Short-Term Rental Ordinance Amendments

Spoke on behalf of the Historic Charleston Foundation in favor of the short-term rental amendment, noting it provides clarity and strengthens enforcement.

Expressed deep concern that the expiration of grandfathered occupancy limits upon property sale would harm property values and small business owners.

Highlighted that Charleston is a tourist town and noted that hotels face easier approval processes than short-term rentals.

Represented the Cannonborough-Elliotborough Hospitality Association, supporting clear livability rules but objecting to a fixed cap alongside the IPMC.

Worried the amendment solved a nonexistent problem, raised concerns about grandfathering, and pointed out potential privacy and safety issues with FOIA requests.

Argued that occupancy restrictions on smaller rentals would cause a major drop in revenue since guests often travel together.

Shared that traveling with a large family of eight makes finding suitable properties difficult under restrictive occupancy rules.

Requested a deferral, noting that livability issues are rare among short-term rentals and occupancy cuts would devastate businesses.

Criticized the arbitrary occupancy cap and argued that the IPMC provides a better, more transparent framework.

Stated that short-term rentals in the overlay are mostly used by families attending events and that additional caps are unfair.

Pointed out that short-term rentals support many local workers like housekeepers and contractors, and restrictions could hurt them.

Urged the city to recognize the good faith investment of operators and avoid blanket guidelines.

Recommended eliminating the 8-person cap or expanding grandfathering provisions to protect legal property rights.

Stated that grandfather clauses should survive property sales to protect millions invested in properties.