I didnt buy an STR, this is my house and income at the moment. Lived here for almost ten years and have often slept in my car just to keep keep the income steady. Which is what begged my original question. No limits on days to avail an STR should not preclude that same property's designation as primary residence when occupancy exceeds 51%. In this case about 90%. Its an interpretation from the director of E&L, for STR regulations specifically
If you're renting this property 90% of the time you have to be staying somewhere else most of the time. I see why they wouldn't believe this is your primary redidence.
Oh absolutely, and i apologize as i tend to go WAY off into the weeds sometimes. My line of thinking was not whether or not i was staying at my primary residence the majority of the time, but that in my opinion its a misuse of the term “primary residence”.. Not trying to appeal to abstract interpretations of law or skirt around, find loopholes etc. Its only that primary res are tax and voting designations, and used here in a municipal code which had been interpreted (not defined) by the director. My argument is over private property rights, which municipal codes must adhere to etc.. I do appreciate hearing from everyone on here though truly enjoy being challenged on my ideas or pointing out where im wrong.
If I were you here’s what I do:
1. Look for a local lawyer who is experienced with this.
2. Contact Mile High Hosts, which I think is affiliated with Rent Responsibly. They appear to be active in helping defend hosts in these situations. https://www.milehighhosts.org/
3. Dial back the “Cooties-19” and calling people “ideologues” and “suits.” There’s just no world in which that’s gonna help your case.
Good luck!
I didnt buy an STR, this is my house and income at the moment. Lived here for almost ten years and have often slept in my car just to keep keep the income steady. Which is what begged my original question. No limits on days to avail an STR should not preclude that same property's designation as primary residence when occupancy exceeds 51%. In this case about 90%. Its an interpretation from the director of E&L, for STR regulations specifically
@Nathan Crankfield the #1 "fast-pass" ticket to really pissing-off city staff and getting self known is via doing Work-Arounds.
And here is the thing, they have all the power, ALL. They can just do things, and say if you don't like it, sue them. You don't get to do that back to the city. They can come up and just shut your STR down, and I mean in the most literal sense.
The juice is not worth the squeeze, in trying to do work-arounds.
And here is the thing, it's NOT personal property rights, not when looking to use the whole property as hospitality business (STR), at that point your a commercial operation, commercially utilizing that property. Personal property is for PERSONAL use, a business operation is not personal use. So that's a pointless argument to pursue and will only annoy city officials if tried.
Here is the whole foundation to the issue that so many novices jumping into STR don't get. It is very literally the job of city to designate and manage sectors of the city for certain purposes. This is why we have zoning. Certain areas for residential housing, others for retail business, others for industrial etc etc.. All this is part of a design that includes roads to meet such demand, utilities, water, sewer, parks etc etc.. A city is itself an organism.
The current fad with STR's is perverting and distorting the entire city plans. It plunks a commercial hospitality business into residential neighborhoods. How often is there a Hilton on the same block? What would you think of got a notice 4 homes were being knocked down in middle of block to put up a 7 story Radisson? Most would be pist, and demand to know why city allowed it, right. yeah, well, converting SFH's into micro-hotels is no different, it's only room count.
This is why cities are on the response. Cities are not opposed to STR, there opposed to the city plan being destroyed, and results from such.
Some places, it's a non-issue, because it's a non-issue of impact.
So a work-around, or seeking a variance is a fools-errand, it's asking a city to ignore there zoning and the city plan. I know, it may sound ridiculous but there is a ton if science and work that goes into designing every city area so things actually work. If it were all left to just do whatever wherever, well, it would look like a 3rd world city and be a nightmare of a mess. ironically the thing that makes it ideal and profitable for STR, is the exact thing your trying to find a "work-around" to.
I suggest find a way to work WITH the "flow" vs seeking a way to faster swim up a river. For example, find areas of mixed use zoning, nearby to the residential area, thus allowing it under commercial.
@James Hamling We're obviously in the realm of philosophy when discussing this, but it is an issue of personal property right, because things I personally own are an issue of personal property. There can be impacts and taxes imposed on it, but it doesn't take it out of the realm of personal property just because the government overreaches and decides to regulate and control what I do with it.
It is not meant to be the job of the city to designate what homeowners can and cannot do in their own homes. I disagree with that, novice or not. I realize you're pro-government controlling all things and being the supreme power at every level, but not all of us agree with that.
Something that is common among us real estate investors, seasoned and new, is that we try to find legal ways to maximize profits and avoid taxes through certain loopholes and work arounds. I am unsure why so many of you got absolutely triggered by me trying to understand ways that people may have found to run STRs that they don't actually live in.
There's a massive difference between putting a Hilton where my house is and me allowing 2 people to stay here every night, so I am not sure the point you were trying to make there really landed.
Some cities are opposed to STRs due to the lobbying of massive hotel chains. That's not supportive of personal property rights or the lower/middle class people who are trying their hand in this new realm of business. It's unrealistic to act like local governments are angels among us who only have our best interest at heart and therefore we ought to do everything they ask by following both the spirit and the letter of the law.
You're free to continue supporting massive government overreach into the lives of autonomous citizens and I'm free to continue asking questions about ways other people operate their businesses. Thanks for your response
LMAO! Wow, you win the Emmy for Arrogant Ignorance award in this.
I am arguably "the" poster-boy for limited government. I can give you a few Senators to call and check that with if unsure, because unlike 99.8% of people I do more than just talk about it, I take ACTION and work to have actual impact on policy to effect limited governance. But this isn't the place to discuss political affiliations or activities.
As for lecturing me on what "investors" do, lol, that's like the 3yr old telling Santa about Christmas.
Look, it's called Personal Property because it's of PERSONAL use. I know schools have really gone down hill the last years but come on, it's literally in the name your using, PERSONAL. Business anything is NOT personal, it's business.
And, sorry to inform ya buddy but yes, it very literally IS the job of government to dictate what person can and can not do, ya know those things called laws rules and regulations. If you hate those, hey, feel free to go where this is little to none of them, there called 3rd world nations.
Myself, yeah, I am a big fan of working electricity 24-7, running water that doesn't kill, and all the other things your so clearly taking for granted in your rant of entitlement.
Exactly how is it your know why cities are regulating against STR's? Have you spoken to the city officials? I have. Have you spoken with Attorney Generals offices? I have. Have you discussed it with organizations? I have. I will stick to my 1st hand explanations of the why's vs the arm-chai-quarterback assumption club.
Again, personal property is that of personal use, of PERSONS, not BUSINESS. I would think this obvious even for a 4th grader by this point but, here we are, stuck in this loop.
Kids these days....
Pretty interesting to call me arrogant then call yourself "the poster boy for limited government in the next sentence" while bragging about all the important people you know, which in your mind makes you an expert on all things.
I have no doubt you know more about real estate investing than I do. I also have no doubt that your understanding of private property rights aligns more with Bernie Sanders than it does with the founding fathers. "Personal property" was used as a synonym for private property, which is the property of private citizens. Property of private citizens is to distinguish property owned by citizens rather than property owned by the state. That has nothing to do with what the "use" for the property is.
The founders believed the proper role of government was to determine how to use state owned property, which was very limited, and to protect the natural rights of citizens in the state. Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton would ardently disagree that "it is very literally the job of gov to dictate what a person can and can not do", because they would view the vast majority of laws and regulations to be unjust and unconstitutional, which they are.
The irony of you pointing out the high standard of living in the US is that it's the result of free markets that we have this quality of life. Government regulations, for the most part, inhibit innovation and the advancement of technology and growth of economy rather than cause it.
Feel free to keep talking down to me while sharing what you seem to think are conservative principles that actually mirror the ideas of modern democratic socialists. Funny that you blame the modern day education system when it seems whatever school you went to decades ago failed to share these key founding principles with you.
This is a great week to learn about them though :)
Lol, this whole thing is a perfect example of everything wrong with the younger generations.
Excellent, well-thought out response. Feel free to read the Federalist papers, the Constitution, and/or the Declaration of Independence and actually cite something that proves my explanation of private property rights as understood by the Founders to be incorrect, rather than just making cliche boomer complaints about young people.
Perhaps neither is the same prescription, but seems both would appreciate the same outcome; that is the ability to contribute within society and otherwise to be left alone without precluding your neighbors of the same ability.
This gets into the weeds but someone in Real Estate might appreciate it. What is private property? and yes ive read the discourse, the federalist papers, and i truly find it all the most fascinating of subjects, but in particular private property rights. What is self-determination in the face of rules & regs. What is the difference between a law, a statute, a code, a province or municipality, civil law, criminal , admiralty or maritime, what is feudalism, serfdom, what is a subject, how does a subject become a lord, what is private property if it is a subject to the state i.e., property tax. And what is it if perpetually subject to eminent domain? So is private property just an agents ability to hold without control? What is allodium, or freehold and where did that go? Why arent real estate agents even taught about this? This IS American history, not some commie pipe dream, So tell me how the “freedonians”, whence subjects of the crown, over a couple centuries shook the old feudal habits to establish a sovereign people within a land and law to protect an absolute independence for itself, its people and posterity, became so self flagellating, broken and relegated to arguing the merits of municipal jurisprudence. Seriously?!
Well I certainly agree that's the best option. But there are usually creative ways to follow the law, which I look for in cases such as these where the laws seem unjust. It's not the proper role of government to dictate what I use my personal property for so long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights of others.
There are potential workarounds like maybe getting exceptions from the city (if possible) or maybe leasing my current home out to someone for a discounted rate to run the Airbnb in the basement for us. If it would be in their name, it technically would be following the law as it would be their primary residence.
Nathan is officially one of my new favorite thinkers on here! Love reading thought provoking posts. Back to foundational, age old private property rights! If enough people thought like this we would see a class action suit against every major municipality in the country!
Im hoping to find a solution, so I'm hoping by putting this out there that i might have some luck with some of you more seasoned STR/Real Estate aficionados… After hosting exclusively with Airbnb for the last few years, the city of Denver just stripped my license away in the most ridiculous "hearing" I've ever witnessed, let alone been involved in. Its my only property and have maintained a 5 star rating since its first quarter and have over 300 ratings. Not bad for a lil bungalow! It was intended as a second income stream as i had a brick and mortar shop downtown where i was full time for 13 years. Cooties-19 shut my business down in March 2020, right as i made my way into the hospital and a much less anticipated and extended respite for the following year. My personal business was destroyed and i lost nearly every single client, but after the entire month of April 2020 had cancelled reservations, (thanks for "having our back" Airbnb) thankfully May picked right back up and i had some folks that stepped in to help me while i was away. After having the chance to get back to things in the summer of ‘21 and now as my only income, i had to rent another house to stay at so that i could continue with Airbnb, which up until now, is the only thing that saved me from losing my home.
Last December i renew the license as always, except anticipating a response in January this year turned into mid July when i was told it was denied and i could appeal and set a hearing date. Which occurred just yesterday. Another big shout out to Airbnb for freezing my calendar in Feb this year because Denver took its sweet A$$ time! Anyhow, Denver says that the property was not my primary address, and in the words of its attack dog, Linebarger Analytics, had reported that i was receiving mail at another address in late 2020, but failed to uncover the mail carrier which was bitten by a neighbors dog causing a subsequent halt to mail delivery for the entire block for nearly two months, ergo the need to forward the mail. Within that time i had rescinded the forwarding request and delivery commenced as normal. The report also failed to mention that, and added that for some unknown reason i stopped receiving mail just this last Dec ‘22.
As expected, during the hearing i had a stack of mail from the last 6 months as i queried where this idea had come from. There was some back and forth but in short time they realized that at no point was i ever receiving mail at another address other than when i had no choice. Their line of questioning quickly pivoted to my daughter, where she goes to school, where i sleep and questions for which any answer would never suffice the deaf ears of ideologues.
Now, the meat of it…. Nowhere in the code will you find what "primary residency" actually means, but you will find what the directors interpretation of what it means, and for the purposes of STR REGULATIONS ONLY. Primary residency, as far as i can tell is used for tax and voting registration purposes only. It is not defined elsewhere and in spite of any glaring contradictions, the city, nor the 90lb suit they put in front of the camera to represent the DA's office can admit these contradictions because alas, they work in their favor. Honestly ill pretend for a minute that the Director (excise and license) sits upon the Supreme Court Artifice of STR and was duly elected to interpret city regulations as law. Can someone tell me how, with no limitations on how many days/nights a host can make their STR available each year, can the director ALSO claim that this is not a host's regular place of return if the host has no other "regular place of return" insofar as voting registration, tax purposes, receiving mail. This is just iterated as "elsewhere", and where if 51% or more nights out of the year are booked at this STR (and again, no limits on how many nights a host can make it available), then "elsewhere" supplants a primary address and your STR license thusly. Even when elsewhere has no address.
I sat quietly, remained composed and had politely posed these questions and instead of a reasonable and plain English response my feeble mind could understand i met the ire of ideologues. No quicker had the issue of addressing me, and in my own hearing about my primary address been forgotten but now both the suit and the judge in near perfect harmony revealed some of their cards by addressing Hosts at large and how WE are the problem and how we collectively are contributing to the housing crisis. It became crystal f'ing clear at this point that whether i had been guilty or not there was no way the city was letting me walk away (or stop the zoom call) with my STR license intact. This was their raison d'étre all along, and i went in prepared to fight an entirely different game! The hearing closed with a duet, parroting woes of the housing shortage and how "we all have to do our part"… Ill spare the you 10 additional pages it would take to transcribe the rage after hearing this statement bear its full weight upon the pan opposite of mine on the scale. Now my only source of income is gone, because in the opinion of the Ubermensch, er i mean Director, has the air of an investment.
So what are my options? Put house in a trust, file another LLC and apply for a new license? Sign a lease to a trustee and have them put a new STR license in their name? Either way i lose the last 5 years of work and reputation i built on a platform so prepared to stab its "partners" in the back. Oh yea… Airbnb made sure to outfit the city with messages with guests, reviews, photos and i believe (possibly) geolocation data collected when using the app. None of which would strike me as prime facie evidence unless the court had put the defendant in a position to defend a negative, something unfamiliar to Americans, though perhaps should mull over the possibility of something to get used to.
If you made it this far, heck ya! You rock and thanks so much for letting me take up your time. Any input would be greatly appreciated!
Basically, my wife and I are military and moving away soon. For two reasons, (1: our house is probably bigger than what most military families in the area are looking for. 2: our private room on AirBnb has been relatively successful) we are seriously considering doing a STR instead of a long term renter. We were going to go the Evolve (STR management company) but we saw a forum from years ago on BP that strongly advised against it. I guess I'm curious if there are any BP members who have done STR self management from afar?
Open to suggestions and/or past experiences. As a bonus if anyone has had experience with Evolve more recently than 2021, I'm super open to hearing your feedback on the company!
Stay away for a number of reasons, but namely that before you know it you’ll be seeing less than half of the revenue after Airbnb and Evolve take their cut, which is before you (Evolve) pays the cleaners, and dont forget about taxes friend. The gregarious welcoming mat will no doubt assuage even the most ardent skeptics, but like all the other clouds, even the pink ones eventually blow away. You’ll be wrapped up in a broker/client relationship only with your money, license and reputation on the line, so i would ONLY recommend someone you trust and someone that can have some skin in the game. Find a family friend you can pay a reasonable % to, even if its the same as evolve (13-15% i believe?) but at least there is more incentive to NOT leave your name in the mud when it also affects their bottom line. Or develop a relationship with a small cleaning crew, assign them as co-hosts and use them as your channel manager. That’s my two (or three cents). Good luck!
As soon as you say rent control is legal, you already lost your private property rights. You as a private person can’t rent your private property to another private party at a price you both agree to
Hopefully the supreme court take the NY case and either abolishes it requires the government to pay for the taking as required under the constitution. The odds are slim but the victory would be huge.
Im familiar with rent control but im not sure if im following here. Granted its CO and not NY but whats the link between rent control and private vacation rentals? You might have to school me on rent control a bit. Im familiar with section 8 / hud and i know certain areas developments must adhere to that, but homeowners arent restricted insofar as the amount of rent they can ask for
Who you vote for has consequences.
Unfortunately, a lot of people are voting for politicians that want to take away private property rights and determine what you can do with your property, how you do it, when you do it, how much you can charge for it, etc.
Thanks to the large percentage of illegal short-term rentals, and the poorly run ones, you can expect more and more crackdowns in the coming years. If you have a short-term rental, I would start considering ways to flex if your operation gets shut down. I think it's important to purchase properties with multiple uses, in case one use gets shut down or no longer produces results.