By QUINTON SMITH/Lincoln Chronicle
Lincoln County commissioners have decided to decrease the number of vacation rental licenses allowed in two zones east of U.S. Highway 101 rather than issue the 17 currently available.
But in doing so last week, commissioners voted unanimously to drop a years-old moratorium on processing new applications effective March 31. But with the lower limits in two zones and a long waiting list for licenses in five zones west of Highway 101, it is expected to be decades before new licenses actually become available.
The decision on Wednesday to end the moratorium followed a three-month extension in December when commissioners said it was time to examine how the two-year-old licensing, inspection and enforcement programs are working. Nothing was done on that, however, so commissioners agreed Wednesday to ask the sheriff’s office and other staff to prepare a report and to possibly commission a public survey to gauge sentiment toward its license limits.
After years of controversy, a ballot measure and legal battles, commissioners in February 2023 voted to create seven geographic areas and sharply limit the number of vacation rental licenses in each. Five of the areas are west of U.S. Highway 101 and two are east of it.
There are currently 457 vacation rental licenses in unincorporated Lincoln County, down from 502 when the seven areas were approved. That number is supposed to drop sharply via attrition – licenses cannot be transferred when properties change hands — to 181 licenses under the new density requirements.
While it may be decades before any licenses are available west of Highway 101, but there are currently 17 available in the two large and less populated zones east of the highway.
Zone six is east of Highway 101 and north of Highway 20 – basically north of Newport all the way to Otis. Zone seven is east of Highway 101 and south of Highway 20 – basically south of Newport all the way to Lane County.
According to the sheriff’s short-term vacation rental website, there are 29 property owners on the zone six waiting list. There are 25 property owners on the zone seven waiting list.
The cities of Yachats, Newport, Depoe Bay and Lincoln City have their own limits on vacation rentals; Waldport does not.
There was little sentiment or talk Wednesday by commissioners Claire Hall, Casey Miller or Walter Chuck to issue the 17 licenses sought by the 54 property owners on waiting lists for those areas.
Hall outlined possible choices for the commission – allow the moratorium to expire across all seven zones, keep the moratorium on all zones, allow the 17 licenses in zones six and seven to be used, or decrease the number of licenses allowed in those zones to their current level – 44 in zone 6 and 31 in zone 7.
Hall said commissioners never intended the moratorium “to be a permanent thing” but did so last August because it still faced at least four court challenges in Lincoln County circuit court or the Oregon Court of Appeals. Those cases are still active and the next hearing in circuit court isn’t until June.
But using her personal Facebook page as one gauge, Hall said sentiment there indicated that the public was still opposed to loosening the moratorium or allowing more vacation rentals.
Miller said he wanted to extend the moratorium in all zones “and circle back to do a review of the entire program … to see where we’ve been and where we want to go.” He said a public opinion survey would be a more accurate measure than Facebook of what people thought.
Chuck, who was appointed to the commission last month but said he had followed the issue for years, made the motion to trim the number of licenses in the two zones, keep the same limited number in the five other zones, and to also ask staff to study the effects of the moratorium, complaints and enforcement issues.
Does the sheriff’s office even have someone to enforce the STR regulations? Can a resident expect a short term violator to be still violating by the time this enforcer responds?
As long time residents of Lincoln County, we have seen only one response by law enforcement in the past 19 years to vacation rental complaints in our neighboehood. The Sheriff’s Office responded when two vehicles (which were parked on our firelane), each was packed full of fireworks, thus making them the equivalent of a bomb. The police confiscated the fireworks. We have been left to our own devices in an effort to stay safe.
Thank you thank you thank you commissioners for cutting the number of licenses in zone 6 and 7. I live in Beverly Beach and Avery is almost a ghost town in winter because of all the vacation rentals. We already have two new vacation rentals here but I haven’t noticed any headaches yet with either of them in terms of parking, noise or garbage.
I live near the so-called “state” streets section along U.S. Highway 101 just north of Yachats. As I drove south today, returning after being away for a bit, I was remembering this article. For a good stretch of the highway there almost every driveway is badged by a local vacation rental servicing company. I’ve come to the conclusion that 10 years ago, I inadvertently moved into a quasi-commercial district/sprawling “motel” arrangement instead of the residential zoning advertised. Where did I go wrong? Should these neighborhoods heavily peppered with STR’s be identified as such so that potential buyers can make purchasing decisions accordingly?
I believe that it’s necessary, having lived next to rental, would never voluntary do it again. Seems like many of the short term rental people forget common curtesy and don’t care about damage and garbage that they are leaving behind. Attitude of, I won’t be here to worry about it. Not all short term renters have this attitude but enough that I would advise others to think seriously before buying on signing a long term rental on property that is either next to or close to a short term rental. If you don’t know what I’m talking about just ask some of the residents of bayshore.
Some people invested in houses on the coast for purposes of making them their vacation-homes for their family. The only way they can pay the mortgage is with the money they get through their short-term-renters. These people don’t live or work on the coast, and now they have to decide to sell their wonderful vacation homes or rent them out permanently which goes against their plans. And some who are allowed to keep their short term rental status have to pay exuberant fees to do so. Can’t people who live and work in Lincoln County find homes that are not vacation rentals? Why can’t vacation rentals and permanent housing exist together?
First because there is a severe shortage of housing here, especially housing anywhere near affordable, for people who work here.
Second under the situation you describe, these out of town second homeowners really can’t afford that second home without receiving what is an effect of financial subsidy from those of us who live here. That subsidy is in terms of local full-time residents enduring noise, garbage, illegal parking, sewage systems over capacity, neighborhoods that are ghost towns in winter, etc.
People who really can’t afford to own a second home at the coast and only plan to spend a few weeks here per year should simply go to a hotel.
No, actually they can not. They don’t make more dirt. No one who actually lives in this town enjoys crazy rental prices and few if any options being available while half the damn town is empty. Vacation rentals have ruined the culture and community of this town/region, and they are the cause. Live here, or don’t … but residents will vote by a huge margin to eliminate vacation homes outright if it ever came to the ballot.
If these people are “buying” these homes but have to have them rented out most of the year to cover the mortgage, then they can’t afford these second houses on their existing incomes, and are living beyond their means. And once a house is rented out, it becomes a business and is subject to business licensing and other limitations imposed on businesses by government, which, remember, is the people. Additionally, the houses in unincorporated county are often in rural residential neighborhoods where party house rentals are unsuitable to the neighborhood’s flavor. People live in these areas because they like the quiet and the lack of traffic, not to mention the landscaspe. Having multiple families with multiple vehicles, garbage, etc, isn’t necessarily compatible with the situation. There’s a reason why hotels and motels are limited to commercial districts.
Moreover, every one of these houses was once either an owner-occupied home or a long-term rental. Now they have been taken out of the county’s long-term housing inventory and are used exclusively for out-of-county visitors who are often not very sociable. The list of offenses committed by some of these people is, unfortunately, long, and not pretty.
This is one of the reasons why there is a housing shortage in the area, and, in general, in many tourist areas.
I recently read an article about Barcelona, in Catalonia, where it is having an identical problem, and the same is happening in Juneau, Alaska.
Believe me when I say we have tried to live in peace with vacation rentals in our neighborhoods. The very need for absent owners to have management is also the main cause of the problems we, as residents, encounter. VR management companies are remote, as are the owners. That leaves it up to those of us who live to deal with the renters. They are often fine and well-behaved. But, they are often noisy, beligerant, threatening, and destructive.
$500,000+ homes are not going to magically become “affordable housing” what ever that entails. It’s to expensive to build. Property expense, permits, fee’s and material are all expensive. Property taxes and home insurance, repairs and upkeep have all gone up tremendously. What was a $20,000 roof a few years ago now cost $40,000. Interest rates are still high. I just don’t see this as helping the “affordable housing” crises.
Too bad. They can’t co-exist because of the temporary renters poor behavior. My home is next to a vacation rental home and there isn’t enough space here to list what we go through. When we ring their doorbell and ask them to stop their rudeness it’s common for the renters to slam the door in our face. Everyone involved in this scheme profits while the full time resident pays the price.
We live in a county that can barely afford the very limited sheriff deputies we have. The Samaritan hospital in Newport can’t financially support itself and is looking for a buyout. There are numerous small business and restaurants that are forced to close their doors each year. Unemployment remains high and is now inching up. Our community is not sustainable with only a population of retirees on fixed incomes. I know everyone wants their little slice of paradise on the coast when they retire. But without investments in tourism, a huge financial driver in terms of jobs and taxes in Lincoln county and other coastal counties, what we all love about this place is going continue to decay. Instead of the constant finger pointing maybe we all start demanding our commissioners to focus their time and attention on the real issues that need to be addressed. Instead of pandering to the whiny FB few that are going to complain no matter what the topic. I promise, being labeled a county that is anti-tourist and anti-business isn’t going to end well for anybody.
Whiny few? Perhaps you’re forgotten the general election of 2020, when just 22 people shy of 10,000 who went to the polls voted for a complete phase out of all STRs in five years? Not exactly a whiny few. We knew the measure was likely to be ruled illegal, and it was, but when 58 percent of the voters, a huge margin by election standards, says do something, I feel obligated to follow the will of the majority as best I can and do something. This is why we have the licenses, caps and enforcement program. And of course lots of people still aren’t happy — those who think what we did doesn’t go far enough as well as those who think it went too far. We didn’t go looking for this issue. It came looking for us.
There is a bit of Irony in saying there is an obligation to follow the will of the people. This seems to only matter when it’s a topic you agree with. But when 49.53% or 13,027 people in Lincoln county voted for another candidate for county commissioner, that person wasn’t even considered for the appointment of a vacant seat. My point is that we need to listen to more than just the people that complain the loudest. My hope is the referenced report/retrospect on the results of the implemented STR restrictions actually involves facts and data and not just a bunch of hyperbole about trash and noise. Let’s look at the economic impacts, job losses, tax revenue lost, the hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money wasted on the legal defense of an unconstitutional ballot measure. Maybe take some time to talk to the small business owners, restaurant owners, and people that make this county run everyday. With all the federal job cuts, rollback of social programs and funding, we as a county need to put our own economic welfare to the forefront of every decision being made. We don’t have the luxury to attack our biggest economic driver…tourism.
Drew,
As a business owner myself for the last 20 years, we’ve lived with the reality that tourism is what’s kept us in business. However, our peak years were almost 10 years ago, when there may have been a better balance between STRs and long-term housing. With tourism, “more” does not always mean “better” for our small businesses. I also don’t believe that tourism needs the existence of STRs to thrive.
The aspect you may be missing is how the STRs contribute to the housing shortage for potential employees of these businesses that are trying to benefit from the tourism. Have you seen all the “help wanted” signs in the restaurants? Some are even now not back to pre-Covid staffing levels. There’s simply a lack of housing for new people to move into.
Obviously, there are more reasons for this than STRs, e.g., retirees moving in – but retirees become part of the neighborhood. Zoning usually prevents businesses from randomly popping up in residential neighborhoods for a reason, and you can’t argue that STRs are just a less traditional type of business – one that found a loophole in the zoning laws. However, any other business has incentives to blend into the neighborhood, whereas STRs operate with little or no accountability. I’ve personally seen beer cans and their boxes strewn on the rocks at the beach right in front of some of these places, or their driveways jam-packed with cars for a party. I’ve called owners to let them know, and they do not care as long as they’re getting their money. The maintenance company doesn’t care. The people renting the place obviously do not care. That’s got to be a living h*ll for those neighbors – I’m just glad I don’t live any closer to them than I do.
Enforcement is an issue. Tax payers are subsidizing out-of-county investors who have no interest in the community. Over the years, I reported unlicensed rentals and came to realize my input went immediately into the circular file (trash). The sheriff’s office is short handed and distributes resources based on priorities. Vacation rentals are a very low priority.
Those of us against turning housing into short-term vacation rentals are against neither tourism nor business. We are against commercial business in residentially zoned neighborhoods.
Agreed, Lee
Short Term Vacation Rentals, used to mean motels/hotels. Today it means mini motels in residential neighborhoods. I live in Bayshore full time and have experienced the front row beach homes for the past two years. Owners/renters in numerous properties at the beach edge have cut dune grass back to “improve their views”, and cut private pathways through state owned property beyond their property lines down to the shore itself, creating more erosion to the foredunes that are our only defense against the inevitable tsunami. Park rangers have ticketed a few of these. I’ve seen renters take shovels to the dunes to create these pathways. Then many visitors bring dogs, many of which go unleashed in the foredunes and beaches. Fireworks? Every year without fail. Enforcement of STR abuses here in Bayshore? I’ve never seen it.
Lincoln County is not “anti-tourism”. I like the changes. There is a fine balance of regulations put in place align with community values and economic needs, creating a balanced approach that respects both tourism and residential integrity.
Would it be possible to create a new subsection under short-term rental licenses specifically for rentals lasting “30 days or more” (not long term leased 6 or 12 months) that address concerns from residents about the potential impact allowing rentals to operate without the same licensing and regulatory requirements; occupancy, septic, garbage, parking, boats, RVs, Trailers hauling side by sides; private and state property damage, with limited law enforcement, raises valid points for discussion.
It’s essential for local policymakers to consider the views of residents, property owners, and the broader community when evaluating the impacts of these unlicensed version of a short term rental arrangements.
Could help ensure regulations put in place align with community values and economic needs, creating a balanced approach that respects both tourism and residential integrity.
I appreciate Commissioner Hall precisely because she “deigns” to converse with us real people on FaceBook as well as the whiners who aren’t allowed to let just anyone use their house. Chances are that her FB page will reflect the same results as you see here in this comments dialogue that a money-wasting survey would give.
One possible solution to the situation might be to impose huge fines on VCR business owners, as Lee correctly describes them, whose customers think they can behave badly when they’re visiting someone else’s home turf. The fines could pay for an authorized person to respond to complaints. Meanwhile, neighbors, keep a journal and document every offense with words and pictures. Date-time-nature of offense-name of persons contacted to correct the offense (noise, trash, dogs, parking violations, etc.) and the response, if any, from the persons contacted.
When my absentee neighbors imposed a nightmare rental tenant on the neighborhood, I called them directly to complain, sometimes at 2 o’clock on Sunday morning during the tenants usual weekend-night expletive and violent threats-laden domestic fights in the front yard. I figured it was a courtesy, giving them a chance to correct the situation without calling the sheriff every time and flagging their house as a trouble spot.
Why should we suffer while VCR’s owners make money without vetting their tenants? We residents don’t see a dime of the “damage deposit” collected, despite the damage inflicted.