"YES" On 66: Let’s Reclaim Our Rights To Host Nantucket Vacation Rentals

To the editor: Fellow island homeowners – or should I say investors – please join me in voting "YES" on 66 to reclaim our rights to host traditional Nantucket Vacation Rentals (NVRs). Article 66 restores our rights to rent our homes by ending the threat of zoning lawsuits.

What about investor-owned corporations and REITS? No longer an issue. They can no longer operate vacation rentals. We stopped them last year by adopting Article 60 at ATM and Article 5 at STM. And in Select Board meetings this month the Town made it clear they will enforce this ban.

"YES" on 66 is about protecting families’ rights, the rights of ordinary people to rent out their own homes. But why do we need to adopt 66 and specifically make NVRs a principal use in residential zones? A number of reasons.

1) Kindness: Any of us may be called off island for months or years. A work assignment. A partner needing a long course of medical treatment. Our child needing help with our grandchildren. When we cannot be on island for a prolonged period and truly need the income, the principal use designation for NVRs is the simplest way to protect our rights.

2) Fairness: Decades ago, island families bought properties they operate as NVRs. This was their investment for the future, their retirement plan. Do we envy their foresight? You bet! Yet it is only fair that we secure their right to carry on with established practice.

3) End zoning lawsuits: YES on 66 to designate NVRs as a principal use is our only way to stop and prevent zoning lawsuits. Well-meaning citizens have repeatedly submitted accessory-use based articles, most recently 67, that require a term of residency to host vacation rentals. The flaw in this accessory-use approach is that it is unconstitutional, as Town Counsel has pointed out. Consequently if we were so heartless as to adopt 67 we would face a new wave of lawsuits… and be back here AGAIN debating zoning articles. YES on 66 is the way to stop this insanity.

What about the concern that the island is already too busy? Won’t "YES" on 66 lead to many more seasonal families offering vacation rentals? No, it will not. Any family who intends to offer their home for NVR is already doing so. Zoning lawsuits haven’t deterred them, and the only thing 66 changes is ending the threat of zoning lawsuits. Zoning lawsuits have served only to scare families with established (often 10-20-30 year old) vacation rentals. Well, and zoning lawsuits have wasted a bunch of taxpayer dollars as the Town defended our rights.

Another thing about seasonal owners – contrary to rumors about revenue going off-island, much of the rent they collect gets spent here on Nantucket, for property taxes and local services – just as it does for us.

Could "YES" on 66 encourage individual off-shore investors to buy property to open new vacation rentals? Nope. Investors are all about maximizing profit and minimizing risk. No one can buy a property on Nantucket today and profit from vacation rentals. The math doesn’t work; property costs are too high. Also, renter demand fell in 2024 (as evidenced by lower Town STR tax revenues) and is forecast to decline further in 2025. The pandemic peak in renter demand is in the rearview mirror and unlikely to recur. (Thank goodness!) Investors assess all these factors and invest elsewhere.

Do we give up anything by adopting 66? Yes. We’re giving up the opportunity to bring vacation rental zoning lawsuits against our neighbors. And will any of us miss that? Heck, no.

Please vote YES on 66 at Town Meeting. End the lawsuits. Reclaim our rights.

(The author owns one home on the island and is not affiliated with any real estate or other business interest).

Rebek Duhaime