Trustees seek how best to regulate increasingly popular overnight business model
By Jason Emerson
As the Cazenovia Village Board considers how best to regulate short-term home rentals — often referred to generically by the name of the online app “Airbnb” — within the community, about 50 people filled the village board room during a public hearing this week to voice their opinions.
Everyone who spoke was in favor of allowing this particular business use in residential neighborhoods in the village, and when one audience member called for a show of hands for supporters of the business, at least 80 percent of attendees complied.
Mayor Kurt Wheeler said this is not a simple case of majority rules, and the minority’s opinions and concerns must be considered as well — calling this “a relatively complex issue with potential pros and cons on both sides.”
“We [the village board] have no agenda on this issue,” Wheeler said during the May 7 public hearing. “Our job is to listen, reflect and make the best decision we can.”
Short-term rentals are not mentioned in the village code and are viewed by the village board as being outside current zoning laws. The board is considering amending the village code to define the term “transient occupancy” as “a living and/or sleeping accommodation provided for any period of less than 30 days” and to clarify that such uses are prohibited within residential districts, except by duly permitted bed-and-breakfast businesses.
The issue of regulating short-term home rentals in the village of Cazenovia — what the village board is calling “transient occupancy” — began being looked into last December, when the board was apprised of multiple homeowners in the village renting out their homes through online apps such as Airbnb, VRBO (Vacation Rentals By Owner), HomeAway and FlipKey, among others. These online community marketplaces allow people to rent lodging — often their own homes — on short-term bases.
The town of Cazenovia then addressed this issue earlier this year after some town residents complained about a neighbor renting rooms using the Airbnb website. The board affirmed that such short-term rentals are not allowed in the town code, but the board is considering forming a committee to delve deeper into the issue, according to Supervisor Bill Zupan.
In March of this year, Wheeler said he started receiving complaints from village residents over Airbnb uses and users in their neighborhoods and, after discussing the issue at the board’s April 2 meeting, the trustees have received “extensive input” from the public on the pros and cons of allowing short-term rentals in Cazenovia.
Wheeler said at the beginning of the public hearing that it was “absolutely, unequivocally not true” that the village board/village of Cazenovia is considering this law because it is “afraid of strangers,” as some have suggested on social media, or that the board does not care about the success of its local businesses by limiting tourists. He said the village actively welcomes visitors and considers local entrepreneurs a vital part of the village. But, he said, there must be a balance between the interests of local businesses and home renters on the one side and concerned neighbors and general residents on the other side.
Opponents of transient occupancy have complained to the village about high traffic levels, excessive cars parked on residential streets, cars blocking in permanent residents’ cars, inappropriate behavior by renters, barking dogs and a high rate of rental turnover, Wheeler said.
During the public hearing, more than one dozen people spoke in favor of allowing transient occupancy in the village, saying that it attracts visitors — especially young families with multiple kids and limited income who want to stay in a house versus a single hotel room — is bolsters local business, and it improves neighborhoods and property values by homeowners keeping their houses in good condition in order to rent them.
Supporters also said that neighborhood complaints can and should be handled by existing nuisance laws and by walking over to speak to troublesome visitors renting local homes — not by complaining to the village board. Wheeler said problems arise when such rental homes have no owners or caretakers on site to be held responsible for nuisance issues. Visitors leave, new ones arrive, and nuisances could start all over again, he said.
“Airbnbs attract more people like us, families with young children,” said Airbnb supporter and village resident Brittany Pfohl. “It allows the town to grow and be more welcoming.”
Cal Nichols, who owns 65, 67 and 69 Albany St. said he has been renting those spaces out for two years using Airbnb and has had “nothing but good experiences” with his guests. He said guests are reviewed on the Airbnb website, just as lodgings are reviewed, and guests with bad ratings can be refused rentals. He also said that the income he receives from his short-term rentals have helped him pay the $15,000 in local taxes.
“I have no idea how you could not allow this [approval of transient occupancy] to happen,” Nichols said.
In general, many speakers said it would make more sense for the village board to seek to regulate transient occupancies in the village rather than do an outright ban.
Scott Flaherty, director of Madison County Tourism, said that while his office supports short-term rentals, he said it is “truly unfair” and there needs to be “a level playing field” if short-term rentals are to be allowed. He said transient occupancy homeowners need to held to the same standard as traditional bed-and-breakfast owners and hotel owners, such as in getting permits, having mandatory inspections, paying sales and occupancy taxes — which they currently are not held to.
Flaherty also said statewide legislation on short-term home rentals is expected to come out in the next year or two.
No action was taken by the board after the public hearing on the proposed legislation.
The board scheduled a work session to discuss the transient occupancy issue for 7 p.m. Tuesday, May 15 in the village office meeting room, and Wheeler said the issue would be discussed again at the board’s June 4 regular monthly meeting.
“I was very pleased with the public hearing. We had a great turnout and those who spoke were not only objective and on-point but very courteous,” Wheeler said. “The whole goal of public hearings is to learn more and gain perspective before moving ahead with any sort of legislative action. Monday night, in combination with the communication we had during the month, was very helpful in achieving that end. I am confident that the board, with the assistance of the village attorney and others, will be able to craft a solution that will allow for new opportunities for visitors to our community while also preserving neighborhood character and quality of life.”
