TESTIMONY OF GREATER FARMLAND CIVIC ASSOCIATION
PRESENTED BY ED RICH, PRESIDENT
MONTGOMERY COUNTY COUNCIL
ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT 17-03 ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL USES – SHORT-TERM RENTAL AND BILL 2-16
September 12, 2017
PRESENTED BY ED RICH, PRESIDENT
MONTGOMERY COUNTY COUNCIL
ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT 17-03 ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL USES – SHORT-TERM RENTAL AND BILL 2-16
September 12, 2017
President Berliner and Members of the Council, my name is Ed Rich and I am President of the Greater Farmland Civic Association (GFCA), which represents the 981 homes in the Old Farm, Tilden Woods, Hickory Woods, and Walnut Woods neighborhoods located just south of Montrose Road and just east of Interstate 270.
I am here today on behalf of the GFCA to register our concerns regarding the proposed Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) 17-03 and its companion Bill 2-16, which will govern Short-Term Residential Rental, because they fail to provide a viable structure for enforcement and raise significant financial and safety risks for our community and for the County. The proposed amended restrictions on the number of short-term rental days cannot be realistically enforced by residents or the County’s zoning board given its limited resources, making such restrictions meaningless. Thus, we urge the County to revise the proposal from a ZTA to a Landlord Tenant Regulation with adequate civil penalties for violations of the proposed limitations on unsupervised rentals of 90 days or less, and for other violations, including fines and the ability to remove rental licenses for repeat offenders.
We are concerned that ZTA 17-03, in its current proposed form, may have a substantial negative affect on the residential nature of our community by turning it into a short-term rental haven for Washington, DC, potentially bringing a high volume of people into our neighborhoods who have no connection to the community. Without a strong and effective enforcement mechanism, the proposed ZTA raises the potential of disturbances of the peace, lack of accountability, risks to pedestrians--including children on their way to and from school, and added traffic and congestion.
We understand that permitting short term rental has the potential to produce benefits to certain residents of our community; and, to be clear, we do not seek to wholly block the ability of owners to rent their properties on a short term basis. Rather, we request that the County protect our community and mitigate the potential risks such rentals pose by revising the proposal from a ZTA to a Landlord Tenant Regulation with adequate civil penalties for violations as outlined above.
Our concerns about lack of supervision over short-term rentals, if enforcement is ineffective, are well founded. Data from Airbnb shows that the majority of short-term rentals are unsupervised. “[T]he majority of Airbnb listings are not shared rooms rented out while the hosts are present. Rather, 58.6 percent of Los Angeles listings, 72.3 percent of New Orleans listings, and 66.6 percent of Seattle listings are for entire homes. This means that instead of a host welcoming a visitor into a guest bedroom, most tourists are renting out homes with lockboxes and hotel-like furnishings without ever seeing the homeowner.”
Our goal is to maintain the strong residential nature of the Greater Farmland community and to protect the quality of life and safety of its residents. No doubt, certain homeowners and local businesses can benefit from short-term rentals, but the potential costs for the community at large from such rentals are significant. These costs include, among others, safety and quality of life concerns stemming from the presence of a transitional population that is not invested in the community, the added burden on infrastructure, increased vehicle traffic, and more vehicles parked on the street. With long-term rentals, the renters are screened, typically through credit checks and references; and they have an incentive to socialize, participate in and contribute to the community in which they live. Such is not the case for short-term renters.
We do not oppose the Montgomery County Planning Department‘s recommendation to the County Council that short-term rental use of residential property be regulated separately from a Bed and Breakfast use, but believe strongly that its regulation should NOT be done through a ZTA. The proposed ZTA approach would rely on neighbors reporting on each other to a board that has very few resources to conduct any enforcement and whose enforcement authorities are limited in any event.
Monitoring and licensing by the County, unfortunately, does not adequately deter violations. First, the County does not have the staffing to provide adequate monitoring. Second, the natural incentive under the current proposal is for homeowners to hide such rentals and “cook the books.” The proposed approach will pit neighbor against neighbor – first to identify violations and then to report the violations to the proper department. Relying on neighbors to monitor the 90 day limit, ascertain that the homeowner is or is not present at the property, or that other provisions of the ZTA are being followed has the potential to undermine the cohesiveness of our community. Further, this approach will be a nightmare for the County’s supervising department and could trigger unrest in the neighborhood as neighbors dispute the number of unsupervised days or adherence to other rental limits, such as number of visitors and the activities held in the rented home.
For the proposal to work as intended – benefiting homeowners without hurting communities – homeowners need to know that if they violate the supervision requirement for short-term rentals, they will face stiff civil penalties that will be collected, and that they could lose their licenses to rent out their properties if they repeatedly violate the requirements. Further, renting out properties without the appropriate license also needs to be penalized with adequate penalties and effective collection. Without adequate incentives to comply with the limitations proposed, homeowners will not take those limitations seriously. Without effective enforcement, the proposed short-term rentals risk filling our community with absentee landlord properties with tourists – who lack any commitment to keeping our neighborhoods safe, clean and quiet – streaming in and out, day and night, with additional cars adding to the traffic, and putting pressure on our already limited parking areas.
Restrictions on the number of short-term rental days cannot be enforced by residents and cannot adequately be enforced by the County. Tracking the number of rental days would be impractical, making the restriction meaningless. Reframing the proposal into a full-fledged regulation would strengthen the incentives for compliance by providing for significant civil penalties and loss of license as a deterrent to violations and removing the burden of enforcement from neighbors to professional law enforcement. In addition to the enforceability issue, the current approach poses financial risks for homeowners and for the County and safety risks as well.
Below are just a few of those risks:
Financial Risks
Safety Risks
In conclusion, transient housing without adequate enforcement threatens the residential nature and the safety and security of the community that we love, and that we hope the Council will help protect. The Board of the GFCA urges the Council to reject the ZTA and companion Bill 2-16 as proposed because they fail to provide a viable structure for enforcement and raise significant financial and safety risks for our community and the for the County.
We request, instead, that the County protect our community and mitigate the risks such rentals pose by revising the proposal from a ZTA to a Landlord Tenant Regulation with adequate civil penalties for violations of the proposed limitations on unsupervised rentals of 90 days or less, and for other violations, including fines and the ability to remove rental licenses for repeat offenders.
I am here today on behalf of the GFCA to register our concerns regarding the proposed Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) 17-03 and its companion Bill 2-16, which will govern Short-Term Residential Rental, because they fail to provide a viable structure for enforcement and raise significant financial and safety risks for our community and for the County. The proposed amended restrictions on the number of short-term rental days cannot be realistically enforced by residents or the County’s zoning board given its limited resources, making such restrictions meaningless. Thus, we urge the County to revise the proposal from a ZTA to a Landlord Tenant Regulation with adequate civil penalties for violations of the proposed limitations on unsupervised rentals of 90 days or less, and for other violations, including fines and the ability to remove rental licenses for repeat offenders.
We are concerned that ZTA 17-03, in its current proposed form, may have a substantial negative affect on the residential nature of our community by turning it into a short-term rental haven for Washington, DC, potentially bringing a high volume of people into our neighborhoods who have no connection to the community. Without a strong and effective enforcement mechanism, the proposed ZTA raises the potential of disturbances of the peace, lack of accountability, risks to pedestrians--including children on their way to and from school, and added traffic and congestion.
We understand that permitting short term rental has the potential to produce benefits to certain residents of our community; and, to be clear, we do not seek to wholly block the ability of owners to rent their properties on a short term basis. Rather, we request that the County protect our community and mitigate the potential risks such rentals pose by revising the proposal from a ZTA to a Landlord Tenant Regulation with adequate civil penalties for violations as outlined above.
Our concerns about lack of supervision over short-term rentals, if enforcement is ineffective, are well founded. Data from Airbnb shows that the majority of short-term rentals are unsupervised. “[T]he majority of Airbnb listings are not shared rooms rented out while the hosts are present. Rather, 58.6 percent of Los Angeles listings, 72.3 percent of New Orleans listings, and 66.6 percent of Seattle listings are for entire homes. This means that instead of a host welcoming a visitor into a guest bedroom, most tourists are renting out homes with lockboxes and hotel-like furnishings without ever seeing the homeowner.”
Our goal is to maintain the strong residential nature of the Greater Farmland community and to protect the quality of life and safety of its residents. No doubt, certain homeowners and local businesses can benefit from short-term rentals, but the potential costs for the community at large from such rentals are significant. These costs include, among others, safety and quality of life concerns stemming from the presence of a transitional population that is not invested in the community, the added burden on infrastructure, increased vehicle traffic, and more vehicles parked on the street. With long-term rentals, the renters are screened, typically through credit checks and references; and they have an incentive to socialize, participate in and contribute to the community in which they live. Such is not the case for short-term renters.
We do not oppose the Montgomery County Planning Department‘s recommendation to the County Council that short-term rental use of residential property be regulated separately from a Bed and Breakfast use, but believe strongly that its regulation should NOT be done through a ZTA. The proposed ZTA approach would rely on neighbors reporting on each other to a board that has very few resources to conduct any enforcement and whose enforcement authorities are limited in any event.
Monitoring and licensing by the County, unfortunately, does not adequately deter violations. First, the County does not have the staffing to provide adequate monitoring. Second, the natural incentive under the current proposal is for homeowners to hide such rentals and “cook the books.” The proposed approach will pit neighbor against neighbor – first to identify violations and then to report the violations to the proper department. Relying on neighbors to monitor the 90 day limit, ascertain that the homeowner is or is not present at the property, or that other provisions of the ZTA are being followed has the potential to undermine the cohesiveness of our community. Further, this approach will be a nightmare for the County’s supervising department and could trigger unrest in the neighborhood as neighbors dispute the number of unsupervised days or adherence to other rental limits, such as number of visitors and the activities held in the rented home.
For the proposal to work as intended – benefiting homeowners without hurting communities – homeowners need to know that if they violate the supervision requirement for short-term rentals, they will face stiff civil penalties that will be collected, and that they could lose their licenses to rent out their properties if they repeatedly violate the requirements. Further, renting out properties without the appropriate license also needs to be penalized with adequate penalties and effective collection. Without adequate incentives to comply with the limitations proposed, homeowners will not take those limitations seriously. Without effective enforcement, the proposed short-term rentals risk filling our community with absentee landlord properties with tourists – who lack any commitment to keeping our neighborhoods safe, clean and quiet – streaming in and out, day and night, with additional cars adding to the traffic, and putting pressure on our already limited parking areas.
Restrictions on the number of short-term rental days cannot be enforced by residents and cannot adequately be enforced by the County. Tracking the number of rental days would be impractical, making the restriction meaningless. Reframing the proposal into a full-fledged regulation would strengthen the incentives for compliance by providing for significant civil penalties and loss of license as a deterrent to violations and removing the burden of enforcement from neighbors to professional law enforcement. In addition to the enforceability issue, the current approach poses financial risks for homeowners and for the County and safety risks as well.
Below are just a few of those risks:
Financial Risks
- Reducing property values and tax revenue for the County when homes are turned into short-term rental properties. Our community has a rental ratio of approximately 16%, but the owners of these rental properties may find it more lucrative to turn their properties into short-term rentals, diminishing property values for our residents and tax revenues for the County over time.
- Present homeowners care for their property. They are subject to neighbors’ moral suasion. And long-term landlords must maintain some standards to attract and retain tenants. Renters to frequent transients are more likely to maintain sub-minimal standards, since they are often driven by short-term income and their renters typically do not visit the property before they rent it.
- Residents moving out of the community as short-term rentals impact the residential nature of the community and the connectedness that can only come from living in the community and participating in community institutions, such as schools, religious institutions, pools, sports teams, and civic organizations.
Safety Risks
- An influx of strangers to the neighborhood, who are not screened using background checks or references, and who can change several times a week, making it impossible for parents to know who their children will meet when they walk to and from school or play outside, and making walking, jogging, and biking less safe.
- Increased traffic and congestion with ever-changing population of renters and multiple renters often with multiple cars, in a single property.
- Transitional residents are less likely to notice or care about safety hazards in the homes they rent.
- Short-term rentals may be used to hold parties with heavy use of alcohol and/or drugs, posing safety risks for participants and neighbors
In conclusion, transient housing without adequate enforcement threatens the residential nature and the safety and security of the community that we love, and that we hope the Council will help protect. The Board of the GFCA urges the Council to reject the ZTA and companion Bill 2-16 as proposed because they fail to provide a viable structure for enforcement and raise significant financial and safety risks for our community and the for the County.
We request, instead, that the County protect our community and mitigate the risks such rentals pose by revising the proposal from a ZTA to a Landlord Tenant Regulation with adequate civil penalties for violations of the proposed limitations on unsupervised rentals of 90 days or less, and for other violations, including fines and the ability to remove rental licenses for repeat offenders.