Nantucket Is On The Wrong Course And Short-Term Rentals Are A Significant Enabler

To the editor: The simple problem we have is an economy that requires more labor than there are places to live. Another way to say that is, the Island economy has grown faster than the infrastructure needed to support it. Short-term rentals (STRs) amplify the problem by enabling the economy to accommodate a greater number of people than it might otherwise house while at the same time removing houses that could house year-round families (Nantucket lost 600 long-term rentals in a decade [Work Group Data] and investors have bid up the prices of mid-island homes).

Additionally, all the workers needed to support STRs need places to live as well (they aren’t living with their parents anymore) – further compounding the problem. In their letter to the editor  “Unintended Consequences” Linda and Dennis Childs, while trying to make the case for legalizing STRs island-wide actually illustrate the problem to which STRs contribute. The Childs argue that new STR regulations which would limit the number of days that they could rent their house which would reduce the amount they could pay local support staff such as caretakers and landscapers. This implicitly admits what we all know which is that it takes an army of service workers to maintain the 2,000 STRs across the island from cleaning people to landscapers to air conditioning repairmen to pool boys. These are employees who are making nowhere close to a wage that would allow them to live on the island where the average house now sells for $4 million. For the record, this same analysis applies to nursing homes.

ACK Now has never advocated for the ban of rental properties or STRs on the Island. We have advocated for local residents to be able to STR their homes and restrict those owned by investors. The law of the land is that STRs are a commercial business and hence restricted from residential neighborhoods. To fix this it needs to be addressed through zoning, not a general by-law. The commercial STR interests and Town government have fought us tooth and nail, and hence, we don’t already have common sense regulations in place already. We are particularly frustrated by the town continuing to spend taxpayer dollars when the majority of voters approved the article we supported in the last town meeting. The lack of enforcement by the town also promotes a belief that it is okay for anyone to STR.

In anticipation of Town Meeting, the cries of economic armageddon if STRs are restricted have started. Please consider the source - they are mostly coming from people who stand to lose money if they are restricted. Remember, that the vast majority of the direct benefit of STRs is not flowing into the local economy in anything other than unsustainable wages – as 80 percent of STRs are owned by off-island investors. Also, don’t forget the economic study conducted by FMX Associates in 2023, the year of the peak rental tax collection, which found that STRs really don’t contribute very much to the economy of Nantucket and that most of the rental income goes off-island. The study found that year-round residents contribute three times more to Nantucket's economy than seasonal residents and visitors and that STRs only contribute 5 percent of all seasonal resident and visitor spending.

Restricting investor STRs in residential districts will be good for Nantucket’s economy. More people who want to live on Nantucket will find housing.

There are certainly some locally owned island businesses that benefit from STR visitors, but how much seasonal resident business has been lost because of the crush of people? Good businesses will always do well on Nantucket, and restricting investor STRs will be good for them in the long term. These businesses, from carpenters to charter fishing captains, have always been known for providing quality goods and services. The STR business will eventually cheapen as high rental rates come down and debt-burdened investors lower rents. The end result will be really bad for all businesses on Nantucket. I urge voters to take the long view and vote for Fritz McClure’s zoning article 67 at Town Meeting. There is a lot at stake.

George H. Spencer III

Editor's note: Spencer sits on ACK Now's Board of Directors. Also, it is not accurate to say that the "law of the land is that STRs are a commercial business and hence restricted from residential neighborhoods."