Agenda Packet 9-23-19 Work Session

Home Browse Search

market aspect, and the problem looks less severe when viewed with the most exacting lens. In several cases, authors merely juxtapose a local housing crisis with the presence of STRs, the correlation seasoned with emotive language. The very subtitle of the Portland Auditor’s report includes “effect on housing crisis unknown.” The LAANE report cited above, something of an activist battle cry, is frequently cited by other authors who are critical of STRs and especially Airbnb. Among them is Dayne Lee in Harvard Law & Policy Review who details a very real housing crisis in Los Angeles and the likelihood that part of this may be due to STRs and Airbnb, then appends a host of other social problems to the platform. As in the case of many others, he only gives a nod to the other end of the problem: “…neither the market nor the public sector can swiftly replenish the housing stock, given the time, cost, and legal barriers to developing affordable housing in Los Angeles.” (p.235) Where he cites the LAANE report, it is at second hand via its mention in an article in Curbed about one successful STR entrepreneur—or group of entrepreneurs—who rent out 78 units in Los Angeles. The Curbed article itself points out, in turn via the LAANE report, that a majority of Airbnb listings in LA are for whole dwellings, and that many hosts don’t make any money. After that the author’s personal distaste takes over as he sniffs at the owners’ organizational background, and the fact that their two public faces for awhile were two white women. The libertarian Cato Institute, by contrast, favors institutions and policies that give people more choices and allow more decisions to be made noncentrally. So they favor a governmental response that is least meddlesome while allowing transactions that don’t do harm to others. They are quick to cite the paper by Barron et al since those authors’ research ended with the least apocalyptic picture of STRs’ effects on the housing market—the effects are real, but smaller than some think. Even Cato doesn’t think STRs should be unregulated. On this issue and others, they frequently address negative externalities, and feel they should be paid for by those who impose them rather than by a cost levied on everyone. A disruptor entering an established industry or business model always has opponents among the incumbents. In the case of STRs there has been pushback from the hotel industry, which has allied with activist groups in an otherwise unlikely pairing, united in opposition to possible loss or downgrading of jobs. As seen above, it is debatable whether hotels have suffered at all due to STRs. And during tourist seasons or irregular, highly popular events, both venues will likely fill to capacity. The Cato Institute points out the hotel lobby’s disingenuous outrage about hosts with multiple STR listings, and their vested interest in this stance. Again in the LAANE report, the authors are shocked that jobs in the hotel sector may be lost and take a consumerist tack, portraying Airbnb rentals as looming deathtraps in comparison to sparkling, safety-conscious hotels. Dan Bucks’ report, highly negative about Airbnb, was written under the auspices of the American Hotel & Lodging Association—though his criticisms draw on expertise in tax regulation rather than fervent emotion. Inside Airbnb: Adding data to the debate http://insideairbnb.com/index.html The face of Airbnb, New York City: Airbnb as a racial gentrification tool. Murray Cox/ Inside Airbnb. March 1, 2017. http://insideairbnb.com/face-of-airbnb-nyc/ September 23, 2019, Work Session – Item 3