Rachel Edelson

1) Negative Impact on Tourism Economy: Non-primary residences used as short-term rentals (like Airbnbs or VRBOs) attract tourists. Imposing additional taxes or restrictions could deter visitors, reducing revenue for local businesses such as restaurants, shops, and attractions. 2) Impact on Property Values and Investment: Measures specifically targeting non-primary residences could devalue these properties, potentially harming the owners' financial investments and discouraging future real estate investment in the state. 3) Stifling the Free Market: Government intervention in the housing market, beyond health and safety regulations, can stifle the free market and limit options for both property owners (to rent their homes) and visitors (for accommodation). 4) Revenue Uncertainty: While the bill aims to generate tax revenue, the additional tax burden could lead to decreased compliance or fewer rentals available, making the actual revenue generation unpredictable or lower than projected. 5) The state should not force mandates on municipalities, which are better equipped to determine their own housing and short-term rental needs and regulations based on local infrastructure and community character. 6) Mandating certain types of housing or short-term rental rules might be problematic for communities that lack the necessary infrastructure (e.g., water, sewer, emergency vehicle access) to support increased density or transient use in certain areas. 7) Owners should have the right to use their property as they see fit, including renting it out for short terms, as long as they comply with basic health and safety standards.