Leave it to localities
State government should stay out of short-term rental regulations
As short-term rentals of houses and rooms in residential areas proliferate, so does concern about how they impact the character of neighborhoods and the price of houses. Neighbors complain about a lack of parking, an abundance of noise and the accumulation of trash.
Though debate over how best to regulate these ventures has occasionally roiled Virginia cities and towns, these are local issues with local solutions. That’s why
Gov. Glenn Youngkin should veto a bill that would curb localities’ ability to impose thoughtful regulations that best suit their residents.
The General Assembly this year passed a bill that limits some of the power local governments have to regulate short-term rentals such as those available through Airbnb and Vrbo. Introduced by Sen. Lamont Bagby, D-Richmond, it earned bipartisan support and awaits Youngkin’s action.
The measure would not do away with existing short-term rental regulations in localities, but it would limit new ones. If it becomes law, local governments would not be required to impose new regulations, such as requiring a special exception, special-use permit or conditional-use permit for property owners to offer shortterm rentals involving their primary residence. Bagby’s bill was supported by Airbnb, Virginia Realtors and some tech companies because it would cut red tape that costs time and money, and it would make the process of offering short-term rentals easier and more uniform across the state.
But the Virginia Association of Counties, the Virginia Municipal League and several localities, including Virginia Beach and Hampton, strongly opposed it. Their primary objection is that the bill curtails localities’ ability to shape short-term rental policies in ways that reflect their residents’ interests and particular circumstances.
Surely, it’s important to continue to allow cities and counties to respond to the concerns and needs of their residents — more important than it is to impose cookie-cutter rules in order to make things run more smoothly for the businesses that offer short-term rentals
The danger of one-size-fits all regulation from Richmond is that it does not account for the differences among various localities. What works in Roanoke, Charlottesville or Fairfax may not work so well in Virginia Beach, Norfolk or Hampton.
Tourism in Hampton Roads makes short-term rentals especially attractive to homeowners here, but full-time residents often have mixed feelings about where and how they operate. That’s why our cities have debated the issue exhaustively before imposing thoughtful regulations that have struck a balance between allowing shortterm rentals and protecting residents’ rights.
The rapid growth of short-term rentals makes it even more important for localities to be able to respond to their residents’ concerns. Thousands of such rental properties are already offered across Hampton Roads. AirDNA, a company that provides data on short-term rentals, reports 2,900 active listings in Virginia Beach, 2,000 in Norfolk, 710 in Hampton, 444 in Portsmouth, 269 in Chesapeake, 243 in Newport News and 70 in Suffolk. Just up the road, Williamsburg has 2,500.
We are still learning the many ways that more short-term rentals may transform neighborhoods. There is a growing worry, for instance, of what economists call “the Airbnb effect” — that as more homes are used as short-term rentals, the cost of buying or renting a home can soar.
On the other hand, some homeowners may want to be able to offer a room over the garage or a “mother-in-law suite” for short-term rental as a source of extra income so they can continue to afford their home.
So much uncertainty makes it even more important that localities continue to be able to craft regulations over short-term rentals that respond to the particular needs of their communities.
The people who call Hampton Roads home, who make their lives there, should have a say in how the community evolves. They should be able to offer informed input into regulations over short-term rentals and trust that their interests will be addressed.
The governor should veto this bill and stop the state from sticking its nose in these local affairs.