Post: #1

Anaheim officials moved to ban Airb&b's for anyone renting for less than 30 days. This reminds me of legislation in Nevada which temporarily banned Uber drivers from operating in the state. That kind of corruption is expected in cities like Vegas, where the Casinos basically run the state, but in a place like Orange County?

Anaheim is popular tourist destination because of Disneyland. Disney calls the shots and no doubt are behind this piece of legislation in order to keep people in their hotels and avoid being undercut by the locals.

I find it distasteful that those who can't adapt and have deep pockets can lobby their way into out-muscling the competition. I know lots of RVFers are big on hosting / using Airb&b, what's to stop this sort of thing happening at other hotspots or destinations as well?


http://www.ocregister.com/articles/-726153--.html

Quote:ANAHEIM – Short-term rental owners, including former Councilwoman Gail Eastman, have sued Anaheim over the city’s new regulations on short-term rentals of homes, which will eventually ban the popular practice.

The lawsuit, filed last week in Orange County Superior Court, called the stepped-up laws unlawful and asks that they be overturned.

Talmadge Price, a short-term rental owner, said Wednesday that the new laws are “overly restrictive.”

“We faced no other option,” said Price, who owns seven properties in Anaheim. “We tried everything we could to avoid bringing a lawsuit.”

Suing the city are five short-term rental owners, two real estate companies and the Anaheim Rental Alliance, a nonprofit group that has owners of 200 short-term rental properties as members.

Mike Lyster, the city’s spokesman, said Anaheim officials understand the concerns of the homeowners, “but we believe the actions taken by our City Council to regulate short-term rentals in Anaheim are legally valid.”

Last month, the City Council decided to ban, effective in 18 months, owners from renting out their homes to vacationers for 30 days or fewer.

Popular home-sharing platforms Airbnb and HomeAway are also each suing the city for another ordinance the council passed that would require the websites to remove listings the city has not permitted or face fines starting at $500 for each violation that could reach $2,000. Those lawsuits say the city is violating the First Amendment.

Until the ban takes place, short-term rental owners must ensure the properties are quiet overnight, provide neighbors with a contact who can respond within 45 minutes, and limit occupancy – a four-bedroom home, for example, can’t have more than 11 staying there.

Short-term rentals have become a divisive issue in Anaheim, Orange County and nationwide as cities with popular tourist destinations such as beaches or theme parks try to grapple with how the home-sharing economy and residents can co-exist in harmony.

In Anaheim, which attracts more than 20 million visitors annually, mostly because of Disneyland and Disney California Adventure, short-term home rentals have become a popular alternative for some vacationers seeking larger lodging spaces than hotels offer and a way to save money.

However, residents have complained the homes are “mini-motels” and that some vacationers hold all-night rowdy parties, fill up neighborhood parking spaces and leave trash about.

Short-term rental owners say they’ve invested heavily in eyesore properties and increased the value of surrounding homes. They say the income from the rental properties, in just one year, has meant $3 million in taxes to the city’s coffers. Just like hotel guests, visitors pay a 15 percent bed tax.

In 2014, the city issued homeowners permits to operate short-term rentals. But the rapid proliferation of these homes, and the complaints that followed, prompted the city to crack down.

Post: #2

Assuming this resident complaint thing is real and is the primary reason for the legislation, then a more reasonable action would be to put more hefty punishment on short-term rental property owners when their renters break local ordinance with noise, litter, parking, etc. This could be done by introducing heftier fines which would also increase tax revenue to the city.

Post: #3

Get in, or get out of the way.

I rented my place out for the first time this summer. I have stayed in plenty of AirBnB over the years, but this was the first time I set my place up for it.

I was gone for a month, so why would I leave my place open for that time? In a city that is DESPERATE for accommodation!

I listed it, within 24 hours it was fully booked by three guests. $5000 in my pocket, which payed my mortgage and my trip.

I get that they want to keep people from using the service as a business, but that is what happens when a new, clever business model hit the market. It inspires spin off businesses (I used keycafe and a cleaning company that specializes in AirBnB) which work its way into the economy.

Sometimes its scary how much USA hates capitalism, especially when it threatens the lobbyists.

Post: #4

(08-18-2016 05:26 PM)General Stalin Wrote:  Assuming this resident complaint thing is real and is the primary reason for the legislation, then a more reasonable action would be to put more hefty punishment on short-term rental property owners when their renters break local ordinance with noise, litter, parking, etc. This could be done by introducing heftier fines which would also increase tax revenue to the city.

I have my doubts. Anaheim is a ghetto city. Even the area Disneyland is located in is shit. There's plenty of other things the residents could be bitching about, coincidentally nothing has ever happened that would result in a loss of revenue for Disney. Nightly fireworks at 9:30pm for example. A guy I knew lived in an apartment complex with a courtyard and every night at 9:30 the firework sound reverberated throughout and it sounded like the place was being bombarded with heavy artillery. I doubt those residents would get anywhere if they tried to raise a complaint.

Post: #5

Qui bono? Who benefits? I don't follow commercial RE like I used to but it seems like Disney is flexing its muscles and trying to put a floor under their lodging enterprise and the City of Anaheim is only too happy to oblige since they get a cut of the taxes. I'm from South Bay originally and Anaheim is your typical decaying greater LA suburb with Disneyland as their only claim to fame (and middle class fueled tax revenue). I think that governments just want to slow the spread of these types of direct to consumer busniess models until they can figure out how to regulate/tax them to their full advantage while leaving other revenue streams (i.e. hotel/hospitality tax) intact. Also something to consider is that even if a city were to get a cut from AirBnB in the form of taxes, they would lose out on getting something even more powerful from that residence: votes.

To give a bit of depth to the issue the same exact thing is going on in Seattle but they are regulating AirBnB under the guise of an "affordable housing crisis" which casts the victims as minorities, poor, and elderly, with the bad guys as greedy homeowners.

Can’t find a home in Seattle? Airbnb rentals may be to blame

Post: #6

I can see why this happens.

If you're in a tier-1 city you can rent your airBNB out for $250 a night or more and make your rent money and have a ton of spare cash at the end of the month. Ideally, You rent your spot out for all 30 days of the month and make over 7000 dollars over thirty days. I figure your rent on a nice pad in a t-1 city is probably like $2,500 - $3,000. So you're paying for the spot and putting a nice chunk of money in your pocket every month.

This disincentivizes renting your spot to long-term tenants and fucks with the average rent in the area. If your neighbor knows you're making 7,000+ dollars a month off of airbnb he'll do the same thing and the only way he'll rent to long term tenants is if they can pay some absurd amount of rent every month.

This effectively prices locals out of their own city. I think it's fucked up. I know, I didn't go too deep into the actual math and circumstances of AirBnB but I think it can be a bad thing if too many people do it.

Post: #7

(08-18-2016 07:33 PM)Adonis Wrote:  Qui bono? Who benefits? I don't follow commercial RE like I used to but it seems like Disney is flexing its muscles and trying to put a floor under their lodging enterprise and the City of Anaheim is only too happy to oblige since they get a cut of the taxes. I'm from South Bay originally and Anaheim is your typical decaying greater LA suburb with Disneyland as their only claim to fame (and middle class fueled tax revenue). I think that governments just want to slow the spread of these types of direct to consumer busniess models until they can figure out how to regulate/tax them to their full advantage while leaving other revenue streams (i.e. hotel/hospitality tax) intact. Also something to consider is that even if a city were to get a cut from AirBnB in the form of taxes, they would lose out on getting something even more powerful from that residence: votes.

To give a bit of depth to the issue the same exact thing is going on in Seattle but they are regulating AirBnB under the guise of an "affordable housing crisis" which casts the victims as minorities, poor, and elderly, with the bad guys as greedy homeowners.

Can’t find a home in Seattle? Airbnb rentals may be to blame

Damn, that headline was lifted straight from a Vancouver news agency! The left is just recycling shit now, changing the city/person/race in order to get clicks.

Clicks.... I wonder how true journalists feel about that word. It must make them cringe.

Post: #8

(08-18-2016 07:33 PM)Adonis Wrote:  Qui bono? Who benefits? I don't follow commercial RE like I used to but it seems like Disney is flexing its muscles and trying to put a floor under their lodging enterprise and the City of Anaheim is only too happy to oblige since they get a cut of the taxes. .
snip
To give a bit of depth to the issue the same exact thing is going on in Seattle but they are regulating AirBnB under the guise of an "affordable housing crisis" which casts the victims as minorities, poor, and elderly, with the bad guys as greedy homeowners.

Can’t find a home in Seattle? Airbnb rentals may be to blame

Seattle too? A similar bill was sent to NY Governor Cuomo recently and he'll likely sign it.

Different parties stand to benefit whether Airbnb is legislated out of business or not:

If is: Hotels maintain an unbreakable grip on temporary lodging for travelers. The city get its tax revenue from them as it always has. I think this is the main reason, roomsharing effect the city's bottom line so it has go...every other reason is just a front.

If airbnb isn't legislated: Homeowners can most likely make more money renting out their apartments/house by the day then by the month:

For example I have a buddy in Hell's Kitchen in Manhattan. His rent is $2200 monthly, or $73 daily. The average daily rate for airbnb for an unshared apartment in NY right now is $252, meaning the Landlord could list this unit on the site and turn a profit by only keeping it rented at least 9 days (interestingly enough per hotwire hotels in the same area are about 160-180).

Why would you or I, as the building owner rent out our units on yearly leases when we can potentially make up to triple the money off of naive foreign tourists with deep pockets who want to "authentic" New York experience. No regulation almost always benefits homeowners so it depends how you look at it. All things considered I see airbnb and similar services being legislated out of existence in most major metro areas in the US in a few years.

Post: #9

Someone's condo got trashed near me recently who was renting it out over weekends on Air B&B. They had damage well into 4 figures at a minimum. Would never do it if I owned a place. There's just little recourse against someone who trashes a place on a 1 or 2 night rental.

Post: #10

Nightmare scenarios of people being pushed out of housing are a bit far fetched.

The airbnb customer base is limited to the number of people seeking temporary lodging.

Personally to me this just smacks of the standard kneejerk response most governments have to anything new and difficult to tax/regulate. If were up to them we'd still be riding horses and treating most ailments with leeches.

Post: #11

My condo board recently passed an amendment banning AirBnb, I have heard many others doing the same. I'm ok with it mostly as I wouldn't rent out my personal home anyway. But I can see how others who use their condo as a cash flow property wouldn't like it, but there are a number of issues it causes in a place like mine with many shared amenities, which people pay a high fee for, and strict rules to keep things working well.

But that's a community of owners voting on what should be going on in their own building, I don't think municipalities should be getting involved at all.

Post: #12

All of those arguments against it are ones that have been said before. It would be interesting to see the data on it.

In tier 1 cities, the reality is that there is just not enough beds during the tourist months. Hotels that normally charge $170 in the winter are charging $800 in high season, and for big weekends I heard that some places were charging $1500! Before AirBnB it was the same. Now people have more options, and people like me were charging under $300 a night, for two bedrooms. Its a great deal.

Some people list their places to have 'surge' pricing, meaning that when the stock of available units goes down, the price goes up. Think Uber.

This is strictly a supply and demand scenario.

Its hard to think of one city that would be able to keep airbnb competitive year round. Its going to be a high season money maker, not so much during the low season, if at all.