Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is happening all over the country. In southern California where I live now, the cities of Santa Barbara and Carpinteria are enacting ordinances to regulate short term / vacation rentals. Essentially they are only going to allow them in areas zoned for hotels/motels such as waterfronts and on streets adjacent to the downtown areas. The cities haven't had the budgets or staff to control it so they would only enforce it when a neighbor complained about parking and noise. As far as having AirBNB or VRBO be the gatekeeper, it's not realistic since there are so many factors such as whether or not the rental is attached or detached; is the owner onsite or not; is it short term or long term.
Honestly it would take a city official 5 minutes in front of the computer to gather information on locations and then they can send letters in the mail.
The plan will still go to the Council, but it would need 6 votes to pass instead of 5 due to the planning commission vote apparently.
Hopefully the Council does the right thing and passes!
From what I know of the bill, I’m glad it hasn’t passed. On the surface, it’s a bit ridiculous when looking at the current situation. The current situation is that there exists specific buildings and area’s where vacations are allowed and legal today. And there are places it is illegal today. But the problem today is that there is really NO enforcement of the current regulations and laws.
So the new bill expands the number of legal vacation rentals from 800 to 4,000 and then they say the will enforce and penalize the illegal ones. What’s the point. They can’t enforce the current laws and zoning. So why would anyone expect they will enforce the new bill. All it will do is legalize a bunch more vacation rentals and really not impact or shut down the illegal ones.
If they want support for the bill, I suggest they first prove they can seriously and aggressively enforce the current laws and shut down existing illegal vacation rentals. If they can’t do that, then it is a joke to expand legal rentals while claiming they will be able to shut down illegal rentals. Shut down the current illegal rentals first and build trust that you can follow through with enforcement before expanding the current problem.
That’s my perspective, for what it’s worth. Hopefully the council is seeing it the same way. It seems to not be the right bill to me.
From what I know of the bill, I’m glad it hasn’t passed. On the surface, it’s a bit ridiculous when looking at the current situation. The current situation is that there exists specific buildings and area’s where vacations are allowed and legal today. And there are places it is illegal today. But the problem today is that there is really NO enforcement of the current regulations and laws.
So the new bill expands the number of legal vacation rentals from 800 to 4,000 and then they say the will enforce and penalize the illegal ones. What’s the point. They can’t enforce the current laws and zoning. So why would anyone expect they will enforce the new bill. All it will do is legalize a bunch more vacation rentals and really not impact or shut down the illegal ones.
If they want support for the bill, I suggest they first prove they can seriously and aggressively enforce the current laws and shut down existing illegal vacation rentals. If they can’t do that, then it is a joke to expand legal rentals while claiming they will be able to shut down illegal rentals. Shut down the current illegal rentals first and build trust that you can follow through with enforcement before expanding the current problem.
That’s my perspective, for what it’s worth. Hopefully the council is seeing it the same way. It seems to not be the right bill to me.
An increase in tax revenues, I'd imagine. Expanding the legal number of vacation rentals will make it easier to track income associated with vacation rentals. That's income that I'd assume is largely going un-taxed at the moment.
Put differently, the current law does not stop people from renting out their homes as short term rentals (I think everyone can agree with that). But owners who do so under the current law know they take a risk in doing so and, as a result, are less likely to claim that income on their taxes (I wouldn't if I was in their shoes). Indeed, I'm not going to claim as income what the law says I am not allowed to earn to begin with. But this is a risk as there can be serious consequences for not claiming that income on your taxes. By bringing things above ground, however, I'd bargain that you'd have many more willing to legitimize their business.
Last edited by prospectheightsresident; 09-24-2018 at 11:09 PM..
Indeed, I'm not going to claim as income what the law says I am not allowed to earn to begin with. But this is a risk as there can be serious consequences for not claiming that income on your taxes.
Just ask Al Capone - ultimately tax evasion is what brought him down.
Anyway, we don't need more vacation rentals - enforce the existing laws and raise the silly height limits in designated areas for higher hotels - our skyline over the past 20 year now looks ridiculous with all the building the same height.
Is it still profitable to have an Airbnb Kona condo? My husband and I are thinking of purchasing a condo under $225,000 (hopefully) and using it when we have a few days off work and then for renting out. What are the pros and cons of condos now?
An acquaintance of mine on Oahu has recently had his very small business audited for sales tax (GET) payments which really only amount to peanuts. The auditor flat-out told him that they were under pressure to increase collections due to the rail project being so far underwater. He probably doesn't owe anything because he filed all his taxes in good faith, but it will cost him more in accountant fees to come to that conclusion than what he can possibly negotiate a settlement for. This is a shake down, and I'm not surprised they are going after anybody possible.
Meanwhile, the other islands are now paying for the Oahu rail project and federal investigators have become involved:
Just another nanny state rule for bigger government...seriously. Yea; they have to nickel and dime us in order to pay for the boondoggle rail.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
