Accuracy is essential on short-term rentals
Opponents claim short-term rentals take away residential properties and are unauthorized, untaxed hotels. That’s true for most STRs, and governments could and should have shut them down, as recommended by the independent consultant the City of Victoria hired and ignored.
But many STRs are zoned “Commercial,” “Transient,” and “Tourist Commercial.” They’ve always been regulated and fees in Victoria are $2,500 a unit versus only $5 a room for hotels.
We pay all sales taxes and higher income taxes than multinational hotels. Our profits stay in the community, we support local businesses, and provide affordable options for families.
The hotel lobby pretends they’re against STRs because their minimum-wage staff need these high-end properties to live in, not because it makes it hard for them to charge $500/night per room.
So hard that until the government began penalizing STRs, thousands of hotel units were being converted to long-term rentals. Those conversions stopped and new developments originally planned as rentals are being re-envisioned as “suite hotels.”
The solution has always been simple: Fine/shut down residentially zoned STRs. Let commercially zoned/licensed STRs operate and charge them fair fees. Build more market rental and affordable housing.
Hotels can pay their staff fairly. We pay $35 an hour for our STR cleaners, double what hotels pay.
Expropriating existing STR owners’ rights is wrong. It also opens the taxpayer to liability if the courts decide that this unprecedented action unfairly lowers profits/property values.
Victor Ramous
Short-term rental operator
Victoria
Another way to describe the short-term issue
Re: “With this little suite, the government gets what it wants,” commentary, Oct. 19.
The commentary could have said:
“I don’t live in Victoria, but have reached out to a Victoria newspaper to solicit sympathy for individuals (like myself) who have made an obscene profit at the expense of those who do actually live — or attempt to — in Victoria.
“Some of my neighbours may complain that the constant influx of individuals introduce chaos to this building and surrounding areas, to which I say — what noise? I can’t hear it from Vancouver.
“Here are some impressive sounding tax obligations while I purposefully avoid disclosing how much money I have made. I will neglect to mention the increased tax spending consistent with the lack of housing availability that I have directly contributed to. Look at all this tax revenue that you’re missing out on, Victoria!
“Now, I will laughably position myself as a job creator when in actuality I simply retained the service of a vendor to manage my listing and clean my investment property.
“I will now list a number of restaurants UberEats assures me are quite popular in Victoria. Oh, they’ll rue the day they cast this absentee flophouse baron into the cold! I just boasted about paying ‘my’ manager the equivalent of $4 an hour — can you imagine the lost tips?
“Fine. For rent: 280 square foot condo, $9,000 a month. You win, Big Government. You’re taking food from the table of my fourth home. I hope you’re happy. Poor whats-her-face will be inconsolable.”
Alex Stevens
Esquimalt
Eby’s politics are aligned with reality
Re: “With this little suite, the government gets what it wants,” commentary, Oct. 19.
While it is true short-term rentals have the potential to bring in tourism to bolster Victoria’s revenues, they hamper the ability for people to live here full-time.
If I owned a restaurant, I’d prefer having a regular return customer who lives in the neighbourhood than someone who visits once and leaves, or a place for my employee to live close by.
Airbnbs have been used by property owners to dodge rules around short-term rentals, and ensure a consistent stream of revenue without the involvement required from month-to-month rentals.
As someone who has looked for housing, seeing the amount of Airbnbs taking up affordable space from students, service industry workers and retired persons is frustrating.
Like many others, I would have compromised on space if rent was affordable — allowing me to have a larger budget to support my local businesses.
The notion that Premier David Eby is pushing forward this legislation as a last-ditch effort for popularity is inherently flawed, and indeed in this case politics is aligned with reality.
While we talk of building new housing to help with supply, short-term rentals can instantly snap up that new property, keeping housing availability low.
It’s unfortunate people will lose revenue streams under this ruling, but there are always opportunities to sell or rent out long-term. It’s a good move by the province, and one that should be encouraged and enforced.
Gavin Senft
Saanich
We need more homes for people to live in
Re: “With this little suite, the government gets what it wants,” commentary, Oct. 19.
I can understand the writer’s frustration in losing his “little place to stay” in Victoria since he will no longer be able to rent out his 280-square-foot apartment on Airbnb when he’s not visiting from Vancouver. It sounds like a great setup.
But Victoria needs more places to live.
My partner and I have rented out a similar size basement studio in our small home for the past 3.5 years to long-term tenants (mostly students) with great success.
We haven’t increased the rent once, despite massive mortgage increases and inflation, because we feel so privileged to own a home in Victoria and want our tenants to feel fortunate to share our space, too.
This is what it looks like when housing isn’t considered a commodity, or a way to have your cake, eat it and make money, too.
Yes, it sure must have been nice for those folks who were able to make income on the side renting out their vacation homes, or funding their retirements with a handful of short-term rentals.
But do you know what’s even nicer? Homes for people to live in, no matter the size.
Danielle McQueen
Saanich
Get back to the basics with smaller housing
Daily I am seeing letters about small units ranging from 250 to 450 square feet as too small for residential use.
As a child, my family lived on the main floor of a duplex with about 800 square feet for a family of four. We had two large bedrooms, living room, kitchen with a small eating area and one bathroom.
When my mother did laundry, it hung in the hallway. We survived just fine in this space. When we had overnight guests, which was frequent, one bedroom accommodated the guests plus my sister and me.
My first rental with a friend was 550 square feet with one bedroom for the two of us. After she married, I moved into a 400-square-foot studio apartment, and again I was completely satisfied with my space.
When my husband and I started a family our house was 1,000 square feet with one bathroom and a roughed-in basement. We didn’t expand our house until our eldest daughter was 18 years old, adding space in the basement, including a second bathroom. Our older daughters shared a room for many years.
When did our expectations of suitable accommodation become so outlandish that we need a bedroom for every child, a family room plus a living room, etc.
We need to go back to the basics, forget the mansions and build appropriate housing.
Eileen Cannon
Victoria
Inclusive services offered for decades
Re: “A reminder about where atheists aren’t found,” letter, Oct. 19.
Canadian Forces Chaplains, Imams and Rabbis have provided worship services that are inclusive and ecumenical for decades.
From the Chaplain’s Manual:
“Chaplain general’s policy on public prayer
“42. The Chaplain General encourages CF chaplains, who lead worship or prayer during public services and ceremonies where members of many religious groups may be attending, to be sensitive in their use of sacred phrases. Examples of these public services would include, for instance, annual Remembrance Day services, the interment of the Unknown Soldier in May 2000, or the consecration of the National Military Cemetery in June 2001. The goal is simply to ensure that all believers, of all faith groups, feel included in public prayer that is led by CF chaplains.
“43. The Chaplain General’s guidelines are not meant to ban people from expressing their faith. It does not change the nature of voluntary Christian religious worship for CF members in chapel, in the field or on board ship. Rather, it is an inclusive measure that reflects the multicultural and multi-faith nature of the CF and Canadian society as a whole.
“44. Within the context of voluntary worship, either within a chapel or a field service or on board ship, chaplains are free to lead Christian worship according to their denomination tradition within the established practice of Canadian Forces Roman Catholic or Protestant Chapels. Likewise, in the context of ecumenical or interfaith worship where a number of religious leaders are participating, chaplains may conduct themselves in accordance with their denominational tradition. “Within the context of a public ceremony the chaplain is the sole representative of all faith groups. Where various faith groups and a wide range of beliefs are likely to exist, normally prayers should be inclusive in nature respecting the wide range of faith groups and believers who may be present. The religious celebrant is encouraged to be sensitive in the use of specific sacred faith formulas to allow for greater inclusivity.”
Gerald Pash
Victoria
Still room for faith on Remembrance Day
Re: “A reminder about where atheists aren’t found,” letter, Oct. 19.
While military officialdom is reported to have advised the Chaplain Service there will be no prayers on Remembrance Day, meaning that a chaplain (or padre) is not permitted to recite from the Bible or allude to God as part of public functions such as Remembrance Day, the Chaplain’s Manual indicates such an order could be “over-reach”.
Chapter 8, Section 47: Each participating leader should be free to pray from within his or her own tradition, and to read from texts that are considered sacred in his or her own tradition.
Ken Lane
Saanich
Atheist in a foxhole? Blame someone else
Re: “A reminder about where atheists aren’t found,” letter, Oct. 19.
The reason an atheist would be in a foxhole is probably because of someone else’s religious beliefs.
Religion is the bane of the modern world.
Gerald Marantz
Parksville
Religious or not, the foxhole is the same
Re: “A reminder about where atheists aren’t found,” letter, Oct. 19.
The writer does not understand why it is always a wise decision to separate religions from organizations that represent all people.
There are so many variations of so many religions, only chaos will eventually ensue, often violent, as history has taught us (and current events verify).
As for foxholes, they contain only unfortunate people; no one really wants to be there and the results are the same for everyone.
Deborah Crawford
Saanich
SEND US YOUR LETTERS
• Email: [email protected]
• Mail: Letters to the editor, sa国际传媒, 201-655 Tyee Rd., Victoria, sa国际传媒 V9A 6X5
• Submissions should be no more than 250 words; subject to editing for length and clarity. Provide your contact information; it will not be published.
