Article 2 Is A Concession Not A Compromise

Liza Hatton •

To the editor: I am a member of Nantucket Planning and Economic Development Commission and the Capital Program Committee, but I am speaking as a private citizen. I care deeply about our environment, affordable housing and a thriving year-round community. It is dangerous for proponents of Article 2 to be spreading rampant misinformation and fear-mongering. I have a lot of respect for Dave Iverson, and I feel that he was doing his best trying to come up with a “compromise," but year-round residents being strong-armed into complying with another group’s wishes is not a compromise. It is forcing year-round residents to acquiesce and give up their property rights and livelihoods.

Restricting short-term rentals to 21 days in the off season could unintentionally raise shoulder-season rental prices, as homeowners will set rates at peak prices due to limited availability. This policy reduces incentives for negotiation and risks making Nantucket even more expensive for visitors who need a more affordable price point. In general, most homeowners only rent for around 70 days a year, but capping rentals could force year-round residents to sell if they face financial hardship. A mortgage payment on a $1.5m home (a starter home on Nantucket) is around $10,000 per month if it was purchased in the last few years. If a teacher bought a house and then has a medical crisis, are we going to tell them they can’t maximize their income by renting it short-term for 120 days? The rules will apply to everyone.

Nantucket has done a good job at placing restrictions on short-term rentals thus far. We have banned corporate ownership of properties, we have a registration system which requires short-term rentals to have adequate insurance and oversight, we have a complaint hotline, and we have a method for collecting taxes that contribute to our town budget. Article 2 encourages neighbors to police neighbors and sows further discord in the community.

Once corporate ownership was addressed at town meeting in 2024, one corporate owner on the island sold 12 of his 14 properties. Every property sold for over $4 million. This did not help create year-round housing. If anything, it took homes out of the rental inventory and made rental prices increase. One of the issues I have noticed in the real estate market (I am a real estate broker) is that we are seeing year-round residents competing with businesses and non-profits buying homes for employee housing because there are so few affordable options and no affordable seasonal rentals. This is an inventory issue. I am hopeful that the work the Affordable Housing Trust is doing in creating deed-restricted housing and the various projects they have in the pipeline will continue to offer year-round residents and seasonal employees more options in the coming years. As an island, we should be supporting these efforts.

Lastly, but most importantly, we need to consider small businesses on the island. They have a very small window to make their income for a full year. We saw firsthand how the loss of business can hurt our economy last Christmas Stroll, when the heart of downtown had an electrical failure and the impacted businesses requested a grant to recoup funds from lost sales. After this event, three of the businesses impacted shut their doors for good. Between retail shops, restaurants, bike and car rentals, fishing charters, florists and photographers, they depend on a thriving shoulder season. It is short-sighted and irresponsible of us to scapegoat short-term rentals for the problems we face as an island and, in turn, destroy the livelihoods of our fellow islanders. Let’s return our focus to collaborating on ways to improve the island and not give in to this narrative. Please vote yes on Article 1 and vote no on Article 2 on Tuesday, November 4th.

Liza Hatton

Current Opinion