Thursday, February 11, 2016

County Rent Conrol Ordinance

The North Coast Journal looks this week at proposals to regulate rentals of homes in the county. Those rentals being homes people live in but rent out temporarily to folks from out of the area that might be here on vacation, or some other activity. I've read of concerns over this in the Bay Area, too.

My first reaction is dismay that a bunch of people seem upset they found an area that isn't regulated. So what? Maybe we need a lot less of regulation? Might making the county more friendly toward visitors be a good thing? It seems they're saying we get some people that want to spend some time here and we want to put the screws to them.

Second, it seems rather odd we're concerned about what are likely people with money (after all, they're well off enough to pay the rent) moving in temporarily when many of the same people are likely suggesting we put the homeless in rentals for a much longer period of time. That might seem like apples vs. oranges but it doesn't quite make sense to me The homeless thing seems more likely to cause problems.

And what's next? Will we come up with an ordinance telling us what kind of guests are allowed to visit us at our homes.. A slippery slope? Perhaps.


At 8:48 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's an easy position to take living in Eureka. Try living in Trinidad where rental homes have destroyed a community.

At 8:59 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Problems? Certainly! "Destroyed a community" is a bit much I'd say. We do need to stand together to keep criminals and polluters out of our beautiful town however.

At 11:52 AM, Blogger Henchman Of Justice said...

Rent control is no more than a bed tax. The effe t is 2 - fold:

#1 to help renters, not rental owners
#2 to act as a mechanism to lower rent profits so owner sells home at a lower price to a permanent residence user, alleviating the rent price gouging concerns that destroy families.

Is it a bit too much to control private assets, sure; yet, when the private asset is actively doing business as a lessor/lessee for profit, then that rental owner decided in favor of the business and professional codes that allow taxation of vacation rentals as a business enterprise and codified/classified industry. Vacation rentals are not a permanent primary residence. Profiteers must pay their fair share for their unmonitored and converted private but public house business.

If ya don't want to pay taxes, don't generate profit through business transactions.

Just because a home is empty is not a qualifier as a vacation rental, so it does seem problems will occur if the government proceeds with another taxation.


At 12:27 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm with you, Fred. The complaints listed are already dealt with in ordinances & laws. If laws stopped crime, there would t be any crime at all under today's dictatorship. Creating more redundancy is insane. If they are threatened or harassed by vacationers, they need to report the offending parties to the authorities & have the authorities deal with it. No loitering, no loud after 10pm or before 10 am, no dbl parking, .. whatever the crime, it's already on the books.


Post a Comment

<< Home