City of Laconia home rentals
 

Looks like they are cracking down on rental homes in Laconia. Letters going out to homeowners that rent by the week or night saying to stop or you will be fined $275/day. In order to keep renting you have to go to the city and apply for a zoning change. They state that renting is in violation of the city’s zoning ordinance and site plan regulations. Watch out everyone doing weekly rentals and Air B and B...


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Velcome comrades... we will stop these people! This is just another disgusting overreach of threat then force by government.

People have to rent out their property in Laconia just to help pay their tax bills. Just another reason I would never buy property there. :rolleye1:

Craigslist has 25 rentals listed in Laconia...
 

Quite a few are for Bike Week. Quite a few are weekly vacation rentals on The Lake. Wonder what Laconia is going to do about people who want to vacation there?

The zoning issue is half the battle for rental home owners.

As soon as you register with the City and acknowledge that you rent your property you will be monitored to be sure that you pay the 9% rooms and meals tax. Approved seasonal operators must file reports for each month of their approved season, even if no tax is due.

What's next? An increase in your assessed value because you are able to rent your property and generate income from it. That will make your property more valuable.

And so it begins...................

The 9% tax letters went out from the state earlier this year. They went on all the rental web sights and then sent letters to all in NH that has a room or house for rent. Even if you had it listed and didn’t rent it you got a lovely certified letter from the state...


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Planning Department has started enforcement actions
 

From The Laconia Daily Sun:

The city Planning Department has started enforcement actions

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...bf83024ba.html

Another reason that makes Laconia a laughing stock of the area

NH has a good plan with regard to Interest and Dividends Income Tax. If you only make so much, you don't owe the tax, AND the form says please don't file if you don't owe. We don't wan the extra paperwork. If I rent my camp for only a coupe of weeks, and the income to the state is minimal,. considering cost of administration, why bother?

You are confusing income tax with rooms and meals tax. A 9% tax is assessed upon patrons of hotels (or any facility with sleeping accommodations), and restaurants, on rooms and meals costing $.36 or more. You will owe (unless you rent your camp for less than 36 cents) from the first dollar. The tax is due on the 15th day of the month following the taxable period.

The tax is paid by the consumer and collected by operators of hotels, restaurants, or other businesses providing taxable meals, room rentals, and motor vehicle rentals.

Approved seasonal operators must file reports for each month of their approved season, even if no tax is due.

My place is in Meredith...
 

There are several property owners near me that rent their places out during the summer to pay the property tax.

So if Meredith adopts this and a couple of neighbors complain, my neighbors will be forced to sell and if more towns adopt this, what happens to the summer tourist industry? What happens to the restaurants and other tourist supported businesses? Bayside Rentals (specializing in renting single family homes short term)? If this is carried to an extreme would only hotels and motels be "allowed" to rent to tourists and vacationers? Or is that the design?

In my little mind the problem isn't short term renters, it's noise, which can be generated by long-term renters as well. Maybe even a home owner themselves being a bad neighbor!!! What about that barking dog? Biker with a loud Harley? Enforcement against noise makes more sense to me than taking income away from someone because there is a possibility the short-term renter could be noisy (chances are they'll be gone in a week. A noisy home owner/resident is permanent. Not gone in a week).

Some day I'll write a book..."The Unintended Consequences".

Ehhh, probably not!

its actually a state tax and is enforced by the state and the town (started a hard push on it just about over two years ago when the letters 1st started to come out to those pubilically announcing they are renting online), and Laconia is helping the enforcement and taking it a step further by making the people in residential areas apply for a variance to operate a "Rental business" in a residential area because zoning laws technically do not allow it, and they could deny it. They don't have any other major problems to deal with in the town.

Those in other zones like Commercial or Commercial Resort (example would be the old motels and cottage rental places that are now condos and in this zone) that rent their residential properties out do not need to apply for the variance for Laconia but they still need to file with the state and collect the tax according to the law.

I/m not confusing anything. The point is, there should be a set level where you don't pay any tax and you are not required to file anything. Quoting the law is the opposite approach. The law should be changed, not enforced to the point of being a money loser for small occasional rentals and state administrators.. The comparison to the I & D tax was only to the reduced paperwork (NO FILING) for many citizens.

This issue would have been everyone’s little secret if the owners of the properties in question addressed their neighbors concerns. If I understand the law correctly, each summer home that rents, know of three on my street must apply for a variance to continue to rent. Who will be enforcing this bylaw?


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

First: I agree that this response to an isolated problem is overkill. Noise complaints and a police response would have been sufficient.

But, as to the question of who will enforce it? A few years ago I made repeated complaints to the Laconia Planning Department about repeated flagrant violations of the city's zoning laws. I submitted pictures that documented the violations. As a result of the complaints, the former Planning Director had letters sent to the violator with instructions to stop the violations. The violations continued.

I met with the former Planning Director demanding fines and court action. She informed me that they could not take any court action because they had not taken court action in the past with previous unrelated violators. Her contention was that they could be sued by the current violator because they had ignored previous violators. Huh? Does that mean you can never enforce the zoning regulations because you have never enforced the zoning regulations?

Subsequently, the City Manager told her to not have any further discussions with me and stop taking my calls and ignore my emails.

So, I guess that means you can do whatever you want because Laconia refuses to enforce it's zoning regulations

I'll bet the City of Laconia finds...
 

A way to collect the $275/day fine, however.

What an incredible story you've shared here.

People in Laconia who use the internet to rent their properties out should not be heard to complain about having to pay the same tax that motel/resort owners pay.

Fair is fair.

I would say the people renting have no issue (OK maybe some) paying the state and town tax fees like a Hotel/Motel. In fact VRBO does have a line item you can add your tax to and the renter will be billed as a added expense. The major issue I see here is that the town will only "go after" people that have complaints against them. So if I don't like the neighbor down the street because ...and he rents his house out i just make a phone call to the town and wham he is screwed.. I just don't think that is right it should a a law or not a law.

sort-of sounds like the Gustapo::(

The city becomes aware of the illegal renting via the complaint.

That requires fewer hours of investigative time.

It's the low hanging fruit.

With enough media attention and a few first hand "I got fined" testimonials, I would expect greater compliance would follow.

If the ordinance is inappropriate citizens can bring pressure to bear on their elected representatives.

Failing that, one could run for office.

Why should it be ...
 

"Illegal renting"...

The illegal activity should be the noise, not the renting. I love it when the proposed solution for those in opposition to Govt. policy is that the citizens can vote them out...or..."One could run for office" themselves!

Crap! One issue politics.

I can't wait for my fellow voters to become educated, and I don't have the time to hold office myself...Besides I live in California and, I suppose, should not have an opinion on this local subject.

It should be an even playing field. If patrons staying at a motel/hotel short term must pay the 9% occupancy tax then so should patrons of short term rentals of all kinds no matter if it is through a broker, website of advertisement. People renting their vacation homes should not have an upper hand over a business that has invested in their property and community as an on going concern.

I agree...
 

I go through Bayside Rentals for any rental activity and they handle all of this for me. Pay the tax. Keep the noise level low.

If I pay my tax, but the neighbors complain about noise, should I be disallowed from renting?

An ongoing behavioral problem at a rental property, after the police have dealt with the occupants, and got no satisfaction, should become the landlord's problem. The neighbors then file a negligent landlord complaint against the landlord. Problem in San Francisco is that rent control limits what a landlord can do about behavioral problems. And this is a City with some real behavioral problems.

No you should not. If the tenants are violating any local ordinance then they should be the ones that are fined.

So I rent my place for 15 cents per week and charge a $1500 non refundable damage and cleaning deposit I'm good?

Can't get around the powerful tax addicts...
 

They'd make you prove that the cost of your repairs and cleaning were at least $1,500/week. They'd probably hit you up for the tax on the $0.15 also.

Yup...Laconia has lots of addictions!

Well what does one do if one's elected representatives are not upholding or striking down ordinances that one finds of interest?

Is there a lawsuit to be had?

Shall one storm the castle with pitch forks?

Everyone can have an opinion.

Not everyone has standing.

Well...
 

I don't know...

Wondering if Lowes sells pitch forks...

They do
 

They do, and after 30 days you can return it for a refund of your money. And don't forget to stop by Wal-Mart to get one of their $4.97 noodles on sale, which can be cut up and used as protection for the sharp prongs on the pitchfork. Safety first... Yabadabado !:D

Dave

I don't live in Laconia but have seen problems with rentals in other areas. I have a slightly different opinion. The state has to raise money for a variety of programs. When people rent a vacation home, they are no different than a B & B as far as I'm concerned. If people don't pay the room tax, it means that other taxpayers have to pay that much more. Problems with renters has nothing to do with people paying the tax. Vacation homes are nothing different than different than a business when they rent it out.

Absolutely agree. Also more often than not the tenants are not from New Hampshire so residents of the state are really not paying the tax non resident visitors are.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

To separate the issues...

In some areas renting is not legal.

Some people rent their property and don't collect tax.

Some renters misbehave.


The city is trying to resolve these issues.



In other news...

Alaska had an earthquake making some roads impassable with winter a few weeks away. :eek:

There seems to be a little confusion by some.

The city's new rule has nothing to do with the state meals and rental tax. This is strictly a state issue. You are expected to display your license # in all ads and collect the 9% and pay it to the state. The city does not enforce or get involved in this. The state does actively look at rental website and check and see if people do have a license.

The cities New rule is about zoning, and if short term rentals are a permitted use in the zone. Also the article does Not state a very important point. Short term rentals are allowed in the CR and SFR zones. So really this new rule is just to prevent short term rentals in the downtown area. It does not apply to most of the shore front and Weirs, since they are CR and SFR. So most vacation rentals are not effected.

If I were the city I would ask that the article point this out. I see this creating a lot of phone calls come spring from feuding neighborhoods who think they can report their neighbors.

And yet your tax rate keeps going DOWN

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...211ac6db9.html

Just read an article about Manchester, 72% of property tax payers did NOT have a child in the school system! That's frightening and I wonder what those percentages are in other cities and towns?

The Manchester number of taxpayers (72%) who did not have a child in the school system is an interesting fact.

I don't know if anyone has ever taken the time to figure it out but it would be interesting to know the percentage of tax revenue in the lake front towns that comes from non voting (non-resident) taxpayers. The Manchester statistic is the number of taxpayers, the dollar numbers would tell a different story.

The so called rich towns which include the towns around the lake better watch the legislature. They are again talking about making us pay even more in taxes to help out the "poorer" towns. If they come up with anything like they did last winter our taxes will increase a lot!

Maybe the 9% room tax on short term rentals would help. At least it mostly comes from tourists and not residents and seasonal residents.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

I don't live in Laconia, but what about the people that have to live next to these rentals? It's a terrible feeling living next to strangers every weekend. People are more concerned with paying taxes than they are for their neighbors safety and piece of mind. Would you want to live next to one of these rentals or is it a "not in my backyard" mentality. It's time for regulations on short-term rentals regardless of the zoning.

I am in Laconia and have been in two different neighborhoods with rentals next door. I have never really had a major issue, asked one to tone it down a little once. Remember these are homes mostly near or on the lake and many owners are non residents like myself. Besides many of the gated communities around the lake already allow and have short term rentals

We previously owned a condo and I personally thought the weekly renters were much better behaved than the longer term winter renters. We never had an issue with the weekly summer renters but had some issues with noise and odor with winter renters. Hopefully the city can find ways to minimize disruptions from both types of renters instead of just focusing on those that may be bringing in tourism.

Living next to strangers
 

Guess you never lived in a City?

I know less than 50% of my neighbors. Lots of them are renters. Some of them I know "of" from afar and don't want to get to know them any closer. No matter where you live, you can have problem neighbors...Some could be owners and not renters. A bad weekly renter will be gone in a week. A bad home owner may be there forever.

Why are renters here getting this bad rap? They're all people and not all people behave the same. Is it the 9%?...Pay it.

Two years ago I had a neighbor, on the Lake, rent their place to some folks from Russia. They were GREAT! Loved their company better than the permanent owners. I have another permanent neighbor I would gladly trade for an unknow weekly.

Most weekly renters are respectful, most not all, but many of the longer winter renters are not as nearly good.

Thank you!
 

I was going to make the same point but reading through the thread, I see you beat me to it :) Really good clarification - thanks again!

That's only half the story....
 

The tax rates may have gone down but the valuations on lakefront homes (only on lake front homes) in Laconia went up close to 20% last year. Hard for me to celebrate a reduced tax rate under those circumstances.

I found it interesting to listen to the radio news story saying that the Laconia tax rate went down.

What matters is the tax bill.

Mine went up.

tax
 

Most people did, unless you were a business in the region, example valuation of the naswa went down almost 15%, as the result of a 30% reduction in the value of the land, imagine that they figure the land that the naswa sits on is equal in value to that of a 1/4 acre single family lot on paugus bay

Its raising the pants or lowering the shirt. No matter what they achieve their goal and end up will increasing our property tax.

Board deals blow to Airbnb-type rentals
 

Board denies requests for variances.

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...fef0cb552.html

I see appeals and lawsuits coming for the City! A quick search this morning and there are over 70 rentals online in Laconia from one night, weekly and monthly. Another search there are many other towns and city's in the US with the same concerns and many have lost and the homeowners were allowed to due as they were with rentals. There has to be a happy medium so the homeowners and towns can agree. Living in the Lakes Region were rentals are popular and people spend anywhere from $2500-$25,000 per week and I as a homeowner would like to know if the money was needed I could rent our homes.

Another reason why I left Long Bay. I am very familiar with 7 Rose Point as I was just around the corner. Those condos, along with the condo next door to my single family home have seen short term rentals for many years and from first hand ID I can tell you there were no issue I have seen.

This is again the sub HOA's within Long Bay and the city council overreaching their boundaries that continue to hamstring homeowners. Long Bay, Southdown and all the sub HOA's rule and regulation you to death. Yes HOA's need rules but they always take it a set too far which is again why I left. I am now in a different HOA that is much more reasonable with its rules.

This regulation is a huge mistake for the city and a knee jerk reaction to isolated incidents.

The Lakes Region has a long history of rentals and it is a great way to introduce new visitors to the area. They bring cash, support local businesses, and enjoy all that the area has to offer. Many will return year after year and some will end up buying property either as a vacation home or even a full time home. It makes no sense to place unnecessary restrictions on property owners. Some property owners are only able to hang on to their homes because of the financial help that renting provides.

The homeowners associations can deal with their communities and when that does not apply anyone can make a noise or disturbance complaint to the police.

The amount of problems reported does not seem to have risen to the level that a new regulation was needed in the "Live Free or Die" state. And, the house that was at the root of the problem has been sold to someone who does not intend to rent it.

I hope that there is a reconsideration of this and the city reverses this action.

I don't have property in Laconia but this sets a bad precedent for other communities to follow.

Laconia NEVER fails to disappoint in so many ways. Absolute mismanagement of the city on every level.

I've lived full time in Long Bay for 10 years and prior to that in South Down part time for 7 years. I am against renting in Long Bay, especially on a weekly basis. My feeling is that if you can't afford a second home without renting on a weekly basis, you shouldn't own. Historically, renting was allowed to enable those who can't afford a second home to afford one. However, now that South Down and Long Bay are nearly fully developed, that need does not exist. There seems to be an ample amount of people who can afford second homes. Weekly rentals should not be allowed in a residential environment.

My wife and I use the Long Bay beach often, and we can definitely tell who are renters. 75% are decent and nice, and the remaining 25% are somewhat obnoxious. I would prefer not having to put up with the 25% at all.

My experience with the Long Bay and South Down rules and regulations have been minimal. I don't think they over manage, but we have a tendency to stay in our lane.

I completely disagree on many levels. First of all I was a board member on a sub HOA in Long Beach for 10 years and without a doubt they overregulate you on many issues from small building issues to paint colors to nonsense about golf carts etc. etc. as far as renting goes, It’s my house and as long as my tenants abide by the rules of the HOA’s then there’s no reason why I shouldn’t be able to have short term tenant. I don’t believe the boards have a right to tell me I can and cannot rent again as long as the tenants stay within the regulations and rules if they violate the rules fine there should be some type of penalty for the owner which I have no problem with


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

If I live in a residential neighborhood, I would not want weekly rentals. That is why such rentals are zoned out of residential neighborhoods. Long Bay is a residential neighborhood. If you lived on Holman Street in Laconia, zoning laws would prohibit you from renting weekly. Long Bay should be no different. Obviously, there is no issue when tenants comply with the rules. Issues arise when tenants don't comply. Threats and fines are inadequate recourse for when issues arise, and unfortunately, the occur far too often.

Yes but this was allowed until recently. As someone whose neighbor rented weekly in LB and being on a board in LB there were little to no complaints at all. In fact most of the complaints reported were in regards to owners violating rules, not tenants

Just because it was allowed doesn't necessarily mean it was the right thing to do. As the owner of a small business, the last thing I want to hear my employees say is that "we always did it that way." In this case, it was probably a bad idea to allow weekly rentals, but was tolerated to encourage people to purchase properties. That time has passed. I'm just one vote, but I'd vote against it.

I owned a small business also for 30 years. Your missing my point, the law should have never been changed, you are restricting my rights as a landowner. There were just are not enough complaints to justify the change, this came over one specific incident and the rest are now paying for it. Laconia is a vacation destination and now you are limiting visitors who rent homes on a weekly basis so the home will just sit empty when there could be renters that patron the businesses around the lake.

I don't think I am. While I agree with you emotionally on some level, the "right" you assert is based on less than solid ground. Had the planning department and city council enforced the zoning laws since the beginning of SD/LB, the "right" you reference would not exist. There is no right. Owners in a residential neighborhood do not expect nor want weekly rentals. There should be no difference for owners in Long Bay.

I’m not saying there should be. I think all Laconia should be allowed to short term rent and there were allowed to until recently. I think your statement that owners “do not expect nor want weekly rentals” is quite broad and you nor I have any way of knowing if it’s accurate.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

So I guess my question is does the zoning board have the right to pick and choose who they allow to short term rent and who they say no to. I just watched the three hour town meeting (it is on you tube if you search it) and there is no way that I can see that renting your home by the week through VRBO or the night with Air B2B is that you can prove a hardship.With that said the board said no to all three that at that nights meeting and most likely will continue to say no to everyone that comes in for a variance.

So much for “Live Free or Die”


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

So, "how can a residential property suddenly turn into a commercial property in a residential area? I would think that local homeowners have a right to have their neighborhood remain a private residential neighborhood."


* copied from 1/02/19 www.ConwayDailySun.com, letters to the editor from Lorene Miklos

They need to change that logo. It no longer rings true.:(

Unfortunately you are correct

IMHO,

While I don't think government should really have to get involved...

If you live in an area that is zoned Residential, then you probably shouldn't be doing short term rentals. Your neighbors didn't sign up for a small motel next door.

If you live in the Commercial Resort zoned areas of the city like the Weirs, you should be allowed to do short term rentals as long as your HOA allows it.

For the record, I live in the Weirs and my HOA does not allow short term rentals.

Woodsy

It's been a staple of resort areas forever but now that it can be tracked it's no longer allowed? That doesn't really make sense. I don't rent my house out but I wouldn't want to be told I couldn't. My neighbor across the street from me rented her A frame out all summer, weekly rentals, and I had no issues with the tenants but if I did she would hear about it.

If you live in a zoned residential area, you cannot rent your house on a short term basis without a variance or by changing the zoning. In the past, the City chose not to enforce the zoning laws. With the advent of internet short term rental sites, the issue is now at the City level, and now they are enforcing the zoning laws. I agree with Woodsy. I would not expect while living in a zoned residential neighborhood to have weekly rentals next to my home.

The enforcement of the zoning laws has nothing to do with the evaporation of the Live Free or Die mentality of our great State. Our State's moto has been undergoing a slow death (no pun intended) over the past decade or so. Growth of government and the insatiable desire for the almighty tax dollar have done more to change our mindset away from the Live Free or Die mentality.

Biggd....

The resort areas in Laconia are zoned as such. Most of the Weirs is zoned Commercial Resort. Weekly rentals should absolutely be allowed in this zone. As long as the HOA rules allow for it.

Residential zoned property is a different animal entirely. What happens when somebody comes out with an app and the guy next door decides to switch from weekly rental to hourly?

People who own property in a residentially zoned neighborhood have a reasonable expectation that the guy next door cannot turn his property into a no tell motel.

Never mind the 9% room tax the state isn't getting.

Here is a link to the zoning map... https://www.laconianh.gov/DocumentCe...ing-Map?bidId=

Woodsy

My house is in Meredith. Sorry to say but, if I owned property in Laconia it would be up for sale.

https://www.nhbr.com/September-14-20...t-this-summer/ …. "Airbnb NH bookings soared over 50 percent this summer"



What the legislature could do is totally legalize both recreational marijuana and short term residential rentals in the same bill, and pass it unanimously!


Having done that, the Live Free or Die would be a real deal type of a license plate line. Otherwise, the line should be changed back to the 1963 license plate line of "Photoscenic".

Yes, is so very photoscenic here in NH except for the house next door with the 11 dope smok'n, weekend renters ….. this is the place! …. live free or die!

I understand what you're saying and I can understand what's happening. Things change fast on the information highway. I just think there could be a better way of policing these issues. With the amount of money people pay in taxes in Laconia it's perfectly understandable if they rent their place out some weeks to help pay the tax burden.

I know that there are hundreds of single family homes around the lake that are sometimes rented out on a weekly basis. I have one next to my residence that I have rented out for 16 years. There are a few house rental agencies around the lake as well, some of whom represent over 100 rental homes. The agencies do collect the appropriate taxes on the rentals.

Many homeowners rent out of necessity to help them afford the house. What may have been affordable to their ancestors might have become more than they can afford. I would rather see them rent out their house than be forced off the lake. Also, if you start to limit the number of weekly rentals the price will rise because of supply and demand..

I am all for the rental process as it also enables families to come to the area, spend money, and enjoy all that it has to offer. That helps all of our businesses survive. Some families that have vacationed in the area for years go back to the same rental house every year. Many end up buying property.

I would rather see the towns enact a system that will enable some warning and an escalating fine system for violations of noise or other town regulations. The ultimate penalty could be an injunction preventing rentals on a specific property for a set amount of time.

Placing restrictions on properties that have no complaint history is unnecessary.

TiltonBB...

Normally we are on the same page... but I think this short term rental issue in residentially zoned neighborhood is a very slippery slope. I have no problem with the neighbors renting out their property once or twice a year to help offset costs....

But most of the people who list on AIRBNB & VRBO are renting their property out as business venture. This changes everything... now instead of people living in a residential neighborhood, they find themselves living next to what amounts to a motel...

There are ZERO protections in place for the neighbors. There is no punishment available for unruly/loud behavior, (yes the police can stop the actual offenders, but there is no punishment to the owners) There is NOTHING from stopping someone from renting their house out "by the hour". There are no regulations regarding taxation and collection... etc etc.

Maybe once the laws are changed to protect the neighborhood, then I will reconsider. But for now, short term rentals should be allowed only in the Commercial Resort District.

Woodsy

1913-2017: unlimited local prop tax deduction off your federal taxes ..... effective for tax year 2018: $10,000 maximum limit on same ........

So's, only seems fair for the $10,000+ prop tax payer, now under attack from the fed, to have the option for renting it out maybe two or three of those rainy June-July weeks for something like $3000/week and let someone else go play in that cool, clammy June-July lite misty rain that's been present for the last ten years what with the global warming.

It seems to me ...... that there otta be a law against this new tax law!

Unfortunately Meredith and other lake towns are dealing with the same thing and will all be making changes to protect the residences in residential zoning areas.


Sent from my iPad using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

That tax change on real estate tax deduction will have zero effect on rich people buying or building multi million dollar homes in the lakes region. Most of those McMansions are empty 90% of the time, not rented for extra income to pay taxes.

I agree tax law will have ZERO effect on the McMansions. Many of these larger homes are not individually owned but you in LLC’s or another corporate structure for many reasons and this is an avenue to still receive the full property tax deductions plus deduct other expenses.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

One other thing to consider: If the property taxes are say $20,000 per year and the property use is 50% rental, half of the tax bill is deductible as a business expense and does not affect your $10,000 limit. If the house is 100% a rental property then the entire tax bill is a business expense and does not come into play with the $10,000 limit.

I agree but there has to be a better way that can appease everyone. Maybe limit the amount of time it can be rented to one week a month and no renting by the just a day or a weekend.
People renting their second homes out in resort areas has been going on forever but, now with internet rental being popular, a new way of policing this needs to be implemented. I don't agree with just making it illegal.

I don't think anyone has ever had a problem if the neighbors rented their house out once or twice a year for week to cover taxes. Like you said that has been going on forever. However, with the advent of websites like Airbnb & VRBO, these rentals have essentially become an unregulated and untaxed small business. That is a problem.

I am not sure how the issue can be resolved, unless you restrict it to areas zoned a certain way.

Woodsy

There are many waterfront homes that are used full time as rentals. My Gilford house is one of those. It is a weekly rental in the summer and one tenant from September until Memorial Day. The two houses immediately adjacent to the other side of the property (I spend summers in) have also been used 100% as rentals for the past 6 summers. I have no complaints about the people who have rented them and have not been impacted at all. Many of these rental homes were purchased by their owners for precisely that purpose.

If renting is significantly impacted by changes or enforcement of the laws I believe many homes will go on the market, and that will drive the sale prices down. That ranges from the families who rent to help offset expenses and use the property themselves, to properties that are rentals 100% of the time. When fewer house on the lake are available for rent, look for the weekly rental prices to skyrocket.

I still feel that the ideal solution is enforcement of noise regulations and regulations that specifically impact the problem property. As of this time, anyone who has purchased a home that is not in an association knew that there was a possibility that their neighbors could rent their home out. If the home is in an association the documents available before the purchase would inform the purchaser of the rental policy and may impact their decision to purchase.

We don't need to keep adding laws in the "Live Free or Die" state. In the view of many, continuously adding laws and regulations has already negatively impacted boating on the lake.

Rentals
 

Can someone confirm that Laconia is not creating a new law, just enforcement of existing regulations?

The Laconia Daily Sun has an Oct 11, 2018 article: 'Short-term rentals come under new enforcement plan' that is a good read. It says the city already has the authority to restrict rentals according to permitted uses in various zones, and can fine the landlords who do not respond $275/day.

LaDaSun-Nov 28, 2018: 'Four enforcement actions launched under Airbnb policy'

LaDaSun-Dec 18, 2018: 'Board deals blow to Airbnb-type rentals'
…………

Conway Daily Sun-Jan 26, 2018: 'Unfairbnb? Short-term rentals mired in controversy'

An easy solution, in my opinion, is to make a distinction between a short term rental to offset costs and a business venture. Pick a reasonable number, say 30 days/year that allows property owners to rent out their homes for short term rentals. If a property owner exceeds that number of days, it would be considered a business and face different, stiffer regulations.

Regardless of the number of days the property is rented, collect the state and local rental tax. If you are renting through Airbnb or VRBO, this is very easy to do.

Like any other regulation there are ways people can work around or ignore the above suggestion and no law or regulation is perfect. This is a model that has worked well in other communities.

The question remains... how does the city/town know what days it was rented, and for how much? So the neighbors have to be eyes/ears of the city to make sure its not rented more than 30 days?

Not for nothing.. the burden should be on the property owner...

Woodsy

That's the way it is in Florida. I have a home their which I rent short term and it is the obligation of the owner to report file and pay (which the owner collects from the tenant) the rental tax.

It is the owners responsibility to follow the law, collect and send in the tax, etc. It works in other communities - but you're right that if there are flagrant violators, someone needs to let the enforcement body know.

To reinterate previous post
 

This has nothing to do with the state Meals and Rental tax.

The cities New rule is about zoning, and if short term rentals are a permitted use in the zone. Also the article does Not state a very important point. Short term rentals are allowed in the CR and SFR zones. So really this new rule is just to prevent short term rentals in the downtown area. It does not apply to most of the shore front and Weirs, since they are CR and SFR. So most vacation rentals are not effected.

I will also include a link to the tax map so people can see what is effected.

https://www.laconianh.gov/DocumentCe...ing-Map?bidId=https://www.laconianh.gov/DocumentCe...ing-Map?bidId=

If I was a person who rented in an area that is currently now prohibited. I would be asking where that was written in the zoning that it is not allowed. I have not seen that yet and I couldn't find it but I didn't look very hard.
You can see the table here https://www.ecode360.com/attachment/...0Table%20I.pdf

The closest after a quick skim I can see is maybe "Bed and Breakfast" but I doubt it meets the criteria, but it would be a CUP not a Variance. My point is the zoning didn't have short term rentals as something that was or wasn't allowed.

So at some point I would imagine, someone will challenge this. Especially if they purchased a property and the zoning was one way and then all of a sudden it was another with no public input. To create new zoning rules doesn't the public get to vote or have a hearing? Beyond my knowledge.

The issue isn't in areas where commercial zoning exists. The issue is where the zoning is residential. In South Down and Long Bay, the zoning is residential. The City is now enforcing the zoning law, although residents have been renting their properties on a weekly basis for years. Owners of properties in these residentially-zoned communities now have to go before the Board for a variance. There is no "new" law to my knowledge, merely enforcing existing law.

I understand, what you are saying. Where is the existing zoning law that states short term rentals are not allowed?
I can't find it.

In the zoning table of uses, I don't see "short term rentals" that or "airbnb policy". So I seems like the city is saying because it is omitted, here is our policy. My point is the current zoning isn't equipped for it, so they made decisions on it with out public input. I could be very wrong, I would just like to see where it is written because some attorney is definitely going to ask that.

Try this -- https://www.ecode360.com/15050211

Click on Attachment 2. It appears that hotel, motel and inn are not generally not permitted in residentially-zoned areas. It wouldn't be unreasonable for the Board to take the position that weekly rentals or weekend rentals through ABNB are the same as operating a motel or inn.

Hotel
 

Are you sure that is accurate? The city is saying a short term rental has to meet the criteria for a hotel/motel? So when people are applying for variances they are applying for a hotel? Are you just assuming this or do you know this?

It doesn't seem to line up because the city is allowing short term rentals in only SFR and CR where as a hotel is allowed in a lot more zone than that. Also to get a variance, you would have to apply for your house to considered a hotel, so you would have to meet the dimensional requirement etc, like green space, parking. At that point, it would also allow you to get one room for every 1.5 parking spaces you can fit (higher density). So it is safe to say no one will ever get a variance for short term rentals. It would also mean that every town has the same current zoning as Laconia since every town most certainly has Hotel zoning and any town could take the same position as Laconia.

I would also point out that that means anyone renting in the SFR or CR is now considered a hotel and will have to meet the dimensional requirements and apply for a permit.

If this is what the city is saying a wish them the best of Luck when they take this up with a property owner who is attorney.

My opinion only. I don't know for sure, but it seems that it is the position the Board is taking.

It will get litigated. I wouldn't count on the party seeking a variance winning. I don't think it's an unreasonable position that residential zoning prohibits short term rentals. That's just my opinion based on the intent of zoning laws.

Understood, I think I have mixed feelings on it. But I definitely think the current laws/rules are not equipped to handle it, and public input should have been taken before the city added the "airbnb Policy"

New Story in the Laconia Sun
 

There is a new story about rentals though it does not shed much new light on the subject.

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...58fe3951a.html

Interesting to see Rusty’s perspective and numbers he presented.


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

South Down/Long Bay Position
 

We received Long Bay's official position on short term rentals --

"Since the City Zoning Laws ban short term rentals in Long Bay, our Board has concluded that there are no additional considerations for Rules & Regulations needed at this time to address this subject. Simply stated, short term rentals are against the law in Long Bay, and anyone that continues to rent their home for less than 185 days are subject to City Laws that involve stiff fines."

I am pleased that our Board decided to follow the law. This is good news for our community.