EASTHAMPTON — A proposal to require owners of short-term rentals in the city to install a roughly $5,000 fire and carbon monoxide system is on hold for more study following a heated two-and-a-half hour public hearing before the City Council.
Despite multiple city department heads speaking in favor of amending a short-term rental ordinance at the council’s Dec. 3 meeting, the proposal was sent back to the Ordinance Committee over concerns that the language would imposed “costly” regulations on property owners without alternatives. The Ordinance Committee unanimously voted to send the language to the council at its Nov. 12 meeting.
Currently, the city has no formal regulations on short-term rentals, besides the state Room Occupancy Excise Tax that took effect in 2019.
“For a number of years, they have been operating without any ordinance or guidance,” At-Large Councilor Koni Denham said at the council meeting.
The rise of short-term rentals, such as listings on Airbnb and Vrbo, has been prominent throughout the country. Easthampton first moved to address its lack of regulations in the spring. However, former Mayor Nicole LaChapelle’s resignation and months of deliberation among the Ordinance Committee with various departments has prolonged the discussion.
Some at last week’s council meeting said that in its current language, the proposed short-term rental amendment conflicts with the state’s fire and building code. The language also mandates building owners to install a costly, special smoke and carbon monoxide detector system as an alternative to a sprinkler system.
Denham said the costly mandate could price owners out of the city, which is already experiencing an increasing cost of living.
The amendment makes a significant change to the city’s Zoning Ordinance, to recognize short-term rentals alongside motels, hotels, lodging houses and bed and breakfasts, with slight differences compared to the state’s definition under Massachusetts General Law (MGL) 64G.
The amendment would define short-term rentals as “a whole or a portion of a primary or accessory dwelling unit … as overnight accommodations for no more than twenty-eight consecutive calendar days.” The amendment would require an annual registration process with a cap of 50 of these units throughout the city.
“I just want to acknowledge that if we adopt that section … Easthampton will be the most regulated short-term rental community in the state,” Denham said.
Easthampton Building Commissioner David Gardner has been working with the Ordinance Committee, which is chaired by Denham. While Gardner said there are certain parts he would change, overall he felt the amendment was ready for adoption.
Alarm system concerns
Gardner said the state’s new building code that went into effect July 1 requires a sprinkler system for short-term rentals. However, a community’s local authority on the matter — or Gardner in this case — can accept an alternative that meets the same safety codes for existing buildings rather than new buildings. Gardner said he sees the alarm system as a much safer option.
The kind of alarm system described at the ordinance meeting on Nov. 12 is estimated to cost $5,000 with monthly payments, and it includes a whole-house, smoke and carbon monoxide detector system. When triggered, it notifies first responders through a third-party.
Additionally, it will also send a notification if a guest tampers with the system, which Fire Chief Christopher Norris said is a common issue.
“I think that’s far safer than a sprinkler system that has no other notification, no reason that first responders would show up,” Gardner said at the Dec. 3 meeting.
Gardner noted that while Norris may prefer sprinkler systems, they decided this is an equally safe option. Also, sprinkler systems which are occasionally set off by accident can inflict significant water damage.
Multiple councilors, including Denham and Precinct 4 Councilor Amanda Newton, were not comfortable including this mandate in the amendment.
Denham said the item was initially presented at the subcommittee would have given property owners alternative options for meeting the requirement.
“We talked about a variety of different alternatives depending on size of room, size of space etc. and so I can only speak for myself — I understood that it could be a variety of different alternatives depending on the situation,” she said.
Gardner said that amending the city’s zoning ordinance is an inherently complex action, particularly with short-term rentals, involving the Building and Fire Departments as well as the Board of Health.
Gardner said he received a complaint at the beginning of the year from an abutter to a short-term rental, who reported seeing different people showing up frequently at the neighboring residence.
Gardner said that since the city does not have an ordinance permitting short-term rental use — or acknowledging that they exist — his only option was to send a cease-and-desist letter to the homeowner who was using their home as a short-term rental. A moratorium was then put in place in March, thus suspending enforcement actions on short-term rentals and prompting the ordinance process.
Precinct 3 Councilor Thomas Peake said that with continuously evolving regulations over short-term rentals at the state level, the city needs to be careful that any ordinance it passes complies with state law.
During the meeting, Gardner challenged Denham’s previous statement that Easthampton would be the most regulated in the state, saying there is no evidence to back the claim.
“This is still fairly new. A lot of communities are still dealing with this,” Gardner said.
Denham responded saying that the rentals in Easthampton are not the same as they are on Cape Cod or in the Berkshires, and as such should be looked at differently.
In Easthampton, roughly 70% of the proprietors of short-term rentals are women and most of them are elderly, she said. They are renting out rooms to help supplement their income, she added.
“A lot of people who are working and hosting (in Easthampton), they’re not making the kind of money and revenue that is happening on the Cape or that is happening in the Berkshires,” Denham said.
Precinct 2 Councilor Felicia Jadczak said that owners have a responsibility to know the codes applied to short-term rentals, but based on the confusion at the meeting, she said the amendment is not ready.
“I don’t think it’s going to be helpful if we pass something that is going to be out of the gate confusing when we all want the same things. We want people to be safe,” Jadczak said.
Norris said working collaboratively with Fire Inspector Dan Constantine and Gardner, they collectively decided this would be the safest option for the guests. He noted that deaths due to carbon monoxide and fires have been an issue for short-term rentals.
“We’re trying to find a balance between making sure the occupants are protected, their investment is protected and trying to find that balance for financial means,” Norris said.
Constantine said short-term rentals need to be considered commercial properties.
“We’ve been willing to regulate hotels and motels in the name of safety, but while at the same time ignoring short-term rentals as their popularity has exploded,” he said. “Thousands of rentals have been created in spaces that would never be permitted in commercial settings.”
City Councilor At-Large Brad Riley said there are decades of shared experience between Gardner and Norris, and they have seen what happens when things are not well regulated.
“If this is the recommendation of the building commissioner and the Fire Department, it’s because they truly have embodied the circumstances of when something is not well regulated,” Riley said.
Director of Public Health Ryan Griffin said it is crucial to have an ordinance or regulation in place.
“Just a prime example is about a month ago, I got a complaint about a rental and it was an unpermitted bathroom/kitchen combo that they were renting out,” he said.
John Losito, a short-term rental host in the city, said short-term rentals are still a “gray area” and state officials are still trying to figure it out.
Losito also said the noise regulation in the amendment is “a discrimination,” especially since Easthampton does not have a general noise ordinance.
“I personally monitor my property, and I go outside and say ‘I have neighbors, you can’t be loud out here,'” he said. “Just the vague nature of the ordinance, giving the inspectors discretion, defeats the reason why we have codes.”
“I think that this becomes an equity issue,” Denham said. “Because the reality is, that having spoken to some of the hosts, that if this gets passed as is, they’re out (of their property).”
She noted that one of the hosts she spoke with described making less than $5,000 last year on their rental as a means to help subsidize their mortgage. Denham said in Easthampton, people are not making enough off their rentals — which are generally not used as an investment — to pay for the alarm system. Passing this amendment would be “reproducing wealth for people who already have wealth in our community.”
“As we already know and are fully aware, the cost of living, housing in Eastampton is expensive and rising, and what we are doing by codifying this, is we are taking away from them an option that allowed them to be able to stay in their home. I think that’s unacceptable,” she said.
The amendment is slated to be revisited at the council’s Feb. 18 meeting.