facto hotels.

And, we’ve heard unsettling stories about homes on the low end of the market (below $500,000 in assessed value) being purchased and turned quickly into STRs.

Free-standing homes that are offered at least part of the time as STRs range in value from $332,000 for a cottage mid-Island to $7.5 million for a waterfront home on Dering Harbor. Listings include places that look as though they might alternately serve as much need long-term rentals including apartments, estate cottages and units in multi-family dwellings.

In the proposed legislation, the board says it aims to prevent the commercialization of residential neighborhoods here and to protect the Island’s limited stock of affordable housing. Those most outspoken against regulation — including a lawyer they hired to speak at the last public hearing — have failed to convince us that the board should back down.

The board was right to take up this matter and many aspects of the draft currently up for a vote are on the money. The creation of the STR registry is essential, especially if the town is to acquire meaningful data to guide decisions about STRs in the near future.

Wisely, STRs will only be permitted in homes with a valid certificate of occupancy or certificate of compliance. And the board is right to fix capacity of a rental at two people per conventional bedroom versus the online standard of two per bedroom plus two (and sometimes extra people at an owner’s discretion).

The compromise of allowing one rental of any duration within a 14-day period makes it possible for hosts to continue to offer stays of varying lengths. Of course, rentals of even longer durations are permitted, and nothing in the law prevents homeowners from offering space to paying guests while they are present — a practice in keeping with the home-sharing origin story touted by the Airbnb representative who spoke at the last public hearing.

Assuring to immediate neighbors is the requirement that hosts provide to them their personal cell phone numbers. Hosts who plan to be away during an STR stay must designate someone on the Island, available 24 hours a day seven days a week to respond to complaints and take remedial action.

Islanders have worked hard to maintain the neighborly lifestyle that sets this place apart. Requiring hosts to provide guests a town-approved “Good Neighbor Brochure” summarizing our rules governing noise, trash collection, recycling, and water usage, among others, helps STR guests come to better know the Island and its values.

Some have complained that the regulations will be burdensome. But for STR hosts, the registration process and filing fee will become just another cost of doing business — and running an STR is a business, even when engaged in infrequently.

The town will have new bookeeping duties. But costs may be defrayed by the annual registration fee and any fines collected from homeowners who fail to comply with the new rules.

In recognition of the fact that people make vacation plans many months ahead of time, the board has appropriately set up a gradual phase-in. The deadline for STR owners to register is July 1. Rental agreements signed prior to the adoption of the law will be grandfathered. But as of January 1, 2018, all STRs must comply with the new rules.

The law also notes the need for regular review. We encourage the town to consider requiring STR operators at the time of registration to provide their county-issued certificate of authority, demonstrating they have signed up to collect and remit the county’s 3 percent occupancy tax.

The tax supports tourism initiatives and raised millions of dollars last year for county beaches and parks, historical sites and other attractions enjoyed by tourists and residents alike. Local county legislators can dip into the occupancy tax fund to provide grants for projects in their districts.

Beyond that, the board should take seriously Supervisor Jim Dougherty’s proposal to “tune up” the noise ordinance in a way that ensures for all the continued quiet enjoyment of this beautiful place.