I oppose this bill, which preempts the ability of municipalities to make the best decisions for land use. Decisions on land use should be left to local governance structures and citizens who will be most directly impacted in quality of life, preservation of value, and the underlying support of infrastructure.

See attached

AirBnb has long resisted localities’ efforts to collect tax revenue and prohibiting a locality's ability to ensure additional accountability would only further enable AirBnb's noncompliance; that is exactly why AirBnb is supporting this legislation and why we are opposing SB 544. As we wait for the construction of much needed affordable housing units to be completed, we need to make sure that we give localities the tools to stem the tide of rising rents, further inflated by unregulated short-term rentals. Please oppose AirBnb and support renters by advocating against and voting no on SB 544.

The North Virginia Beach Civic League OPPOSES this bill as currently drafted. Please continue it to 2025 and refer it to the Housing Commission for further study and input by localities and citizens. It can be improved by making it more permissive for localities, rather than pre-emptive. SB 544 pre-empts the ability of localities to determine where Short-Term Rentals are a compatible use, without regard to parking, water and sewer capacity, or impact on neighbors, all of which are local considerations for operation of any business, particularly in a residential neighborhood.

STRIKE OR FAIL SB544. The bill should be struck from the Counties Cities and Towns Committee. The bill violates the Constitution of Virginia, Article I, The Bill of Rights: Sections 2, 3, 4 and 6. Section 2: People are the source of power. The public spoke loudly and clearly in objecting B.2 in this bill in last year’s General Assembly. Yet that former bill is embedded as B.2, unacknowledged and potentially overlooked by the “reenactment” as stated. This insertion goes against the will of the people. Further, it falsely states that the only addition to the previous legislation is the Registry for Short Term Rentals. Section 3: Government instituted for common benefit. Maladministration occurs when the right of the people is dismissed or legislation is enacted that is misleading, or gives privilege to a “set of men”, in this bill licensed realtors and the owners they represent, giving them the allowance to NOT register: B. 2.(i) No ordinance shall require a person to register pursuant to this section if such person is (i) licensed by the Real Estate Board or is a property owner who is represented by a real estate licensee; (iv) …including licensed real estate professionals… This opens the unregistered sole owner, Trust, Corporation or LLC to anonymously increase density, impact infrastructure needs of the community, avoid fees and taxes, while the people in communities they have helped develop over the years, suffer the consequential problems associated with short term rentals and pay property taxes. This increases the number of Unregistered STRs, a problem cited by many cities, counties and towns. It creates more profits in the realtors’ enterprise. Section 4: “No exclusive emoluments or privileges; offices not to be hereditary. That no man, or set of men, is entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments or privileges from the community”: is violated by the insertion of B.2 (I) and (iv) the “professional“ who may be an owner of many properties: A non-licensed, I.e., a non-realtor who is a property owner applying for a Short Term Rental MUST unequally to the realtor, register, pay an application fee and go through an extensive process to receive approval for a Conditional Use Permit, pay taxes and renewal fees. Section 6: Free elections; consent of the governed. “Home share” rentals have not had enough public discussion to become passed by the state legislature, as in many instances, task forces have not been formed, nor has significant public participation been involved in determining the impact on communities and regulations regarding same. Many people are unaware that “home share” 30 one night rentals exist, as set forth in this bill: "Short-term rental" means the provision of a room or space that is suitable or intended for occupancy for dwelling, sleeping, or lodging purposes, for a period of fewer than 30 consecutive days, in exchange for a charge for the occupancy. Some cities have worked with the people to determine length of stay, which this bill destroys. Taking away the power of the cities, counties and towns to determine best practices for the people they represent through their elected government is yet another overlay to prevent and take away the right of the people to govern themselves. STRIKE or FAIL SB 544.

I oppose SB 544 and hope you will as well. I live in 23451 area and have seen nothing but bad from STR's/ADU's. Violence, theft, guns & drugs always seem to accompany these types of businesses. They devalue our property and the enjoyment of our homes and neighborhoods. We need more protection against these businesses, not less. I hope that you will protect homeowners and oppose this bill.

I write in opposition of SB304 and SB544 as misguided bills advancing urbane interests at the cost of towns and localities. SB304 and SB544 undermine localities' ability to determine the economic activity and population growth of their communities to address tourism and housing shortages in population dense areas. For this reason, these bills should not advance. Concerning SB304, while certain jurisdictions, such as Fairfax, Arlington, etc... do not have concerns about exceeding Virginia's 3,500 resident threshold prior to having to take on the burden of road maintenance and various other obligations, smaller jurisdictions, as found throughout the majority of Virginia's land area, are prejudiced by SB304's removal of a locality's ability to control its growth and, in turn, ability to maintain quality of life and lower taxation rates for citizens. The thrust of this bill is to address affordable housing and housing shortages, which is not lost on me, the externalities of this proposal place an inordinate burden on small jurisdictions while being something readily and easily absorbed by larger jurisdictions for which the demand for cheaper housing is demonstrably higher. Small jurisdictions are, therefore, burdened with a disproportionate cost to enable large jurisdictions to address their housing issues. SB544, section D, specifically deprives local authority to enforce special use exceptions, ensure uniform administration and quality in accommodations, and tailoring certain commercial uses to a town's constituencies. In preempting these rights, local governments are no longer beholden to their constituencies, special uses are done away with arbitrarily, and the character of towns are entitled to shift with minimal say, input, or restraints of a jurisdiction's constituents. Agritourism is a major industry in the rural areas of Virginia, however, it should be uncontroversial to claim that localities are responsible to and responsive to their constituents. SB544 removes the body of work put in by dedicated volunteers and local officials in tailoring their communities to its constituents in favor of short term rental properties (While carving our equal application of the rules for real-estate agents). SB304 and SB544 make the same fundamental error - they legislate urban policies for a Commonwealth that is not solely urban. In proffering these regulations, local governments are stripped of their ability to oversee and administer their localities growth, development, and economic activity. This leaves small jurisdictions vulnerable to deleterious community impacts, including but not limited to an increase in tax burdens on small communities due to unchecked and unaccountable growth, neutering jurisdictions from ensuring safe, reasonable, and consistent conditions for short term rentals, evisceration of special use and conditional permitting for accommodations, and increasing short term rental capacity which may outstrip or overwhelm local infrastructure compelling additional capital investment and, again, increased tax burden to residents. In sum, SB304 and SB544 are urban proposals to the detriment of rural communities wherein constituencies would have to petition state officials for redress based on short-sighted proposals that serve urban communities but render local government an ineffective bystander.

I oppose SB 544 as written because section D pre-empts local authority by requiring localities to allow an STR in the primary residence of the property owner, taking away local authority from limiting this type of use in areas it deems inappropriate. I further disagree with Section B, item 2(i) in that an operator licensed by the state Boar of Realtors should not be exempt from registering STRs. When acting as an operator of an STR, those individuals are no different than any other operator, and should be forced to register such STRs so that neighbors can be aware that they are operating an STR in the neighborhood.

I oppose this bill!

I oppose this bill.

I strongly oppose this bill on the grounds that these types of decisions should be left to the local governments that understand the impact of short-term rentals on affordable housing, traffic, safety, and the general wishes of the local population. One size does not fit all and Richmond is does not and cannot understand the implications of a decision like this -- leave this to local governments.

Issues involving zoning are best left to the locality which is in the best position to understand how any zoning issue affects the local area.

I strongly oppose this bill.

I oppose SB544.

I oppose this bill. Please respect my elected local authorities and their judgment.

I oppose this bill. This bill would pre-empt local authority by requiring localities to allow an STR in the primary residence of the property owner. Local authorities should have the authority to determine the best course of action.

I oppose this bill for the simple reason that it could take local land use and zoning authority away from our municipal government. There is no reason for the State to overrule local ordinances, and these are best worked out in each locality.

John & Pat Litz oppose this bill with regard to short term rentals.

I oppose this bill.

I strongly oppose SB 544 on several grounds, but primarily because it preempts local authority to regulate short term motels (STRs) in residential areas. The regulation of short term motels should be left to the local governments and the citizens who know what will work (and more importantly will not work) in their neighborhoods. Please do not support this bill. As you can see from the numerous comments herein people feel very strongly that this is bad legislation that will have adverse effects on the neighborhoods in the Commonwealth.

We strongly oppose this bill.

I oppose this bill.

My wife and I strongly oppose this bill. We believe these decisions should by made by the local governing bodies

I strongly oppose Bill SB544

I strongly oppose SB 544.

We are strongly opposed to SB544 per comments expressed by the NVBCL.

My wife and I strongly oppose SB544. Elected members of local governments know much more about the wants and needs of neighborhoods and individual streets than members of the state gov't working in Richmond and sometimes living on the other side of large state with widely varying densities. An STR in a rural area has a very different impact than one is densely populated area. A "One-size-fits al"l law does not fit some at all. https://blogs.mml.org/wp/short-term-rentals/files/2021/06/STR-White-Paper-The-Negative-Consequences-of-Short-Term-Rentals-Arizonas-Recipe-for-Disaster.pdf

I oppose this bill (SB544). Allowing people to rent short-term will create a nuisance for homeowners in Virginia Beach. The VAST MAJORITY of us have voted against this because we do not rent our homes and do not want the chaos of short-term rentals in our quiet neighborhoods.

I oppose SB 544. Alexandria isn't Dumfries, the Bay and Oceanfront aren't Franklin, Richmond isn't Blacksburg, Charlottesville isn't Staunton, and South Hill isn't Arlington. Local jurisdictions are best suited to handle local issues.

I oppose this bill. Doesn’t take into account communities who’ve been dealing with this for longer than this 1 year.

I strongly oppose this bill.

I oppose this bill. In this case, towns and cities should decide on the proper zoning rules based on local circumstances.

I oppose this bill. Local cities must have control over short term rentals.

Andrew & Barbara Fine are strongly opposed to Bill SB544. The combination of narrow northend streets (with dead ends on both land and ocean side) combined with uncontrolled occupancy and the burden of unlimited, excessive number of cars at STR rentals, pose public safety issues for emergency as well as public utility vehicles.

Please oppose SB 544. STR are destroying the feel of “neighborhoods”, Virginia Beach spent years developing rules for STR listening to the public’s input and that of “out of town investors “. Please do not let the State make decisions on local concerns!

Please do not advance this bill. Hundreds of VB home owners are already subdividing single family dwellings into some form of a multi-family dwelling for the purpose of generating revenue from a STR. They try to avoid detection by calling them home-shares but there are no shared living spaces (and VRBO won’t list home shares so they are not desirable to owners). These illegal STRs and the constant stream of vacationers are already a public nuisance in our neighborhoods. This bill will only provide another loop hole for STR operators.

I oppose this bill. I pay taxes and do not want our neighborhoods compromised for profit. Our local government represented our desire after a long group of hearings. Let their ruling stand.

I oppose this Bill!! Alva Scott 215A 85th St

Strongly oppose STRs are a detriment to my long-established neighborhood. Please reject!

While i see the complaints some have issued, i feel we need to support this bill. The rights of home owners is severely limited by not allowing the owner the right to rent their primary residence. I would be in support of allowing investor groups to amass and put up for rent single family homes peppered throughout the city. The primary resident owner should always retain the right to rent their primary residence.

I am opposed to SB544

I oppose SB544

I oppose this bill

I strongly oppose this bill

I oppose bill SB544

I vehemently oppose SB544

I strongly oppose SB544.

I oppose strongly SB544.

We vehemently oppose this bill.

I oppose SB544 because it removes all local authority and provides no protection for what happens on local properties

I oppose SB 544 as it would preempt my local authority to allow an STR in my area, my city, Virginia Beach. Please delegate Tata do oppose, said Bill.

I oppose this bill, SB 544, because it undermines neighborhood residential qualities.

I oppose SB544.

I oppose Sb544 In essence, you are giving people permission to run motels in residential neighborhoods. STRs do not enhance our living spaces.

I oppose SB544

I oppose this bill. I purchased a home in a residential neighborhood. I have the right to quiet enjoyment of my property. Short-term rentals in my neighborhood have deprived me of that basic property right. A party at a short-term rental on our block was advertised on social media. The renters charged admission and hundreds of people showed up. The party lasted two days and the police were called but were overwhelmed by the crowd that even had people twerking on top of the police cars that showed up. People relieved themselves on our property. The party ended up in shots being fired into our neighbors' homes and cars. The police could not identify the owner of the home that turned out to be a real estate trust, My neighbors and I attended many meetings of the VIrginia Beach City Council and worked with our local government and zoning to adopt common-sense regulations to continue to require special use permits and cap the amount of rental business owners operating in our neighborhood. Is the State going to send us police or hire security to protect our homes from these dangers to our family and property? Are you going to buy my property? Many other governments are respecting the right of local governments, Va should as well. There is already a shortage of affordable housing in Virginia, this is guaranteed to make housing unaffordable for many as people find it more profitable to rent their houses out than to sell them so other can live in them.

I oppose this bill. It will degrade neighborhoods.

I oppose this bill.

As a property owner in Virginia, I strongly oppose this bill.

I oppose this bill. Please defeat.

I oppose this Bill as delineated by the NVBCL.

I oppose this bill. I support local control of neighborhoods.

My husband and I (and all our neighbors) oppose this bill.

I oppose this bill because it is bad for the homeowners of Virginia Beach.

I oppose this bill as I think it would damage the character of neighborhoods.

I oppose this bill. I am against big real estate interests pre-empting local governance of neighborhood land use.

I staunchly oppose this bill. This bill will degrade neighborhoods by placing a transient population in the midst of cohesive group of altruistic neighbors. Look no further than Nelson County where a transient renter from Maryland killed a Police Officer last year. If there were no rentals, that criminal would have never been in Virginia. Please do not vote for this bill. Preserve our right to live in peace and safety.

Please DO NOT SUPPORT SB 304 and SB 544. Both bills will severely limit municipality's authority to control local land use, allowing setbacks of only 4 ft. and the accessory dwelling unit could be up to 1,500 sq. ft. Localities have sensible ordinances in place that have been adopted after public hearings with input from our citizens. These accessory dwellings units affect neighboring property owners and exclude input from those properties most affected by the owners. EACH LOCALITY IS BEST SUITED TO MAKE LOCAL LAND USE DESISIONS AND HAVE MADE DECISIONS BAISED ON EXTENSIVE CITIZEN INPUT. IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT MATTERS AND ISSUES OF LAND USE BE LEFT TO THE MUNICIPALITIES.

The North Virginia Beach Civic League remains opposed to SB 544 because it pre-empts local authority to regulate STRs. Our position on STRs was approved unanimously at a general membership meeting with over 200 members in attendance, and our petition on STRs was signed by over 500 residents of our neighborhood. Our position on retaining local authority to regulate STRs is identical to the Legislative Agenda adopted by the Virginia Beach City Council for both the 2023 and 2024 sessions. Please do not advance this bill.