Short-term rentals beyond the surveys

The same can be said for surveys we have seen over the last few years funded by groups who are very much in favor of short-term rentals.

Surveys are essentially worthless, especially ones commissioned by a group with a point to prove. More to the point, they often only convince the people who already agree with them.

The short-term rental argument comes down to this: Where is the public intersection between a homeowner’s rights and the larger problems facing the community?

The first step in wrestling with that question is to define whether or not short-term rentals lessen the chances of islanders finding a place to live.

Now that Town Meeting has taken corporate ownership of short-term rentals out of the equation, what next? This is Nantucket and we will always have people who see the beauty of this island through the lens of it as a commodity.

Can we bring the idea of short-term rentals, what used to just be called summer rentals, down to the tradition of islanders needing the money from a couple of months of summertime rentals to make ends meet?

And what about those off-islanders who just want to be able to keep grandpa’s Nantucket house in the family?

These are all questions that need to be asked. Since the beginning of this debate, however, we have had privately-funded surveys, a workgroup that did a great deal of work but whose final suggestions were muddled and a Town Meeting vote that seemed to clarify the issue except to those who want to keep litigating the matter.

And now the Select Board is backing a compromise proposal for Town Meeting put together from pieces of several citizen articles.

The simple fact is self-interest more often than not drives voters. It also drives point of view. That is the problem with surveys.

If you are working hard but cannot even imagine affording a house, if finding a year-round rental seems like an impossible task where the rug might soon be pulled out from under you at any moment, then you are likely to feel that short-term rentals are part of the problem.

If you already own a home and find the cost of everything about life on this island is getting way out of control, then you may rightly feel why not make a few bucks by renting to visitors?

All of us know someone in both of these situations.

Town Meeting voters deserve a straight-ahead proposal, an article to vote on that is simple and clear, whose purpose is to try to solve a perceived problem, rather than being so afraid that unless it is watered down not everybody will be happy.

Political compromise is a good thing. But in a situation like this, to get anything meaningful done, somebody’s ox is going to get gored. There is no way around it.

All of which brings us back to the original question. Where is the public intersection between a homeowner’s rights and the large problems facing the community?

The town needs to find a way to answer that question. If short-term rentals are detrimental to the overall well-being of this community, then a clear and concise article should be put in front of Town Meeting, without the rambling amendments or anybody taking bits and pieces of several articles and fashioning them into something aimed at making it more palatable.

If short-term rentals are not detrimental to the overall well-being of this community, then let people simply go back to business as usual. But keep corporate ownership out of it.