Part of the inherent beauty and diversity of D.C. is the fact that so many people are from “somewhere else.” It has made the District a melting pot in the truest sense, with people like me coming from around the world to build a new life here.
But with hotel rates in the District more expensive than ever before, it is becoming even harder for my family to come visit me. Traditional lodging offerings are prohibitively expensive for a weeklong visit.
Fortunately, short-term rentals have been a welcome option for my mom and so many others. And they are a welcome safety net for thousands of full-time residents who rent out extra rooms or their whole apartments or condos while they are away on a short vacation or work road trip.
Short-term rental platforms such as Airbnb, HomeAway and VRBO have made D.C. more affordable for both residents and visitors. Average hotel prices in Washington rarely drop below $200 per night and can skyrocket to more than $350 per night during tourist season. So a family renting two rooms for a week can expect to pay $2,300 just for their hotel. In contrast, it might cost my parents as little as $700 to rent a whole home for a week. Not only do they save money, but they get access to a full kitchen and a washing machine.
Unfortunately, the D.C. Council is considering a new bill that would destroy the short-term rental market and prevent homeowners in the District from sharing their homes on platforms like Airbnb and HomeAway. The legislation, pushed by big hotel companies like Marriott and Hilton, would on its face only prevent homeowners from renting their entire home for more than 90 days per year. But the bill would also introduce a licensing system that the District’s chief financial officer has said would “eliminate nearly all current short-term rentals.”
The impact on residents across the city who rely on short-term rentals to make ends meet would be devastating.
This bill would disenfranchise hundreds of D.C. residents during the holiday period when many homeowners could use some added income.
Big hotel chains want you to think that short-term rentals take away from the D.C. housing supply. Not only has this never been a true concern of theirs, but it simply isn’t true. Full-time short-term rentals comprise less than 0.04 percent of available homes in D.C., and less than 2.3 percent of D.C. homes are ever rented out short-term. Clearly, banning the practice will not help D.C.’s very real housing problems.
The fact is, many D.C. homeowners have lived in their houses/condos for years and cannot rent them out to long-term tenants. But they still need to use their property to generate a bit of extra income. Short-term rentals make this possible.
Big hotels are the biggest beneficiaries of this ban on home sharing, which is why they launched a $500,000 campaign to push the City Council to pass it. The hotel lobby also hides the fact that it gets more than $250 million in tax breaks from the D.C. government.
A crackdown on short-term rentals would allow companies like Marriott and Hilton to raise room rates even higher. Even worse, D.C. would need to spend more than $100 million to enforce these new regulations on residents — including losing tax revenue earned from short-term rentals.
Imagine what the District could do if it spent $350 million on affordable housing rather than on this new handout to big hotels.
It’s time to invest in D.C. residents, not give more money to billion-dollar hotel chains.
Rob Winterton is director of communications for NetChoice and a Washington, D.C., resident.
