To the editor:
It is disappointing that the citizens of Great Barrington are being called upon again to stand up to the corporate interests of Airbnb and those who benefit from skyrocketing real-estate prices. Please join me in defeating this effort to undo all that we achieved at last year’s Town Meeting.
This year’s Warrant includes three Citizen’s Petitions—Articles 39, 40, and 41—all seeking to quash the short-term rental bylaw passed overwhelmingly at the last Town Meeting.
To support year-round residents and seasonal workers who cannot find housing they can afford, we need to rally once again as a community. We cannot become another Nantucket or Aspen with hollowed-out neighborhoods, overpriced rentals, and businesses struggling to house staff.
We spent eight months of 2021/22 crafting a document to address the long-term rentals shortage in Great Barrington. The result of this work was a thoughtfully deliberated bylaw regulating short-term rentals; it passed by a 2-1 margin, reflecting a sizable majority of residents in our community. Some who saw their profit margins affected were not happy with the outcome. While nothing prohibits a bylaw from being amended, this year’s Warrant includes more than a mere amendment: Articles 39-41 have only one purpose: killing the bylaw.
Article 39 would permit tenants to short-term rent their homes. This is a nonsensical approach to addressing the town’s housing crisis. It turns long-term rentals into short-term rentals, erodes neighborhoods, justifies landlords charging their long-term renters higher rents, and may cost taxpayers more as it logically follows that the Town would need to rebuild the registration process requiring extra resources to cross-check not only property deeds but rental agreements. The current bylaw seeks to create stable housing and neighborhoods, not short-term rental businesses.
Article 40 would prevent the Town from engaging with any service to assist in the monitoring activity. Many of us in Great Barrington are aware of the problems now facing Stockbridge and Lenox by not including a monitoring provision in their short-term rental bylaws. Without such a provision, the towns have had difficulty enforcing the bylaw, and residents have continued to complain of evictions to make way for Airbnb mini-hotels. Great Barrington’s current bylaw provides for a third-party service to monitor rentals and track registration. It is crucial and essential to ensure compliance. Article 40 must be defeated.
Article 41 would eliminate the 150-day cap on short-term rental activity and allow investors to purchase unlimited properties to operate as short-term rentals. This is a boon for real estate businesses but not good for residents seeking a foothold on the property ladder or homeowners faced with higher property taxes.
If passed at Great Barrington’s Town Meeting, Articles 39, 40, and 41 would undo a real achievement: passage of a reasonable regulation that created an incentive for long-term housing but still permitted short-term rental activity.
Last year, we agreed that Great Barrington is better off when short-term rentals are regulated. We know we are a stronger community if we support our year-round residents and keep a reign on property speculators. The more people can exploit our town as a commodity, the less it will remain a community.
Please join me in voting NO on Articles 39-41 on May 1 at 6 p.m. at Monument Mountain Regional High School.
Leigh Davis
Great Barrington
The writer is a member of the Great Barrington Selectboard.
Author’s note: The opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Town.
