How Many Corporations Have Been Denied A Short-Term Rental License On Nantucket?

Since launching its short-term rental registry in 2024, the town of Nantucket has rejected 19 short-term rental (STR) permit applications due to the town's prohibition on corporate ownership, but 11 were later approved “because of clarifications on STR ownership by the applicant.” This means that most of the time, if the town rejects an STR application because of Nantucket’s ban on the corporate ownership of STRs, the applicant is able to provide some form of clarification that leads to the town reversing its decision.

This data comes in the wake of an investigation by the Current into one loophole that has allowed corporations, including the STR giant Stay Heirloom, to continue legally operating STRs on Nantucket despite the ban passed in 2024. As part of the investigation, the Current filed a public records request with the town of Nantucket asking how many STR applications have been rejected due to corporate ownership, which corporations have been rejected, and how the town determines whether a prospective STR owner is a corporation.

The town declined to provide examples of clarifications that would cause a previously rejected application to be approved, and the Current plans a further public records request to better understand why decisions have been reversed.

As for how the town determines whether an STR is corporately owned, the town replied that “ownership is determined by what is provided to support the application.” In a separate email, the town’s communications department wrote that “each applicant for a short-term rental registration is required to indicate the form of ownership on the application. That information can be confirmed upon review of the town assessor’s records. Additionally, the evidence of liability insurance contains the name of the responsible entity.”

It is unlikely that the town can do anything to prevent Heirloom and similar companies from operating STRs without changes to the existing bylaw, as they appear to be in full compliance with the letter of Nantucket’s regulations.

The Current’s public records request also asked for a list of corporations that have been rejected. Such a list would clarify what the town considers a corporation for the purpose of enforcing the bylaw and which entities the ban on corporate ownership of STRs actually affects. The town did not provide the list.

When asked to explain the omission, the town answered that “after diligent search of the town’s records, the town does not have a list of corporations that have applied for a short-term rental permit and have been rejected. Please be advised that the town’s duty to respond to requests for public records extends only to the records that are in existence and in the custody, possession, or control of the town, and the town is under no obligation to create records in response to your request.”

The town also did not provide the list or any reasons for the reversal of a rejection when asked separately from the public records request.

It is possible that the names of rejected corporations are considered sensitive personal information, and cannot be released. The Massachusetts Public Registry of Lodging Operators says that “only the name of the street and the city or town of an accommodation for rent is allowed by law,” which may also cover applicants who applied to become an accommodation for rent but were rejected.

While one town official suggested that this might bar the town from releasing the names of corporations rejected under the ban, that is not the justification the town has used in its official communications explaining the decision not to provide the list.

In response to STR-related questions asked after the public records request, the town said it has “no further information to provide on this matter.”

The Current plans a further public records request worded more broadly to obtain the information necessary to construct its own list of rejected corporations.