Michigan — House Commerce and Tourism Committee: HB 4722, short-term rentals, opposition (May 16–18, 2021)

Summary

This packet collects emails, letters and local resolutions sent to the Michigan House Commerce and Tourism Committee in May 2021 opposing House Bill 4722 and its companion Senate bill on short-term rentals. In a May 18, 2021 letter to committee chair Steve Marino, the Grand Rapids Office of the Mayor states that the City of Grand Rapids opposes HB 4722, which would eliminate all local zoning over short term rental properties. The packet includes resolutions opposing the bill from Rogers City (Resolution No. 2021-78), St. Joseph (Resolution 2021-23) and Petoskey. Residents' emails warn that neighborhoods would become a patchwork of mini hotels, that housing costs would climb and that local control of land use would be lost; one writer says the bills would make short-term rentals a permitted use in all residential zones.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors. Pages 26 and 84 of 84 are not shown because the text could not be recognized reliably.

Eddie Sleeper

From: susan streur <ssn_strr@yahoo.com>
‘ent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 11:17 AM
To: Rep. Karen Whitsett (District 9); Rep. Tullio Liberati (District 13); Eddie Sleeper:

senpwojno@senate.michigan.gov; sendpolehanki@senate.michigan.gov,

SenDLauwers@senate michigan.gov; SenRJohnson@senate.michigan.gov
Subject: SB 0446 (HB 4277)

Dear Representative,
Regarding SB 0446 (HB 4277)... if YOU push that through... Do you realize:

Attractive neighborhoods acrass the state will become a patchwork of mini hotels, serving needs when they are
hgh and sitting vacant the rest of the time.

school enrollment in many district will decline as families are displaced cue to high orofit short term rentat
potentia

Housing costs wil climb even further due to market pressures created by a demand for partially occupied
housing

Interest groups for every industry, from adult entertainment to marijuana businesses will learn that sensible
land use requiation can be thrown out the window If you can afford to pay costly lobbyists to sway
legislation. local control of land use policy will be dead as we know it

Sur dream homes will be hemmed in by obnoxious tourist controlled party districts, and our legacy of fine
armail town living will be replaced by a senseless cave in to short term wealth at the expense of our beautiful
neighborhoods

The local building inspector will no jonger inspect rental properties (the bill includes language thal if we
inspect rentals, we must also inspect all owner occupied housing. which is not likely te ever happen).
Blighted residential properties and unsafe housing conditions will increase without sensible oversight

Please don’t forget about the values of community living... We're hoping you haven't joined the money-
hungry other legislators who are only in position for power/money (evil)... and have forgotten about
COMMUNITY.

Susan Streur
ssn_strr@yahoo.com
616 402.5727
C Gity of Grand Rapids, Michigan

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR

ROSALYNN ¢. BLISS
MAYOR

May 18, 2021

The Honorable Chair Steve Marino, and

Members of the House Commerce and Tourism Committee
P.O. Box 30014

Lansing, MI 48909-7514

Dear Representative Marino,

The City of Grand Rapids opposes HB 4722. sponsored by Representative Sarah Lightner, which
would eliminate all local zoning over short term rental (STR) properties. The City uses zoning
to define appropriate uses of land to ensure adequate provision of goods. services, and housing
within our community. This includes a balance among the various uses of property while
considering things like parking, traffic, noise and nuisances; protecting health and safety; and
maintaining the desired quality of life and character of each neighborhood for our citizens. It is
for these main reasons that the City opposes this preemption to local zoning decisions.

The reality of entire-home rentals by owners that hold multiple properties is not “home sharing”
( in the sense of a family renting their home for a little extra income for a few short periods of time
a year while staying on the premises or nearby. This is a commercial enterprise. }lomes in
residential neighborhoods are being converted into mini-hotels. Neighborhoods will not only lose
dwelling units; the quality of life will be impaired. Issues of parking. traffic, noise. and nuisance
— the very things that zoning is designed to protect against — will be stripped away under HB 4722.

Homeowners buy in residential neighborhoods to be away from commercial uses. Zoning is the
mechanism that separates such uses from one another. !f zoning is removed as a proactive
protection for homeowners, then the burden is shifted to neighbor residents to call and complain.
Why should neighbors be burdened to call the police department when a different group of people
is renting the house next door every weekend, and there is not an accountable party on the
premises? Residents purchased in a netghborhood understanding what uses were, and were not,
allowed. It is not unreasonable for them to expect that their investment and accompanying quality
of life should be protected.

Safe urban neighborhoods rely on neighbors knowing one another. Neighborhood watch proups
are established to ensure that unusual activity is reported to the police. People coming to stay ata
STR do not offer the comfort of safety and security for residents. In addition, renters who stay only
a few days at a home will be less concerned about the property itself or neighbors. Absentee
landlords, LLC's, and investment companies become the point of contact for complaints.
Additionally, under HB 4722, such units would be exempt from standard life safety requirements
found in the Michigan Building Code and local ordinances for full-time rental properties, bed and
breakfasts, and hotels. These regulations were put in place to protect the sleeping spaces of non-
owner occupants; providing some assurance that where renters and guests are staying is safe.

The Zoning Enabling Act was specifically crafted to ensure local decision-making so that citizens
could determine how their community will grow and develop. The City respectfully requests your
careful consideration and opposition to HB 4722,

Rosalynn Bliss

C: Members of the House Commerce and Tourism Committee, Honorable Representative Sarah
Lightner, Honorable Senator Winnie Brinks, Honorable Representative Rachel Hood, Honorable
Representative David LaGrand
Eddie Sleeper

From: Lois Schwartz <carloveslois@gmail.com>
ent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 10:45 AM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: STR Bills

The STR bills you are considering are an assault on the American
neighborhood. In our residential community just north of South Haven,
we have learned the hard way. Please do not pass these bills into law. We
have no problem with long term residential renting. But short term rental
brings garbage, noise, traffic, and a disregard for community norms of
respectful behavior.

Those who lobby for this legislation talk of property rights. What about
the property rights of the neighbors who have invested in their homes
and communities?

Lois Schwartz

/275 8B. St
South Haven, MI 49090

H - 269-637-6668
C - 312-848-1148

The resistance to change is proportional to how much the future might be altered by any given act
(from Stephen King's 11/22/63)
Eddie Sleeper

From: Cindy Osman <Cindy@saugatuckcity.com>
Cent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 9:29 AM
To: The Office of Senator Nesbitt
Ce: ofcscc@senate.michigan.gov; Eddie Sleeper; Rep. Mary Whiteford (District 80); Brenda
Marcy; Abby Schipper; Stacey Aldrich; Jon Helmrich; Township Manager
Subject: Short term rentals.

Dear Mr. Nesbit:

Please keep local contro! for Short term rentals. Remember teenage years when somebody's parents would go away for
a weekend and half the school would come over to party. Loud music, cars parked all aver, hooting and

hollering. Eventually somebody calls the police, and they chase the kids out — by then it is midnight. Imagine this
happening next door every weekend through the summer. Most municipalities don’t want to exclude short term
rentals, they just want to be able to regulate them in a reasonable way to protect neighborhoods.

iknow the Realtors are big on this bill and they stand to make tons of money from short term rentals by selling them for
high prices, managing the properties, then selling firewood, renting towels and bicycles to the renters. This is NOT about
property rights, it about making short term rentals into the golden goose. Every municipality knows their needs better
than the State.

My perspective on this is as an elected township official and as a zoning employee for a small city. Please let us run our
own programs.

( -indy Osman
~ Supervisor, Saugatuck Township

Cindy Osman

Planning and Zoning

City of Saugatuck
269-857-2603
Cindy@SaugatuckCity.com
From: Laura Haynes <lh@c-w-w.org>
C sent: Tuesday, May 78, 2021 9:18 AM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: HB 4722- Short term rentals

Good morning,

Please include the Conference of Western Wayne's opposition to this billin the committee record.
Thank you,

Laura Haynes

Assistant Director

Conference of Western Wayne

C: 248-390-9271
Eddie Sleeper

From: David Hodgkins <hodgkins@midweststrategy.com>
a sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 9:09 AM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: 4277 Opposition

Eddie,

Can we register Supervisor Chris Barnett with Orion Township, and Mayor Bryan Barnett with Rochester Hills
in opposition to 4277.

Neither wish to speak.

Dave
) The Nautical City

193 E. MICHIGAN AVENUE © ROGERS CITY, MI 49779-1615

OFFICE (989) 734-2191
FAX (989) 734-4833

CITY OF ROGERS CITY
HOUSE BILL 4722
RESOLUTION NO, 2021-78

It was moved by Council Member Nowak, seconded by Council Member Fuhrman,
WHEREAS, the Michigan House of Representatives Commerce and Tourism Committee and the
Michigan Senate Committee on Regulatory Reform have scheduled hearings on companion bills
HB 4722 and SB 446; and
WHEREAS, the legislation proposed would pre-empt local zoning by prohibiting municipalities
from adopting any regulations whatsoever that treat short-term rentals differently than owner-
occupied homes; and
WHEREAS, this legislation also would effectively abolish the many important and successful
municipal rental inspection programs by eliminating a municipality's ability to inspect any rental
properties if owner-occupied rentals aren't also inspected; and
WHEREAS, this legisiation will destroy a focal unit's ability to reasonably regulate and maintain
desirable neighborhoods, almost certainly lowering quality of life and housing standards in
communities throughout Michigan; and

( WHEREAS, by taking a sledge hammer to loca! control, the proposed legislation completely fails
to consider that each community is different, with unique neighborhoods and varying houstng
needs; and
WHEREAS, by eliminating the ability to address substandard for-profit housing, or limit in any way
what is clearly a hybrid residential/commercial use, this legislation effectively ties a community's
hands regardless of the wishes of its citizenry;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Councit of the City of Rogers City strongly opposes
HB 4722 and SB 446, and requests that both Legislative Chambers reject this legistation
thoroughly and completely; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution be provided to Rep. Sue Allor, Sen. Jim
Stamas, the sponsors of the legislation, and the members of the legislative committees
conducting the hearings; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rogers City requests that Gov.
Gretchen Whitmer veto any such legislation that comes across her desk, keeping these decisions
where they belong — at the local level.
ROLL CALL: Ayes — Ali, the motion carried.

CLERK'S CERTIFICATION

|, Terri L. Koss, duly appointed and acting City Clerk/Treasurer for the City of Rogers City,
Michigan, do hereby certify that the above is a true and exact copy of a resolution adopted
by the Rogers City City Council at their regular meeting of May 17, 2021.

Dated: May 18, 2021 Lint K 62 ?

Cc Terri L. Koss, City Clerk/Treasurer

This institution is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
City of Petoskey Resolution

Resolution No

A RESOLUTION OPPOSING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ENABLING ACT THAT
WOULD ELIMINATE THE ABILITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO REGULATE THE SHORT TERM
RENTAL OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES

WHEREAS, the City of Petoskey is a resort and tourism based economy that provides a range of
lodging options for visitors; and

WHEREAS, the City of Petoskey works to protect and enhance its residential neighborhoods while
balancing the needs and wants of visitors, and

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted an ordinance regulating short-term rentals in 2014 to protect the
interests and quality of life for residents and businesses; and

WHEREAS, the City of Petoskey believes that local governments are best positioned to know the
unique needs of a community and determine the delicate balance between residential and commercial
uses, and between residents and investment property owners; and

WHEREAS, House Bill 4722 would eliminate the ability of local governments to regulate short-term
rentals in residential neighborhoods:

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Petoskey City Council opposes House Bill 4722 and urges
its representatives to do the same to protect our local communities.

Roll Call Vote:
Yeas:

Nays:

Absent

State of Michigan )

County of Emmet }ss

City of Petoskey )
|, Alan Terry, Clerk of the City of Petoskey, do hereby
certify that the foregoing is a true copy of a resolution
adopted by the City Council of the City of Petoskey on the
__dayof , 2021, and of the whole thereof.

In witness whereof, | have hereunto set my hand and
affixed the corporate seal of said City of Petoskey this
____ day of , 2021.

Alan Terry, City Clerk
Eddie Sleeper

From: Karen Sipahi <karensipahi@yahoo.com>
( sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 5:48 AM
To: Rep. Steve Marino (District 24); Rep. John R. Roth (District 104); Rep. Diana Farrington

(District 30); Rep. Rodney Wakeman (District 94); Rep. Pauline Wendzel (District 79); Rep
David W. Martin (District 48); Rep. Sara Cambensy (District 109); Rep. John D. Cherry
(District 49); Rep. Mari Manoogian (District 40); Rep. Karen Whitsett (District 9); Rep
Tullio Liberati (District 13); Eddie Sleeper

Subject: NO on HB 4722

My husband and | have lived in our house for 31 years. We raised our 3 boys and have thoroughly
enjoyed our life in our community. We take pride in a community which support the local school
system, library, police/fire, parks. This is all threatened by the introduction of HB 4722. Please
consider the devastating effect this bill will have on communities in our state. Local governments
should have control of the zoning of real estate and businesses. Short term rentals is a BUSINESS
that will destroy our schools and neighborhoods. Please review the bad experiences of
communites outside Michigan that have been caused by unregulated STR. Special interest and
outside investors are only concerned with profits and not the support of schools/community

betterment.
KEEP OUR COMMUNITIES-OUR COMMUNITY.

Thank You
«aren and Hikmet Sipah
Eddie Sleeper

From: Joe LaRussa <jlarussa@ farmgov.com>
a ent: Monday, May 17, 2021 10:43 PM
To: Eddie Sleeper
Ce: jrigterink@mmi.org
Subject: Oppose House Bill 4722

Greetings Clerk Sleeper,

| have sent the following message to the members of the Commerce and Tourism Committee, and |
would like my correspondence inciuded in the official committee record. Thank you for your
assistance in this matter.

Kind Regards,

Joe LaRussa

Mayor Pro Tem

City of Farmington
www.facebook.com/councilmanjoelarussa/

| am the Mayor Pro Tem in Farmington and we pride ourselves on our ability to effectively legislate
and regulate our housing.

fam writing to ask you to oppose House Bill 4722 that eliminates a municipality's ability to regulate
short-term vacation rentals. This bill mirrors several past pieces of attempted legislation and does not
include any compromises local government groups have put forth to address concerns voiced by the
Michigan Realtors.

Local government is best positioned to know the unique needs of their community when discussing
zoning issues. Local officials are the decision makers closest to the people. Our local elected leaders
are the ones best situated to determine if something needs to be acted upon to maintain the delicate
balance between residential and commercial uses, between residents and investment property
owners, and to protect the health, safety and welfare of residents, renters and vacation visitors.

Supporters of this legislation will argue that this is a property rights issue, but they don't include ail
property owners in that argument. By saying "property owners" they only care about those who own
residential homes for the purpose of using them as vacation rentals to generate revenue. They are
not talking about the neighbors of these rentals who have to live with a revolving door of these
¢ ‘tacationers constantly coming and going. The neighbors of these rental properties also have rights as
There are numerous examples of municipal regulations across the state allowing property owners to
rent out their home a few times a year to cover property taxes and upkeep. This proposed legislation
does not take these best practices into account. Are the ordinances all uniform, saying the same
thing? No, but our communities are not cookie-cutter places. They have different residential and
business needs, and different demands on services. A one size, fits all solution does not work for this
issue.

Please oppose legislation in favor of local authority and flexibility.

| stand ready to testify if it would help you or the Commerce and Tourism Committee.

sincerely,
Joe LaRussa

20953 Birchwood St
Farmington, Mi 48336

Sent from my iPhone, so please excuse brevity and any typos.
Eddie Sleeper

From: Dennis Hennen <dhennen@berkleymich.net>
sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 10:30 PM
Subject: Please oppose HB 4722 and $B 446, Short Term Rental Preemption

Members of the Senate Regulatory Reform Committee and House Commerce and Tourism Committee:

serve on City Council for the City of Berkley and am a credentialed Master Citizen Planner from MSU. | have recently
looked into the short term rental situation in our city, how we regulate them, and if it is working for us.

The status quo works well for us, but these proposed bills would dismantle the protections we already have in place and
could endanger the safety and welfare of people visiting our city.

Our current policy is that if an owner-occupied home rents out just a room or two, there is no involvement from the city.
However, ifan entire home or part of a duplex is rented out, we require a landlord license like we do for long term
rentals. This allows us to inspect the property to make sure visitors are in a safe environment. We have no plans on
restricting the number of such rental units.

Further, there are broad loopholes in these bills that would allow landlords to rewrite their contracts as a series of 30
day rentals, totally eliminating the ability for the city to perform any inspections. This would be a dangerous situation for
the renters in our city.

At the local level, we often know best what will work for our location situation. Zoning preemptions are rarely, if ever,
good policy. Making blanket rules as are proposed here for this industry across the state does not further any true

governmental interest.

| ask that you please oppose this bill and do not allow it to move out of committee.
Eddie Sleeper

From: Jodie Adams <jadams4856@gmail.com>
C sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 8:31 PM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: House Bill 4722

Mr Sleeper,
Please share the following with the committee the morning of May 18 referencing the short term rental bill
proposal:

As an elected official myself and a long time resident in my community Iam deeply opposed to HB 4722.
Living within a resort community that has been based on summer residents and permanent residents | believe it
is a township/county/city responsibility to those residents to be able to protect the qualities for which they
settled here.

The state legislature is overstepping its governing power by attempting to withdraw local ability to manage and
regulate short term rentals. In our township we have seen an influx of house buyers whose only interest is in
renting for profit. Many of these homes are in residential communities and the problems, from parking issues to
disrespectful renters, have encroached on their quality of home ownership.

There is a supposition that it helps tourism by having short term rentals and in many respects it does. However.
taking away our community’s right to regulate them at a local level is harmful and shows disrespect from our
state legislature.

Respectfully submitted,
Jodie Adams

Boyne City, MI 49712
Evangeline Township

Sent from Jodie’s iPad
Eddie Sleeper

From: Joy Gaasch <JGaasch@grandhavenchamber.org>
( ent: Monday, May 17, 2021 6:02 PM
To: Rep. Steve Marino (District 24); Rep. John R. Roth (District 104); Rep. Diana Farrington

(District 30); Rep. Rodney Wakeman (District 94}; Rep. Pauline Wendzel (District 79); Rep.
David W. Martin (District 48}; Rep. Sara Cambensy (District 109); Rep. John D, Cherry
(District 49); Rep. Mari Manoogian (District 40); Rep. Karen Whitsett (District 9); Rep.
Tullio Liberati (District 13); Eddie Sleeper

Cc: Rep. Jim Lilly (District 89); SenRVictory@senate.michigan.gov
Subject: House Bill 4722
May 17, 2021

To: Members of the State House of Representatives Commerce and Tourism Committee

The Chamber Board of Directors of the Chamber of Commerce Grand Haven, Spring Lake, Ferrysburg representing more
than 725 members is opposed to House Bill 4722 that will be discussed at a hearing in your committee on May 18".

In general, we support local contro! of zoning. Communities are best suited to make decisions about local land use and
zoning as the elected and paid staff in those communities are answerable to the people they serve. We recognize the
importance of the economic development impact of the tourism industry at the State and local level, and the need for
short term rentals to accommodate family and groups that wish to stay ina home setting.

( ‘tis essential, however, for our community and any community to plan a balanced approach to accommodating the
short-term rental business. Balance in the number of short-term rentals per neighborhood is important for the

residents that make the neighborhoods their homes, and this proposed legislation removes all local control to ensure
the integrity of community neighborhoods. As cur communities continue working diligently to bring families and
individuals back to Michigan to fill the many unfilled job openings in manufacturing and the trades, it makes no sense to
pass any legislation that will affect our community's ability to create sustainable, stable neighborhoods in our
communities that attract year-round residents that help us address our labor shortage, support our local school systems,
become active volunteers and philanthropists with a vested interest in the community in which they live.

As members of the Commerce and Tourism Committee, it is imperative that you do not remove local control of land use
and zoning from loca! communities. There are no two units of government, let alone communities that are alike. One
size fits-all legislation does not serve our state well at all. Part of the beauty of Michigan’s allure to visitors and new
residents is each of the unique experiences they can have while spending time exploring our amazing state. We urge
you to vote NO on this bad legislation.

Respectfully,
Joy Gaasch
President

Cc Representative Jim Lilly
Cc Senator Roger Victory

C
Eddie Sleeper

From: Natalie Forte <niforte@me.cam>
(ent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 9:06 AM

To: Natalie Forte

Cc: Natalie Forte

Subject: House Bill 4722

(

Good morning,

I] am writing this morning to address House Bill 4722. As Mayor of the City of Lake Angelus, | oppose this Bill
which preempts local zoning authority. We are a small city and a quiet community. We treasure the ability to
make decisions based on the needs of our residents and to restrict activities that would infringe on the residents
peaceful enjoyment of their homes and the lake. The presence of short-term vacation rentals in our very small
community (142 households) would have devastating effects on the quality of life of our residents and the lake
environment.

I believe our local Planning Commission and City Council is best positioned to determine if something needs to
be acted upon to maintain the balance between residential and commercia! uses, residents and investment
property owners and to protect the health, safety and welfare of our residents. Thank you for your consideration
and representation.

Cordially,

Natalie Forte
Mayor, City of Lake Angelus
5380 ‘APPLE AVENUE 6 MUSKEGON, MICHIGAN @ 49442-3097
TELEPHONE; (231) 788-2254

05/18/2021

House Commerce and Tourism Committee
Representative Steve Marino Chair

House office building

Lansing, MI

RE: HB 4722

Committee Members,

( HB 4722 in the current form eliminates the local contro! of rental properties and their
ability to regulate density in residential zones. Furthermore, stating that procedures
can't be different than those of other dwellings in the same zone eliminates a
municipalities ability to perform rental inspections. The fact that municipalities operate
very successful rental inspection programs both on short- and long-term rentals,
ensuring the health and safety of the occupants is the highest priority.

Fire departments across Michigan perform these inspections to ensure proper exits,
working smoke alarms and fire extinguishers in the case of a fire. These such
inspections have probably saved countless lives over the years. This legislation
removes our ability to perform these inspections because we don’t inspect single family
residential dwellings in the same zones, protecting rights and privacy of individual
owner-occupied dwellings.

Mark Cleveland
Fire Chief
Egelston Township Fire Dept.

SMOKE DETECTORS SAVE LIVES
Eddie Sleeper

From: Paul Jordan <pq)1949@sbeglobal.net>
a ‘ent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 8:44 AM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: re: HB 4722

Dear Mr. Sleeper:

| don't know if emailed testimony is permitted but, if so, I'd appreciate it if this was provided to the
Committee members.

| am a trustee for the Cobmoosa Shores Association, which represents property owners in the
Cobmoosa Shores community bordering Lake Michigan in Oceana County. My comments are my
own, and | do not speak for either the board or the community.

There is considerable concern in our community regarding short-term rentals, and in particular rental
units that are not owner occupied. HB 4722 is flawed in that it does not distinguish between short-
term rental units which are maintained purely for commercial purposes, and those which are rented
only when not occupied by their owners.

Non-owner-occupied rental units are often owned by absentee landlords with no ties to the local
community and are operated for purely commercial purposes. These are, in reality, businesses.

( ‘ strongly urge you to amend the legislation to make it clear that houses in residentially-zoned areas
which are operated solely as short-term rental units ARE commercial operations and, therefore, not
permitted.

Thank you for your attention.
Eddie Sleeper

From: mary robertson <macy1958@hotmaii.com>
‘ent: Monday, May 17, 2021 3:22 PM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: HB 4722

Hi,

{ just forwarded the following to our representatives, but wanted to make sure you also received a copy.

{am writing to ask you to oppose House Bill 4722 that eliminates a municipality's ability to regulate short-term vacation
rentals. This bill mirrors several past pieces of attempted legislation and does not include any compromises local
government groups have put forth to address concerns voiced by the Michigan Realtors.

Neighborhoods are beginning to look a lot different with these short-term rental homes. People are beginning to be
very concerned about who is renting in the house next to them. You don't know if there is a sex offender staying there
because they have to register as sex offenders at their home address, but not while traveling. You don't know if there is
a drug party taking place next door to your home. It is very scary to think about all of the different people that rent
these houses since we know nothing about them. At least with our neighbors, you have a chance to get to know them
and can talk to them about any issues you might have.

By allowing short-term rentals in every neighborhood, the affordable housing for the local workforce (servers, cooks,
‘eachers, maintenance workers, convenience and grocery stores) is gone. The rental industry has made it difficult to

( ind affordable housing in our lakefront community of New Buffalo. When there fs no affordable housing available in the
area, who is going to work these jobs? The local businesses will not be able to survive if they don't have employees to
keep the business running.

Our school is starting to see a reduction in students due to the homes being purchased by second home owners and
those that want to use the home for income as a rental! property. School funding in most school districts in the state is
based on the enrollment of students. As more homes are used for short-term rentals, there is less housing available for
full-time residents which means less students attending school.

There are more problems requiring more police presence because many of the short-term renters are here to party and
celebrate. They break noise and nuisance ordinances, and require more police that the municipality might not have
funding to pay for.

HB 4722 doesn't allow for any fees or regulation of the short-term rentals, although many of these rental properties
cause a lot of trouble and require police response.

Local government is best posttioned to know the unique needs of their community when discussing zoning issues. Local
officials are the decision makers closest to the people. Our loca! elected leaders are the ones best situated to determine
if something needs to be acted upon to maintain the delicate balance between residential and commercial uses,
between residents and investment property owners, and to protect the health, safety and welfare of residents, renters
and vacation visitors.

C
Supporters of this legislation will argue that this is a property rights issue, but they don't include all property owners in
that argument. By saying "property owners” they only care about those who own residential homes for the purpose of
using them as vacation rentals to generate revenue. They are not talking about the neighbors of these rentals who have
to live with a revolving door of these vacationers constantly coming and going. The neighbors of these rental properties
also have rights as property owners.

There are numerous examples of municipal! regulations across the state allowing property owners to rent out their home
a few times a year to cover property taxes and upkeep. This proposed legislation does not take these best practices into
account.

Are the ordinances all uniform, saying the same thing? No, but cur communities are not cookie-cutter places. They have
different residential and business needs, and different demands on services. A one size, fits all solution does not work
for this issue.

Please oppose this legistation that prioritizes profits over people!
Thank you and have a great day.

Mary & Mark Robertson

300 S. Marshall St.

New Buffalo, MI 49117
C SPRING LAKE JOWNSHIP

# 2 2 MICKIGAN

Viemo

To: | House Committee on Commerce and Tourism
From: Gordon Gallagher
Spring Lake Township Manager
Date: May 17, 2021
Re: HB 4722

Spring Lake Township has spent many years and over $80,000 on reviewing the
impacts of Short-Term Rentals (STR’s) on our community. We urge the Senate
Committee on Regulatory Reform to vote “NO” on SB 446. It is an assault on local

( government that will have very detrimental effects on any community with lakes and
streams (most of Michigan).

Spring Lake Township held public hearings where over 300 residents voiced their
opinions. At the end of our year-long, local, public engagement efforts, the Township
Board decided to regulate short term rentals in our community.

Regulation of transient housing has been done locally in Michigan for many decades.
In Spring Lake Township, STR's are allowed in some areas and not allowed in others.
Our local regulations are reasonable and fair. They balance the desires of residents
to have some areas without transient housing and the strong interests of people that
want to visit and enjoy our naturai beauty.

Spring Lake Township defended our local ordinance all of the way to the Michigan
Supreme Court. The courts consistently ruled that STR’s are a commercial use of
land, because they ARE.

Please leave this important issue to local governments. Vote “NO” on SB 446
Eddie Steeper

From:
C ent:

To:

Subject:

Dear Mr. Sleeper:

ellen delarosa-Pearn <ellen.delarosa.pearn@gmail.com>
Monday, May 17, 2021 3:08 PM

Eddie Sleeper

Fwd: | Oppose HB 4722

My name is Ellen delaRosa-Pearn and | live in Spring Lake Michigan. | am writing to you because ! oppose HB

4722.

| oppose House Bill 4722 because it limits the regulation of Short-Term Rentals (STR} by local zoning
ordinances. If passed, HB 4722 would ensure that STRs (property rental of less than 30 days) would not be
considered “commercial use" of a property across the state of Michigan. Short Term Rentals are clearly not
residential, they are unregulated hotels.

HB 4722 takes away the power of a city, township or other municipality to decide proper zoning locations for
Short Term Rentals. In essence, Short Term Rentals are typically “vacation” houses; they generate high
income for landlords while pricing middle-class buyers and renters out of the area.

The Short-Term Rental industry is increasingly dominated by large, corporate investors; corporations have no
personal stake in our communities’ welfare. Issues with corporate, commercialized STRs have been well-
documented across the country in states like Arizona, California, New York and Florida. Issues include tax-
avoidance, unmitigated fire and safety violations, and attraction of disruptive guests.

( Vacation houses do not belong in all residential areas in our state. The noise, party atmosphere and
continuous flow of transient renters is not a gocd fit with quiet, family communities.

Unregulated proliferation of STR properties create “seasonal-only’ communities and erode the tax base. Well-
documented issues created by STRs are evident in towns such as Crested Butte, CO, San Diego, CA, Sedona
AZ, New York, NY, San Francisco, CA and Roseville, MN. These are just a few of the numerous examples.

| do believe that STRs properties provide value and have a place in our communities. However, let’s allow
individual communities to limit, restrict and govern proper locations for Short Term Rental properties. Local
zoning Is critically important to create and maintain resilient, sustainable communities.

f urge you to please vote "NO" to HB 4722 to preserve the rights of our communities to make the appropriate
zoning decisions for Short Term Rentals

Respectfully,

Ellen delaRosa-Pearn

734 276 3284

C
THE City OF

OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER

241 W. South Street

C y Kalamazoo, Ml 49007-4796
Phone: (269) 337-8047

My Tie Fax: (269) 337-8182

www.kalamazoocity org

May 17, 2021

House Commerce and Tourism Committee
124 North Capitol Ave
Lansing, MI 48933

RE: Opposition to House Bill 4722
Dear Commitice Chair Marino:

We are deeply troubled over the many ways that House Bill 4722 could undermine communities,
fail to ensure that rental properties are safe, and create unfair competition by encouraging the
unregulated growth of vacation rentals in residential neighborhoods. These measures would ti¢
the hands of local leaders and residents who want to have a say in where the growing number of
short-term rentals belong in their communities, forcing them to live with a one-size-fits-all
solution out of Lansing. That’s why we are writing in opposition to House Bill 4277.

( This iegislation puts in place a preemption upsetting the delicate balance between a healthy
tourism economy, properly rights and an established, transparent process for zoning that is open
to the public. These measures would eliminate local oversight that is so important to protecting
the health and safety of short-term renters, as well as preserving neighborhoods.
Residential zoning exists to preserve the character of neighborhoods and protect property values
for every home. This legislation preempts that process and silences the voices of residents and
locally elected leaders by allowing commercial activity in residential areas.

These short-term rentals also are unfair to existing lodging and businesses statewide who
contribute so much to Michigan’s tourism economy. Short-term rentals don’t pay the hotel and
motel taxes or undergo health and safety inspections that licensed business owners do, giving
short-term rental owners an unfair leg up. Without the appropriate regulations in place the bill
would be depriving local tourism campaigns of revenue needed to promote their regions. By
allowing unregulated short-term rentals to dodge tax and public safety requirements. these bills
place renters al risk and undercut existing hospitality businesses, taking away jobs and causing
hotel and motel tax revenue to drop.

in addition, this unregulated activity increases housing costs while making affordable housing
less available to those who need it. This can be especially problematic in areas where affordable
housing already is hard to find in Michigan’s many shoreline communities where outside buyers
can push up housing prices to the point where local workers can’t afford them. The addition of
home-sharing rentals, where the owner is present during the guest's stay, can be a positive
addition for a community if appropriately regulated by the focal governing unit, But these bills
would allow unlimited whole-unit rentals as well. A national study found that only about 20
C percent of Airbnb rentals involve home sharing, while the rest are whole-unit rentals where the
owner isn’t present. If these bills pass, any landlord could simply adjust the terms of a lease
agreement to qualify as a short-term rental, including for weekends only, week by week, or any
number of periods of time up to 28 days, with no local oversight or regulation. Any short-term

rental property, in any neighborhood, running a series of 28-day leases would not be subject to
local ordinances.

We support local control. Local governments and the residents who live and work in those
communities are best suited to determine where short-term rentals work, and under what terms.
A one-size-fits-all Lansing solution is not the way to protect our communities or to allow this
new form of lodging to play a role in the state’s economy.

incerely,

ames K. Ritsema, ICMA-CM
City Manager

Cec: Mr. Edward Sleeper, Committee Clerk
Eddie Sleeper

From: City Manager <citymanager@cityofgrandblanc.com>
CC ent: Monday, May 17, 2021 10:58 AM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: House Bill 4722 Opposition

Please do not let local control be taken away!

Iam writing to ask you to oppose House Bill 4722 that eliminates a municipality's ability
to regulate short-term vacation rentals. This bill mirrors several past pieces of attempted
legislation and does not include any compromises loca! government groups have put
forth to address concerns voiced by the Michigan Realtors.

Local government is best positioned to know the unique needs of their community when
discussing zoning issues. Local officials are the decision makers closest to the people.
Our local elected leaders are the ones best situated to determine if something needs to
be acted upon to maintain the delicate balance between residential and commercial
uses, between residents and investment property owners, and to protect the health,
safety and welfare of residents, renters and vacation visitors.

Supporters of this legislation will argue that this is a property rights issue, but they don't
include all property owners in that argument. By saying "property owners" they only

( care about those who own residential homes for the purpose of using them as vacation
rentais to generate revenue. They are not talking about the neighbors of these rentals
who have to live with a revolving door of these vacationers constantly coming and going.
The neighbors of these rental properties also have rights as property owners.

There are numerous examples of municipal regulations across the state allowing
property owners to rent out their home a few times a year to cover property taxes and
upkeep. This proposed legislation does not take these best practices into account. Are
the ordinances all uniform, saying the same thing? No, but our communities are not
cookie-cutter places. They have different residential and business needs, and different
demands on services. A one size, fits all solution does not work for this issue.

Please oppose this legislation that prioritizes profits over people!

Chant gou,

Wendy L. Jean-Buhrer
City Manager

C city of Grand Blanc
810/694-1118
(33

cits oF

GRAND BIANC

‘This email is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is addressed and may contain information
that is privileged, confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure. Unauthorized use, retention,
dissemination or copying is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies of this c-mail and any attachments and notify the sender immediately by return email.
Eddie Sleeper

From: Fred Sheridan <frednbeth@gmail.com>
a ent: Monday, May 17, 2021 11:13 AM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: Short term rentals

Short term rentals should be left to local municipalities to govern snd regulate. Special interest groups should
not be allowed to take away local zoning and ordinance enforcement from local government!

Sent from my iPhone
Eddie Sleeper

From: Barb Caldwel! <barbmcaldwe!l@gmail.com>
sent: Sunday, May 16, 2021 931 PM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: HR4722

I ive in Grand Haven, we have many neighborhoods in Spring Lake/Grand Haven that allow short term rentals. This
needs to be limited, the rentals are often disruptive to the other homeowners in these neighborhoods | oppose HR 4722
and don't want unlimited STRs in my neighborhood. Please vote against this

Thank you,

Barbara Caldwell
Eddie Sleeper

From: Mary Eagin <maryeagin@gmai! com>
rent: Sunday, May 16, 2021 9:23 PM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: PLEASE OPPOSE HIB 4722 and SIB 0446

Dear Members of the State House Committee on Commerce and Tourism:

As a resident of Spring Lake, MI - certainly a community that thrives on tourism - 1 respectfully request your
OPPOSITION of BIB 4722 and SIB 0446 which attempt to allow "short-term" rentals in any
residential community without limits on the capacity or number of days that the home is rented.

As a homeowner on Spring Lake, | feel that this bill would be detrimental to the community and neighborhood that we
have chosen to live in for 37 years. It would be detrimental to all of our Michigan communities - and take away the things
that make us "PURE MICHIGAN".

Homes in our community are selling at a premium with many young families wanting to move into a community with
excellent schools, library, and other great local amenities. There aren't enough houses for the residential dermand that we
have. |f"investors” are allowed to purchase homes to use as "short-term" rentals then they will price these young families
right out of the market - and we know the need for affordable housing!! This would go against the great need for
housing for families

Residential homes would be converted into short-term vacation renta| units and marketed on the internet by property
management companies for rent by the weekend or week. Websites have made it easy and profitable for property
owners, especially absentee owners, to rent their property to a successive parade of vacationers and to run a commercial
jusiness very similar to a motel. The homes are typically populated with as many bedrooms, containing as many beds,
as possible, since the more people they can support, the more the owner can charge per night.

Unlike long-term renters, short-term renters do not reside in and become a part of the neighborhood. They are frequently
very large groups gathering for reunions, corporate off-sites, or weddings. They fill the driveway with cars overflowing into
the street, create noise and commotion, generate trash, and cause safety concerns among neighbors who don't know
who is coming and going each day

Short-term rentals impinge upon the rights of citizens who relied on single-family residential zoning when buying their
homes, as we did many years ago

We beg you to not be swayed by the Realtors and those who will profit from the rentals, while we all lose money in terms
of property value and have to live with the disruption of our neighborhoods

Please voice and vote your opposition to HIB 4722 and SIB 0446

Thank you!

Mary Eagin
15745 Vine Street
Spring Lake, MI 49456

616-842-9225
Eddie Sleeper

From: barbkari@azulstar.com
C ent: Sunday, May 16, 2021 8:09 PM
To: Rep. Steve Marino (District 24); Rep. John R. Roth (District 104}; Eddie Sleeper; Rep. Jim
Lilly (District 89)
Ce: Rep. Diana Farrington (District 30); Rep. Rodney Wakeman (District 94); Rep. Pauline

Wendzel (District 79); Rep. David W. Martin (District 48); Rep. Sara Cambensy (District
109); Rep. John D. Cherry (District 49); Rep. Mari Manoogian (District 40)
Subject: FW: HB 4722

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: barbkari@azulstar.com

Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2021 7:51 PM
To: Barb Rowe; barbkar!@charter.net
Subject: HB 4722

Dear Michigan House Representatives and Committee Clerk Sleeper,
HB 4722 prohibits local zoning ordinances and
allows for short term rentals in ALL neighborhoods.

~ Mouse Bill 4722 reeks of Big Government Overreach and
( ~an be compared to the federal government
handing down unwanted mandates to the State.
(Michigan is a state that doesn’t like the federal government.}
HB4722 is more than a property rights issue,
it’s a quality of life issue and about government interference.

The correct name of HB 4722 should be the:
“Michigan Realtor Association Airbnb House Bill,” sponsored by
lobbyists, investors, speculators, developers and a legislative committee.
We live in a small downtown Grand Haven
neighborhood with 77 registered STR’s.
Like other towns, citizens and their local elected officials have
seriously worked on making what is best for their community.
Each town has unique needs/personality and diligently
handles its own affairs.
Our goal is to retain and attract young people and families.
Unfortunately, they cannot afford homes and long term rentals
have evaporated.
For your consideration there is a loss of community cohesion due to:
A short term rental is a motel/hotel.
A STR is not residential, unless the owner lives in it.
A5TR is no longer a residence, uniess the owner lives in it.
f STRisnotaresidence. It is commercial and a profitable business.
There are unregistered STR’s.
HB 4722, the State would become responsible for STR registration, inspections,
health, safety, parking, enforcement, fire code etc.

Grand Haven took important steps addressing the

complexities of affordable housing, long term rentals and STR’s.
Tragically, HB 4722 destroys decision making at the !ocal level.
Politicians say they want citizen participation and feedback, and yet
the value of that is being cast aside.

Michigan legislators should take te heart that local governments

don’t need Lansing to deal with local housing issues.

Control of shart term rentals is best in the hands of local government.

HB 4722 is not a good idea.

The best decisions about a community are made by its

people and local government.

Money, power and greed should not determine the future of Grand Haven.

Thank you

Barbara and Karl Rowe

215 South Fourth

Grand Haven 49417barbkarl@charter.net

Please include this correspondence in the official committee record May 18, 2021

Sent from Mail for Windows 10
Eddie Sleeper

From: Eileen Paull <e/p2is@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2021 3:32 PM
To: Rep. Steve Marino (District 24); Rep. John R. Roth (District 104); Rep, Diana Farrington

{District 30); Rep. Rodney Wakeman (District 94); Rep. Pauline Wendzel (District 79); Rep
David W. Martin (District 48); Rep. Sara Cambensy (District 109); Rep. John D. Cherry
(District 49); Rep. Mari Manoogian (District 40); Rep. Karen Whitsett (District 9); Rep.
Tullio Liberati (District 13); Eddie Sleeper

Subject: HB 4722 Short term rentals

| strongly discourage the passage of House Bill 4722 regarding short term rentals for these reasons:

Local municipalities are best equipped to determine what serves their residents best on these matters. In
Grand Haven, local leaders worked closely with residents to determine zones where short term rentals made
sense and where they did not

| am not against owner-occupied short term rentals. Owner-occupied short term rental property keeps a
neighborhood stable and potential issues from short term rental occupants are minimized when the owners are
on site. At this time, it seems the occurrence of non-owner occupied short term rentals is far greater than
owner occupied short term rental property

lam strongly against short term rental property companies buying multiple residences in a stable community
This is known to destroy property values that residents enjoy due to the stability and upkeep of their properties.
It also affects school enrollment and general civic engagement that permanent and long term rental residents

| believe existing residents have the right to buy a home in a neighborhood with known existing zoning
ordinances that cannot be completely destroyed by the unregulated infiltration of short term rentals.

Please consider the property rights of existing homeowners and vote no on HB 4722.
Thank you,

Eileen Paull
Grand Haven, Michigan
Eddie Sleeper

From: Robert Homan <homanrc@sbcglobal.net>
‘ent: Sunday, May 16, 2021 3:27 PM

fo: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: HB 4277

Mr. Sleeper:

i have sent the following communication to all members of the House Committee that is considering the subject bill. |
want to be sure that you received a copy for the record and possible dissemination to anyone requesting to see this
document (email).

lam a retired local government elected official and also a retired local government manager asking you to carefully
consider the following commentary on HB 4277, which is probably one of the most severe attempts to deny local
government officials (representing many cf the same peaple you represent) the ability to regulate—REASONABLY
regulate—short term rental housing.

| can reasonably guess how much pressure may be put upon you to vote one way or the other on this legislation, and |
must trust your judgment in doing what is best for the communities you represent; so I'm asking you to carefully read
and consider the following as you deliberate sending HB 4277 to the full house for action.

Also, please consider the wisdom of modifying the legislation to recognize the importance of local government contral
over this most “local” of issues — our neighborhoods — and possibly create reasonable parameters (including
limitations} on how local governments must act to allow or regulate short term housing rentals.

Thank you for considering the following thoughts and concerns:

The State Legislature is pursuing legislation that wil! eliminate local
ability to reasonably regulate short term rental businesses in Michigan. |f
passed, HB 4277 will strip Cities, Villages and Townships of the ability

to regulate short term rentals AND will eliminate their ability to inspect
all rentals.

There re pros and cons to every piece of proposed legislation:
On the pro side:

* wealthy investors from all over the world will invest in Michigan,
purchasing homes in our neighborhoods and converting them to mini-hotels

* absentee owners of residential properties in residential neighborhoods
will be able to convert the homes into overnight rentals

On the con side:
* attractive neighborhoods across the state will become a patchwork
of mini hotels, serving needs when they are high and sitting vacant the rest

of the time

* school enrollment in many district will decline as families are

i
displaced due to high profit short term rental potential

* housing costs will climb even further due to market pressures created
by a demand for partially occupied housing

* interest groups for every industry, from adult entertainment to
marijuana businesses will learn that sensible land use regulation can be
thrown out the window if you can afford to pay costly lobbyists to sway
legislation: local control of land use policy wilt be dead as we know it

* our dream homes will be hemmed in by obnoxious tourist controlled
party districts, and our legacy of fine small town living will be replaced

by a senseless cave in to short term wealth at the expense of our beautiful
neighborhoods

* your local! building inspector will no longer inspect rental properties
(the bill includes language that if we inspect rentals, we must also inspect
all owner occupied housing, which is not likely to ever happen). Blighted
residential properties and unsafe housing conditions will increase without
sensible oversight.

Bob Homan

5836 Woodbriar Dr NE
Belmont, Michigan 49306-8701
Sent from my iPad
Eddie Sleeper

From:

( ent:

To:

Subject:

Thomas Crum <tomecrumt956@gmail.com>

Sunday, May 16, 2021 12:31 PM

Rep. Steve Marino (District 24); Rep. John R. Roth (District 104); Rep. Diana Farrington
(District 30); Rep. Rodney Wakeman (District 94); Rep. Pauline Wendze| (District 79); Rep.
David W. Martin (District 48); Rep. Sara Cambensy (District 109); Rep. John D. Cherry
(District 49); Rep. Mari Manoogian (District 40); Rep. Karen Whitsett (District 9); Rep.
Tullio Liberati (District 13); Eddie Sleeper

HB 4277

We are not in favor of HIB 4277. Leave local control of land use to our local officials and city tax payers. We
know how to regulate our communities.
Do not vote to approve HB 4277.

Tom and Cheri Crum
Grand Haven, MI

Sent from my iPhone
Eddie Sleeper

From: Mike Dora <mdora@grandhaven.org>
Tent: Sunday, May 16, 2021 9:01 AM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: Short Term Rentals,

Mr. Sleeper,

lam writing to you to day to urge you to not pass House Bill 4722 deregulation of short term rental units.

Our experience here in Grand Haven has not been a pleasant one with regards to Short Term Rentals. We have
seen them take over entire neighborhoods reducing what was at one time a thriving neighborhocd to only a
few remaining full time residences.

We have one area of town our Southside district that covers approx 16 blocks of area that has over 63 short
term rental units in it that we know of. Others exist that simply do not register.

ican not see how the short term renting of these properties would be considered a residential use. Some of
these properties rent for $3000.00 per week in Grand Haven. Various renters come and go on a weekly basis
pretty much the same as any focal hotel in our town to say they are not commercial is wrong. They are a
business plain and simple.

To place them in the same category as owner occupied dwellings is unbelievable as well. removing regulations
on the number of persons that may occupy a dwelling, we have set reasonable numbers to the units we have
registered. Without the limits we would have 15-20 people staying is a 3 bedroom home. We have had this
already with limits on occupancy. Sleeping on the floors, in chairs, basically anyplace which creates a unsafe
environment should a fire or emergency occur.

Removing inspections, really think this over. These residents are being occupied by folks for a week or two
who have nothing invested in maintaining the structure, electrical, plumbing etc in working order. Owner
occupied residences are maintained as the same family lives there day to day year round. Removing
inspections on these rentals will only allow them to become in disrepair and create hazards unknown to the
renters that could cause the loss of life.

Imagine if you would what your neighborhood would be like with one third to half of the homes being short
term rentals. Your neighbors as you know them now gone, kids playing and riding bikes gone or next to none.
Neighbors getting together for a visit gone. Your closest neighbor you can count on if you need to 3-4 homes
away. Would you want to live in a neighborhood like this?

Here is what you will have, people you do not know coming and going during the summer months every two
weeks or so. People not caring who you are or about your family. People who are next door on vacation every
day outside by a fire pit while you are trying to sleep as you have to work. Homes that would otherwise be
sold to full time neighbors being sold instead for $30-$50,000 over the asking price so they can become short
‘erm rentals for $3,000.00 per week. This is NOT an exaggeration and IS happening here. On street parking for
‘you will be gone. With no occupancy limits 4-5 families will rent one home bringing with them numerous cars
that will not park in the driveway. And homes that will sit empty during the other 8 months of the year.
1
Sound good to you? Pass this legislation and remove local control and this is what you will be subjecting each
and every one of us to. You will ruin what is left of our neighborhoods. Deregulating these will work in some
towns where tourism is small and they will simply not generate enough revenue to support having very many
of them.

Not every town is that way and a broad sweep of the brush is not a good fit for every town in our State. We
literally could have our entire downtown area neighborhoods consumed by short term rentals and still need
more.

Please leave local control in place, we live here everyday and with resident input we know what is best for our
businesses and
residents.

Mike Dora

Council Member

City of Grand Haven

519 Washington Ave.
mdora@grandhaven.org
616-638-0553
Eddie Sleeper

From: John Hodgson <jhodgson@sjcity.com>
( ant: Saturday, May 15, 2021 4:23 PM
fo: Rep. Steve Marino (District 24); Rep. John R. Roth (District 104); Rep. Diana Farrington

(District 30); Rep. Rodney Wakeman (District 94); Rep. Pauline Wendzel (District 79); Rep
David W. Martin (District 48); Rep. Sara Cambensy (District 109); Rep. John D. Cherry
(District 49); Rep. Mari Manoogian (District 40}; Rep. Karen Whitsett (District 9); Rep
Tullio Liberati (District 13); Eddie Sleeper

Ce: senklasata@senate.michigan.gov; Mike Garey; Laura Ann. Goos; Jeff Richards; Lynn
Todman; Michele Binkley

Subject: City of St Joseph Resolution & Statement for 05182021 Committee Meeting

Attachments: City of St Joseph Resolution Regarding HB 4722 05102021.pdf

Dear Chairman Marino. Honorable Members of the House Commerce and Tourism Committee, and Clerk
Sleeper:

I am writing on behalf of the City Commission of the City of St. Joseph to express the Commission's strong
concerns regarding and opposition to HB 4722. The City Commission has previously passed resolutions
expressing opposition to HB 4722's predecessors in the 2017-18 and 2019-20 terms of the legislature, HB 4503
and HB 4046, respectively.

The City of St. Joseph and its citizens have been actively involved for many years in considering the benefits
and challenges associated with short-term residential rentals, and crafting regulations in order to best provide
‘or these uses in our community. St. Joseph is blessed by wonderful beaches, a strong downtown, and "small

( own charm" and surrounded by many attractions in neighboring communities. and it is no surprise that our
community hosts many visitors, especially in the summer season.

In the years leading up to 2006, the City's ordinances did not distinguish "short-term" or vacation rentals from
other rentals of residential properties. The community required the registration of rental properties and the
building inspection department and/or the fire department inspected rental units every two years, principally to
confirm safety and welfare issues such as functioning smoke detectors, door locks, functioning windows, and
hot water. Smali registration and inspections fees calculated to defray the cost of the inspections were levied.

In the summer of 2006, residents began attending City Commission meetings to lodge complaints about
vacation rentals. These residents reported that there had been an increase in the number of vacation rentals in
neighborhoods near the downtown business district and beach. Many of the complaints were, on the surface,
regarding specific actions such as noise and overcrowding, but going beyond those concerns, at a deeper level
residents felt that these rentals were breaking apart the residential character of the neighborhoods and the
community. Many residents commented in public meetings, and the City received a petition signed by more
than 250 residents calling for the prohibition of short-term rentals.

rhe City Commission determined that this matter warranted thoughtful review to determine if regulation might
be appropriate, and over a period of several months surveyed residents and worked with staff and special
counsel to investigate the matter and consider possible courses of action. It heard from owners and supporters
of short term rentals as well as from neighbors and other community members.

¢ t became clear from the evidence received that a majority of residents in affected areas strongly believed that
their neighborhoods were losing their essential character as residential neighborhoods and were assuming a new

i
character of a non-residential resort community. They noted that as permanent residences transitioned into
short-term rentals, residents lost touch with their neighbors. Houses were crowded with strangers in the
summer, and stood vacant the rest of the year. The Commission concluded that these concerns were worthy of
investigation, and over time concluded that it was appropriate (o research a plan of regulation.

The Commission understood that it was balancing property rights; not only the rights of owners who might wish
to operate a short-term rental, but the rights of adjacent properly owners who had purchased their homes
expecting to live in a residential neighborhood, and who felt their neighborhood was being damaged by the
introduction and expansion of commercial uses. To be certain, the experiences of our residents indicates that
short-term rentals, with an intentional rapid turnover of paying guests, are commercial uses properly
distinguishable from similar physical properties occupied by resident owners, long-term tenants, and/or part-
time home owners.

Although many residents called for the elimination of short-term rentals, the City Commission correctly
understood that this is not permitted under Michigan law. Under the Zoning Enabling Act:

“A zoning ordinance or zoning decision shall not have the effect of totally prohibiting the establishment of a
land use within a local unit of government in the presence of a demonstrated need for that land use within either
that local unit of government or the surrounding area within the state, unless a location within the local unit of
government does not exist where the use may be appropriately located or the use is unlawful. (MCL
125.3207)"

lherefore, it was essential that any scheme of regulation provide for short-term rentals.

In addition, if a currently existing short-term rental should be in a location where the use might be prohibited by
new zoning ordinance amendments, that short-term rental would be protected under the law and must be ( '
allowed to remain in that location: d

"If the use of a dwelling, building, or structure or of the land is lawful at the time of enactment of a zoning
ordinance or an amendment to a zoning ordinance, then that use may be continued although the use does not
conform to the zoning ordinance or amendment. [...]" (MCL 125.3208(1))

Therefore, no property owner who had been lawfully operating a short-term rental would lose the ability to do
so. Moreover, that use could be preserved and passed on to a new owner, so long as it was continued. Only ifa
property owner voluntarily extinguished the short-term rental use of the property would that use cease to be
authorized.

A number of health, safety and welfare concerns were also identified. Ultimately a two-pronged approach was
followed, in which the City worked to research and prepare: 1) a zoning ordinance amendment which defined
short-term rentals as a separate use. allowed short-term rentals in some neighborhoods in the city, in some
locations through a special use process, in others through a conditional use process; and 2) a general code of
ordinances amendment, which provided for inspection and registration requirements for short-term rentals.

[he zoning ordinance amendment was developed and reviewed through the usual process, which included
public meetings before and a recommendation by the Planning Commission, followed by two ordinance
readings by the City Commission. The general code of ordinance amendment proceeded on a parallel track; it
was not within the purview of the Planning Commission but was given two readings by the City Commission.

Upon adoption of the ordinances, which took effect in February 2007, owners of previously existing short-term \
rentals were given a period of time to register and undergo initial inspections, and then new applications were
accepted and processed. At the time of ordinance adoption, there were approximately 40 separate properties

2
with a total of approximately 50 short-term units in the city. Those numbers declined slightly over time before
increasing over the last two years to slightly more than the community's starting point; at this time there are 43
properties with 53 short-term units. Some previously existing units have ceased to be used as short-term units,
while other new units have been registered in permitted locations.

We note that in condominium complexes, where owners have the right to directly collectively determine for
themselves whether they believe on the whole allowing short-term rentals is an advantage to them as property
owners and neighbors, the overwhelming answer has been "no". There are approximately ten condominium or
site condominium complexes in our community in locations where short-term rentals would be permitted under
the zoning ordinance. To our understanding, only three of those ten have chosen to allow short-term rentals.

After several years with these ordinances, the City Commission further amended the zoning ordinance to
remove an older traditional neighborhood from the permitted area. Several applications for short term rentals
had been submitted and considered, and through the evidence submitted during public hearings before the
Planning Commission and City Commission it became clear that further expansion of short-term rentals in this
neighborhood was not desirable.

We do not claim that the regulations that we developed for our community are the best fit for other
communities. We have spoken to other communities that are not fortunate enough to have sufficient hotel or
other lodging space for visitors, and which feel that short-term rentals are a very desirable way to accommodate
vacationers and boost their local economy, and would not wish to enact our ordinances. We understand and
respect that.

This is why we believe local control should be preserved, so each community's residents-and the elected
officials who those residents know personally and see every day on the sidewalk, in the grocery, and at
municipal meetings-can assess their local conditions, review their collective vision for their community and

( heir neighborhoods, consider the law and the already-established legal requirement to allow short-term rentals
in the community, and with the benefit of that knowledge and insight, develop and consider regulations that are
right for their community rather than be subjected to a one-size-fits-all scheme.

In the years since the ordinances were adopted, we have become aware of additional concerns that the
legislation would exacerbate affordable housing difficulties in our communities. We believe that in our
community a purchaser who plans to operate a short-term rental will in general be able to justify paying more
for that property than a potential full-time resident could pay, further driving up home prices in our community,
which already struggles with "missing middle" housing, which increases the difficulty local companies face in
recruiting and retaining professional employees. and by reducing available housing for full time residents
reduces the number of school age children in the community.

Some would say that higher home prices mean more taxes and more government revenue to pay for services;
our belief is that higher property values are no bargain for communities if they come at the cost of fewer
residents, vacant structures much of the year, recruitment and retention problems for local companies. and
declining enrollment in local schools. We wish to be a genuine community of people, not merely a tax base.

We appreciate the committee's consideration, and ask that you please take no action that would advance this
bill, or any other bill that would prevent our state's residents--your constituents--from considering and enacting
local zoning regulations regarding short-term rentals that are sensitive to their local situations and appropriate
for their communities, through their local governing bodies.

(eos accept the attached resolution of the St. Joseph City Commission, and this statement on behalf of the
city, which we respectfully request be included in the official House Commerce and Tourism Committee record
regarding House Bill 4722, for the Committee meeting of May 18, 2021. Thank you for your time and for your
consideration.

Respectfully,
John Hodgson

City Manager
St. Joseph
Resolution 2021-23 Meeting of May 10, 202!

RESOLUTION REGARDING STATE SHORT-TERM RENTAL BILL

A RESOLUTION
OPPOSING LEGISLATION DEPRIVING MICHIGAN RESIDENTS OF THE RIGHT FO
REGULATE SHORT-TERM RENTALS WITHIN THEIR COMMUNITIES
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, MICHIGAN

WHEREAS, the Michigan Legislature is considering House Bill 4722, and

WHEREAS, if enacted into law, this bill would require that short-term rentals be permitted uses
in all residential zones, and would deprive local residents of the right to determine for their own
communities and neighborhoods, through their local legislative bodies, whether zoning
regulations are desirable to implement to establish the locations in which short-term rentals are
appropriate within their community, or to individually review and consider proposed short-term
rentals using the long-established procedures set forth under state law, understanding that under
the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act it is not lawful to totally prohibit any use when there is a need
for that use in the community or the surrounding area, and

WHEREAS, the City of St. Joseph has through hard experience learned from its residents the
importance of thoughtful consideration of the impact of introduction of transient guests to
residential neighborhoods, and that well-considered zoning regulations are important to protect
the quality of life of our residents and the year-round character of our neighborhoods while still
permitting these uses in appropriate locations in the community, and

WHEREAS, the passage of House Bill 4722 would take from the citizens of the City of St.
Joseph local control of their community in this regard and would, in the judgment of the City
Commission, have a detrimental effect on our residents, our neighborhoods, and our community,
and

WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of St. Joseph understands, respects, and supports
the current right of all Michigan residents, through their local municipalities, to consider all
aspects of short-term rentals and to have the right to exercise local control by considering how
these uses fit in with the circumstances and goals of each individual community, whether
regulation might be appropriate, and if so the specific details of such regulations;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Commission of the City of St. Joseph
respectfully urges our elected representatives, Senator Kim LaSata and Representative Pauline
Wendzel, to oppose the passage of House Bill 4722 or any similar legislation; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Commission of the City of St. Joseph
respectfully urges House Commerce and Tourism Committee Chair Representative Steve Marino
and the honorable members of that committee to take no action to further the passage of this bill
or of legislation with a similar effect.
Resolution 2021-23 Meeting of May 10, 2021

RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]

MOVER: Laura Goos, Mayor Pro Tem
SECONDER: Michele Binkley, Commissioner
| AYES: Garey, Richards, Goos, Todman, Binkley
STATE OF MICHIGAN }
}ss.
COUNTY OF BERRIEN )

], Denise Westfall, the duly qualified and appointed Clerk of the City of St Joseph, Berrien County,
Michigan do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of action adopted by the
City Commission at a meeting held on May 10, 2021 the original of which is on file in my office.
Public notice of said meeting was given pursuant to and in compliance with Act No. 267 of the Public
Acts of Michigan of 1976, as amended.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this May 10, 2021.

Denise Westfall, City Clerk
City of St. Joseph
Eddie Sleeper

From: Ann Blais <blaisann@hotmail,com>
Sent: Monday, May 717, 2021 2:18 PM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: Short term rental

As a Michigan taxpayer and Spring Lake property owner, | STRONGLY object to HR 4722. We chose to buy ina
neighborhood zoned for single family use. Having unlimited short term rentals in our neighborhood and town
would change the dynamics of our community. Why would we want state mandated use of properties??? This
is a local issue, and should be treated as such. | encourage you to vote no to HR 4722.

Thank you,
Ann Blais

18854 Greenwood Ct
Spring Lake, MI 49456
Testimony to House Committee regarding HB 4722, May 17, 2021

My name is Robert Monetza. | am the Mayor of Grand Haven and have been on
the Grand Haven City Council since 2009. |am opposed to the preemption
legislation bill HB 4722.

Trust me when I tell you that we in Grand Haven understand tourism and
commerce very well. We have been a lakeshore tourist destination since the
1880s, in addition to having a well rounded and diverse local economy. Like many
Michigan communities, our citizens work in manufacturing, education,
transportation, retail and service, tourism, and more. We are a small city of varied
income levels, largely single-family neighborhoods built around historic and
workforce housing patterns. We struggle with the challenges of affordable
housing and making space for generational growth, while resolving to maintain
the essential character of our town that defines us as a unique place, We do this
with a clear-eyed view of practical economics, with the recognition that short
term rentals, like other businesses, have their role in our city’s economic
landscape, and the idea that locally developed solutions for our community may
be different than solutions in other communities.

Since 2007, we have been registering short term rentals, distinct from long-term
rentals, but there was little limitation on their ability to expand throughout our
residential neighborhoods. A decade later, we found that our registered - and
known - short term rentals had doubled and grown to more than 30% of
dwellings in some neighborhoods. When this happens on this scale,
neighborhood cohesion suffers, houses are empty in off-seasons, people neither
know their neighbors nor rely on them, the very fabric of community is
undermined. Short term tenants bring money to town, but they are simply
customers of hospitality businesses and do not stay to support our community
institutions, participate in school or civic activity, or provide any kind of continuity
to life in our city. Our residents demanded action to stop the erosion of their
neighborhoods and the impingement of this activity on their homes.
The bill says that the only role of the city is to mitigate nuisances, and it is true
that we have ordinances on the books for this. However, if communities may not
regulate short term rentals, nuisances which were readily avoidable must be
allowed to occur, and then our residents must pick up the phone, call 911, and
complain. Many residents find complaining to be uncomfortable, experience
retribution from the landlords and their customers, and suffer in silence. We
don’t think it is good public policy to push our citizens to their breaking points.
Again, the quality of life of our citizens is harmed while the short-term rentals
earn huge financial returns for a few.

Housing becomes unaffordable when houses are more lucrative as mini-motels
packed with tourists, than as homes. As in so many Michigan communities,
affordable housing has become a critical issue. The expansion of short-term
rentals in our neighborhoods absorbs housing and converts it from homes for
residents to profit centers for property managers, absentee landlords, and
developers. Residents find it difficult to compete for living space.

We firmly believe that our citizens also have property rights very bit as
important as the rights of the short-term rental operators: in particular, the right
to quiet enjoyment of their homes and the right to manage their social and civic
environment. Life in urban environments is always a matter of balancing rights.
The bill’s authors would have you believe that cities are taking away property
rights, and that the incentive to maximize their return on investment is all that
matters. This is not a case of “grandma and grandpa losing their homes if they
can’t short term rent”. That is completely disingenuous, less than 14% of our
registered short-term rentals are owner occupied, and our ordinance makes
allowance for them to make limited rentals. This discussion is about property
management companies and absentee landlords exploiting our neighborhoods.
When only the short-term rental operators have rights, our people are
powerless, defenseless, and impotent in their homes.

The bill declares that short term rental is a residential, and not a commercial
activity. This is false on its face, defies common sense, and creates an artificial
definition which defies reality. From April 2016 through June 2017, we held
several well-attended Planning Commission and City Council hearings. Everyone
who spoke on both sides of the issue acknowledged that short term rentals are
established and operated as businesses. Short term rentals pay sales taxes; if they
are not businesses, then why are they so taxed? They utilize the homes of
neighbors as a backdrop for their businesses, making neighbors unwilling
promoters of the seasonal rental business. Not only do they co-opt otherwise
affordable housing, they also compete directly with motels and hotels. This bill
would make it impossible to ever level the playing field between these
businesses. Every discussion in every context is about return on investment and
profit, plus off-site economic benefits, and it is never about how residents live, or
build and participate in community. This bill will force cities to allow this business
activity everywhere, in every residential neighborhood, against the will of the
citizens.

The bill, as written, would invalidate virtually any rental registration and
regulation program, as it places owner-occupied homes, long-term rentals for
community residents, and seasonally occupied short-term rentals all on the same
plane and requires any local regulation to treat them equally.

In Grand Haven, we engaged our citizens, developed specific regulations which
are suited to our community, through an arduous process of local democracy.
This is why we have home rule, and why preemption is such a bad idea. The
result was compromise, fair and respectful treatment of all parties, recognition of
some well-run existing uses, with the intent that future generations of our citizens
will have homes to live in, not simply to be exploited. We believe in local problem
solving, and do not need the guidance of Michigan Realtors Association or any
other tobbyists, nor imposition of centralized and arbitrary rules from the State.
Pre-emption of local control to profit state-wide players subverts democracy. We
know and trust our people, and at the local level, we are directly accountable to
them.

Mayor Robert Monetza

City of Grand Haven
Eddie Sleeper

From: deborah gang <deborah7 11@sbcglobal.net>
‘ent: Monday, May 17, 2021 1:59 PM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: Short term rentals

Please do not further destabilize our neighborhoods with unregulated short term rentals. These bills need careful
scrutiny and plenty of time to evaluate them. Please forward this to the other committee members.

Thank you
Eddie Sleeper

From: Ric Huff <CityAdministrator@nilesmiorg>
sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 1:53 PM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: HB 4722

Please note that the City of Niles is absolutely opposed to any regulations that would limit the local Planning
Commission's ability to regulate zoning and property uses based upon the best needs of the community.

If this bill is going to be passed no matter then we strongly suggest registration and inspection be allowed in
communities that have such a program in place for rental properties. We have found this program has reduced fires,
blight, and increased overall safety for the renters.

Richard A. Huff

City Administrator
City of Niles, Michigan
269.683.4700 x3011

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any of its attachments may contain proprietary City of Niles, Michigan information that is privileged,
confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the City of Niles, Michigan. This email is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of the email, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or
actions taken in retation to the contents of and attachments to this email is strictty prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this email
“error, please notify the sender immediately by return email and permanently delete the original and any copy of this email and destroy any
printout
Eddie Sleeper

From: Thad Beard <tbeard@rockford.mi.us>
(vent: Monday, May 17, 2021 12:46 PM

fo: Eddie Sleeper

Subject: FW: HB 4722

Please include the following as a part of the committee record.

From: Thad Beard

Sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 8:13 AM

To: Steve Marino@house.mi.gov; JohnRoth@house.mi.gov; DianaFarrington@house.mi.gov;
RodneyWakeman@house.mi.gov, PaulineWendzel@house.mi.gov; DavidMartin@house.mi.gov;
saracambensy@house.mi.gov; johncherry@house.mi.gov; marimanoogian@house.mi.gov;
karenwhitsett@house. mi.gov; TullioLiberati@house.mi.gov

Subject: HB 4722

Please stop the work towards HB 4722, and any other bill that removes the ability for local

units of government to control their own zoning. While | understand that you have been

pressured to consider legislation that enables special interest groups the ’right” to have short

term rentals, it should be and must be the local unit that determines whether or not they are
( appropriate for their community.

We are not considered a tourist area, however we have had several conversations with
property owners and investors seeking short term rental investments. We believe it is our
right and responsibility to determine what is best for our City. We further believe that what is
best for Rockford, may not be best for Grand Haven, or other communities, because we have
unique features that generate unique desired land uses, which in turn requires unique zoning
regulations to ensure the uses are complimentary to the wishes of the community.

By enacting HB 4722, it erodes the ability for the local unit of government from meeting the
needs of our unique communities, which in turn erodes the unique fabric of our community.

PLEASE DO NOT ENACT ANY LEGISLATION THAT REMOVES LOCAL CONTROL OF ZONING
ESPECIALLY IN THE HEART OF OUR COMMUNITIES.....OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

Respectfully,

Thad Beard,
cy Manager/Zoning Administrator
Thad M. Beard
City of Rockford

City Manager

7 South Monroe

P.O. Box 561

Rockford, Mt 49341

Phone (616) 866-1537
Fax (616) 866-4242
tbeard@rockford.mi.us

CONFIDENTIALITY:

The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments is intended for the use of the individual or entity to whom it
is addressed and may contain legally privileged, confidential information and/or work product. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or forwarding of this electronic message is strictly
prohibited.

O
Eddie Sleeper

From: Eric Waara <eric.waara@cityofhoughton.com>

Sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 12:18 PM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Ce: The Office of Senator McBroom; Rep. Greg Markkanen (District 110)
Subject: HB 4722 Hearing - FOR OFFICIAL COMMITTEE RECORD

am writing this in the strongest opposition to HB 4722.

The City of Houghton passed a local rental inspection ordinance more than a decade ago after a college student

tragically died because of a fire in a rental house. Houghton is a college town. More than 25% of our housing units are
rented in some form or fashion. The City, because of the taxpayers’ desire, has been able to put in place and enforce a
rental code which has made us a better community for those of us that live here year-round — and has fostered a safe,
clean, and acceptable way for the large number of rental properties in our City to coexist with the neighborhoods full of
families that make this our home. This bad legislation has the ability to dismantle years of investment and hard work,
supported by the taxpayers, that we’ve undertaken to create a system where we've been able to assure that there is a
healthy rental market in the City while providing the oversight and contro! to protect our neighborhoods, property

values, and living environment.

Like many other communities we are currently suffering a housing shortage. We have been able to create a community
that is one of those desirable places to live; in part a result of our strong rental ordinance and code enforcement. The

area in which we live and the lives we are able to lead here is something that others want as a place to live, not just 2

place to visit. We are fully aware of the need for economic growth and investment in a community, but it must be

balanced with protecting those things that make a community sought after in the first place. It has taken Houghton

nearly half a century of intentional, diligent work to become who we are. With the varied opportunities, needs,

challenges, and histories; the only way to preserve our communities is to leave them alone to manage their own futures
Letting investors run rough-shod on our neighborhoods is going to tear that all down. | would imagine that same cry wi —
be repeated all over the state should this shortsighted piece of legislation pass.

| would be happy to speak on this more should there be interest.

Eric T. Waara, P.E.

City Manager

City of Houghton

616 Shelden Avenue
Houghton, Michigan 49931
www.cityofhoughton.com
Eddie Sleeper

From Jane Ewing <janeewing42@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 12:20 PM

To: Eddie Sleeper

Subject

| Oppose 4722

Please protect our healthy neighborhoods. They are valuable environments for our families.
Jane Ewing
Eddie Sleeper

From: Nancy O'Neill <oneilln@hotmail.com>
Tent: Monday, May 17, 2021 12:12 PM
Subject: In Favor of Local Control of STR Zoning

Dear Committee Member:

We have lived in Grand Haven for thirty years and seen many beneficial changes to the Southside
neighborhood, where we bought a run-down “fixer upper” and poured our money and labor into
renovating the home and landscape. Many homeowners in our wonderful intact neighborhood have done
the same, hoping to raise their families here in a safe, stable environment. During the last decade,
however, we have seen homes that were formerly single-family or two-family long-term rentals for local
people, become short-term rentals for transient vacationers. Next door to us, for example, over the years,
the two-family rental home housed a single mother with young son, a middle-aged couple, a young couple
saving money to buy a home, several factory workers, and so on—in other words, a range of middle and
lower-income people working in the area.

Although the current owners of the short-term rental next door are good, considerate people, their guests
are not always considerate or even aware that they are living in the middle of a stable neighborhood. They
are here for a short visit—a few days or a week—and they are here to have fun, so they celebrate
outdoors, stay out late, and host big parties with friends. | cringe every time a new group moves in
Jecause we do not know what is in store for us. At least with long-term neighbors, we become used to
their habits, even if they annoy us, and we are more likely to be able to talk to them. We do not want to
have the responsibility of constantly reminding people that this is a neighborhood, not a vacation party
land.

At present, we have local control of inspections, which at least assures that rental properties are regularly
inspected. If this bill passes, we are concerned that and unsafe housing conditions will increase without
local oversight.

Another issue of concern is parking: Next door and at the STRs on Franklin, only two parking places are
provided, yet often the vacationers have four or more cars. They park on the street, which makes it
difficult for visitors to the downtown and local residents’ guests to find parking.

Finally, we are concerned that bidding for high-profit short-term rental homes will decrease the availability
of affordable housing for families with children, which would decrease enrollment in local school districts
ind negatively affect our community, known as a good place to raise children. Our children were able to
walk to and from school here, and we hope our community will continue to have resident children in our
midst.

Thank you for considering our concerns and request.
Sincerely,

Nancy and Sean O'Neill
216 S. Second Street
Grand Haven, MI 49417
Eddie Sleeper

From: Bari Johnson <bjohnson@thestantongroup.com>
( “ent: Monday, May 17, 2021 2:20 PM
fo: Rep. Steve Marino (District 24); Rep. John R. Roth (District 104); Rep. Diana Farrington

(District 30); Rep. Rodney Wakeman (District 94); Rep. Pauline Wendzel (District 79); Rep.
David W. Martin (District 48); Rep. Sara Cambensy (District 109); Rep. John D. Cherry
(District 49); Rep. Mari Manoogian (District 40); Rep. Karen Whitsett (District 9); Rep.
Tullio Liberati (District 13)

Cc: Eddie Sleeper
Subject: | urge you to oppose HR 4722!
Importance: High

To the members of the House Committee on Commerce and Tourism:

| urge you to oppose HR 4722! | don't want unlimited STRs in my neighborhood, located in the Village of Spring
Lake and on Spring Lake. | live in an apartment-style condominium building with 33 units. | understand the
Michigan Realtors and the Airbnb-type companies are pushing another bill that's now been introduced into
the Michigan House and Senate. It seems they're trying to ram this through quickly before we citizens’ have
our voices heard. It's my understanding the House and Senate bills have the same wording and declare that
short-term rentals are a residential use and a permitted use in all residential zones." If passed, STRs will be
legal in any house in any neighborhood anywhere in the state. There are no caps for occupancy and no
limitations on the number of days.

< ‘here may be a few pros for supporting this bill; however, | can't see they outweigh the cons. One negative is
the effect this will have on our property values. This concerns me since I'm in the middle of a major
renovation. Other negatives:

attractive neighborhoods across the state will become a patchwork of mini-hotels, serving needs when

they are high and sitting vacant the rest of the time

e school enrollment in many districts will decline as families are displaced due to high-profit short term
rental potential

e housing costs will climb even further due to market pressures created by a demand for partially
eccupied housing

* interest groups for every industry, from adult entertainment to marijuana businesses will learn that
sensible land use regulation can be thrown out the window if you can afford to pay costly lobbyists to
sway legislation: local control of land use policy will be dead as we know it

* our dream homes will be hemmed in by obnoxious tourist controlled party districts, and our legacy of
fine small-town living will be replaced by a senseless cave-in to short term wealth at the expense of our
beautiful neighborhoods

¢ our local building inspector will no longer inspect rental properties (the bill includes language that if we

inspect rentals, we must also inspect a!l owner-occupied housing, which is not likely to ever happen).

Blighted residential properties and unsafe housing conditions will increase without sensible oversight.

( 4gain, | urge you to oppose HR 4722!

Thank you


File and source

File

2021-05-18_testimony_comm-2021-testimony-and-emails-from-mi-citizens-opposed_45802.pdf

Size

1,412,854 bytes

SHA-256

21c4c5093ebd14194bbd613f778553990eb904ffb15c171b39a25b165158fcdf

Our copy

2021-05-18_testimony_comm-2021-testimony-and-emails-from-mi-citizens-opposed_45802.pdf

Original

No public link identified.