HomeMy WebLinkAbout031125 email - STR OrdinanceALERT: BE CAUTIOUS This email originated outside the organization. Do not open attachments or click on links if you are not expecting them.
Dear Board of Commissioners,
My name is Brian McFadin, and along with my wife, Virginia, we own and operate a short-term rental (STR) property in Jefferson County. We are a middle-class family with two young children,
and we reside in King County. Over the years, we have developed a deep connection with Jefferson County, spending significant time at our property and building relationships with our
neighbors. We are good neighbors, responsible hosts, and local employers. In addition to offering our property as a short-term rental, we have adhered to all regulations, holding a
valid permit since we first began hosting.
Our decision to operate a short-term rental while we are not on-site is integral to our plans for the future, as it allows us to make our dream of retiring in Jefferson County a reality.
However, the proposed ordinance, which places new restrictions on STRs, threatens our ability to use our property in the way we had planned. This proposal comes as a surprise, especially
given the investment of our life savings into this property, and we never anticipated such drastic changes when we borrowed money to purchase our home here.
I am writing to request that the Board of Commissioners include a clear and broad grandfather clause in the ordinance that fully protects current STR owners, including those with valid
permits and those who have been paying lodging taxes to the county. A grandfather clause would ensure that existing STR operators are not unfairly burdened by restrictions that could
impact our livelihoods and the investments we’ve made in good faith. I believe this approach strikes a balance between limiting future STRs and protecting the economic interests of
the county, its residents, and property owners. Additionally, it would help minimize the risk of costly legal challenges for the county.
Impact on Local Economy
Short-term rentals are a vital part of Jefferson County's local economy. They draw visitors who spend money in local businesses, generate lodging taxes, and support jobs in sectors such
as cleaning, landscaping, and property maintenance. The proposed restrictions could significantly limit the types of STRs available to tourists, particularly homes and cabins offering
privacy and seclusion. This would likely cause a shift in tourism to neighboring counties, resulting in a loss of income for local businesses and workers. It would also harm Jefferson
County’s tax revenue, which is critical for funding essential public services.
Potential for Costly Legal Challenges
In addition to the economic impact, we are deeply concerned about the legal ramifications of this ordinance. We believe that it may be met with expensive legal challenges, the costs
of which would ultimately fall on Jefferson County taxpayers. A network of STR owners are already exploring legal options should this ordinance pass. As it stands, the current draft
is among the most restrictive county-level STR ordinances in the country, and there are multiple legal precedents where STR owners have successfully challenged similar regulations.
Examples such as Reed v. City of Newport Beach, Holiday Isle, Inc. v. City of Destin, Davidson v. City of Asheville, and Beverly Glen Community Association v. City of Los Angeles all
demonstrate that courts have ruled such restrictions to be an infringement on property rights. We fear that Jefferson County could face similar legal challenges, resulting in costly
litigation and further division within the community.
Housing Affordability Concerns
While we appreciate the county's commitment to addressing affordable housing concerns, we have yet to see compelling data demonstrating that STRs are significantly contributing to housing
affordability issues. The Department of Community Development (DCD) has presented anecdotal evidence, but there is little concrete data to support the assertion that restricting STRs
would have a meaningful impact on improving affordability. The potential economic harm resulting from this ordinance—particularly for small, local businesses—could far outweigh any
hypothetical benefits to housing availability.
Conclusion
We respectfully urge the Board of Commissioners to take a thoughtful, balanced approach to this issue. A solution that includes a clear and broad grandfather clause for current STR owners
would provide necessary protections while allowing the county to address concerns about future STRs. This would preserve the economic vitality of the county, protect the rights of property
owners, and minimize the potential for costly legal challenges. We encourage the Board to consider all stakeholders in this process, including existing STR operators, local residents,
and businesses.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Brian and Virginia McFadin
206.321.3137 mobile
hbnNpb25Xb3Jkc01pZGRsZUNhcGl0YWxUb3RhbExldHRlcnMqGQoSU3RhdGljUmFua2luZ1Njb3JlFQAAgD89WDkTQ4IBSQohigEeOhwaCwiAkrjDmP7///8BIgsIgJK4w5j+////AVIAEhIvL2VtYWlsL2luYm94L2JvZHkiEAoElQKYAhIG/////w8QGgB6egoDU1
RSEhFzaG9ydCB0ZXJtIHJlbnRhbBgBKAE6EVNob3J0IFRlcm0gUmVudGFsQgJlbkoDMC4wUkA0MTI3YzY0MTRlMjljOWE2MjhhY2IyZmQ0YTFjMTFlNmFkNDliY2NhODlhZTgxMmU4OTgyZDc2NWNlNTZiMTRh", "@EntityId": "cf799c6a-1d2e-4c2e-a103-
995dd0b08373", "@correlationTrail": "AssetId=490359eb-1afb-4100-aabc-171eef5f3f49;ExtractionId=67d8f831-15c6-47a5-9547-f56b60aa5a87;EntityId=cf799c6a-1d2e-4c2e-a103-995dd0b08373", "@extractionTimeUtc
": "2025-03-12T04:41:19.178299Z", "@extractionInfra": "AcronymExtractionPolymerProcessor"}]