The Town of Nantucket Annual Town Meeting came to a close late Monday night after two days of deliberation on dozens of articles, including four articles surrounding short term rentals. Requiring a 2/3 vote to pass, Article 66 sought to add short term rentals as a permitted use in our zoning bylaws and continue enforcement of the regulations set forth in the past two years, but failed as it only received about 59% of the vote. Articles 67, 68, and 69 also all failed, which were generally in favor of STRs, but imposed stricter regulations including length of stay requirements, owner use requirements, and caps on the amount of rental properties allowed.
Our community is over five years into the short term rental debate with no firm zoning regulations addressing rentals. Despite this, there has been a marked feeling of compromise from both sides: those in favor of STRs have agreed to restrictions including a ban on corporate ownership as well as implementation of a local registry and oversight by the Health Department. Those wholly opposed to STRs have come around and brought forth articles that acknowledge STRs in our community, but with restrictions (articles 67, 68, and 69). Proponents of article 66 cite that the only way to make this all work in the end is to legalize and then further regulate down the line. This means adding STRs as a permitted use in our zoning code and subsequently in our zoning use chart. Those opposed feel as though this would open the door to unbridled STRs, despite the aforementioned regulations we already have in place. Those opposed to 66 were generally split between articles 67, 68, and 69. However, Town Counsel found articles 67 and 68 to be legally defective because they attempted to govern the amount of time a property owner was in residence over the amount of days rented. Article 69 was also restrictive to STRs in that it proposed than an owner could not STR more than 70 days per year, and also required the Town to cap the number of STRs on the island to 1350 for a period of three years while they embark on an intensive data study. Article 69 was the most soundly defeated.
While our operation of STRs remains status quo, the Massachusetts Land Court judge has earnestly warned our community to come up with a solution lest this issue be legislated for us at the state level. This loss of autonomy could severely impact our island’s primary industry of tourism, as well as unleash financial impacts via the loss of tax revenue generated by STRs. Stay tuned for information about a Special Town Meeting in the fall of 2025, where we will hopefully get another crack at the issue.
