The City of Ketchum is finally debating regulations for short-term rentals (STRs) and will be discussing the issue with the public on next Thursday, the 18th of November, at 4:00pm. Why should you show up? Because the Mayor and City Council are questioning the need for regulations. This is what they said at the previous meeting: Will limiting STRs really lead to more long-term rentals? How many? Is this really going to move the needle? We're probably too late in the game to have any impact...

Let me illustrate how this sounds to me. Suppose you're in the ER, witnessing a patient with a gunshot wound. You hear the doctor ask, "If we take the bullet out and sew him up, will the patient recover? How do we know for sure? Is it really going to move the needle? How quickly have similar patients recovered? It's probably too late for this guy."

The City is missing the bigger picture. In making the decision to regulate STRs based solely on how many long-term rental conversions we expect, the Council is disregarding the current and future damage STRs inflict on our housing market. We need to stop the bleeding, by limiting STRs.

For those unconvinced that gunshot wounds are a health risk and STRs lead to housing problems, let's review some facts:

STRs increase demand for residential property, reduce the supply of housing available to rent or own, earn 5 times more than long-term rentals per night incentivizing landlords to convert, and allow second home owners to outbid local workers on purchases.

These aren't just theories, the 2017 Ketchum housing study identified all these dynamics and the data has only confirmed them. From 2010 to 2018 the number of rental units in Ketchum decreased by over 40%, while the number of seasonal units increased by 28% (SVED). Since 2013, housing costs for rentals and ownership in Blaine County have risen more than 40% adjusting for inflation (BCHA). In 2017, there were an estimated 471 STRs, today there are somewhere between 630 and 900, in a town with 2,800 residents (AirDNA, City of Ketchum). 

Opponents of regulation, including the Sun Valley Board of Realtors, have begun making their case against limitations. They are already talking to the Mayor, are you? Here are some of their arguments: 

Opponents say: Idaho law prevents municipalities from regulating STRs.

This is simply not true. Idaho law states: "A county or city may implement such reasonable regulations as it deems necessary to safeguard the public health, safety and general welfare in order to protect the integrity of residential neighborhoods in which short-term rentals or vacation rentals operate." Sandpoint Idaho has limited the number of non-owner occupied STRs in residential zones to 35. The law in Sandpoint has been in place since 2018 and they have not been challenged. Mayor Bradshaw, who likes to dismiss capping the number of STRs as illegal, needs to read the Idaho law again, take a hard look at Sandpoint, and serve the people who actually live here.

Opponents say: If you limit STRs, many condos will sit empty. The owners want to stay there for a few months a year, so these couldn't be converted to long-term rentals. 

How many second-home owners can only afford their condo thanks to revenue from short-term renting it? When a new condo comes on the market, how much more can a second-home buyer afford, knowing he can VRBO it, vs a local worker? 

If you think local housing should be for local workers, show up next Thursday, November 18th.