The town and village of Woodstock have scheduled special elections to see if there is support for a new short-term rental ordinance that went into effect this spring.
Both the village and the town approved the new rules, which limit how many short-term rentals are allowed in Woodstock.
But opponents gathered enough signatures to force the special elections, which are scheduled for Tuesday, July 30.
The town and village will vote separately on whether to overturn the new ordinance.
More from Vermont Public: Short-term rentals are on the rise in Vermont. So are debates over how to regulate them.
Woodstock has had a short-term rental ordinance since 2021, but the town and village revisited the ordinance this spring to unify and simplify the laws and make them more equitable and uniform, according to an information sheet on the town website.
The new regulations allow 55 owner-occupied short-term rentals, and 55 non-owner-occupied short-term rentals, which makes up about 5% of the town’s housing stock.
They also limit the number of rentals each homeowner can have at one per person.
“The cap is one of the most important pieces of the ordinance,” said select board member Laura Powell. “So the 5% for us is something we felt comfortable with that also helps us protect future speculative investment in our community.”
Powell says the new short-term rental ordinance is partially driven by the housing crisis that is affecting just about every community in Vermont.
And she says while limiting the number of homes that can be used for a short-term rental will not address all of the town’s housing needs, it is a way of slowing down what she says is a loss of housing stock to the growing short-term rental market, especially in tourist-driven economies like Woodstock.
“Short-term rentals absolutely have a place in our community, and that’s why we didn’t have an outright ban on them,” Powell said. “The point of the ordinance is to keep that place in balance with the needs of our community.”
“Short-term rentals absolutely have a place in our community, and that’s why we didn’t have an outright ban on them. The point of the ordinance is to keep that place in balance with the needs of our community.”
Laura Powell, Woodstock select board member
Former Woodstock Planning Commission member Sam Segal, who operates a short-term rental out of his home, supported the original ordinance.
But he says he is going to vote to overturn the new ordinance.
“I’m all for keeping track of and monitoring who’s doing vacation or short-term rentals, even perhaps restricting how many there are, I think that’s totally reasonable,” Segal said. “I just feel like the new ordinance imposes fees that are really high.”
“I’m all for keeping track of and monitoring who’s doing vacation or short-term rentals, even perhaps restricting how many there are, I think that’s totally reasonable. I just feel like the new ordinance imposes fees that are really high.”
Sam Segal, Woodstock resident
The new ordinance allows the select board, and the village trustees, to set the registration fees. In May an annual permit structure was set at $500 for owner-occupied rentals, and $1,000 for non-owner occupied units, with additional fees added depending on how many bedrooms are rented.
Segal says the new fee structure will force him to rent out his place more often, and if he can’t rent it enough to recoup the fees, it will put a strain on his household budget.
“I would not have built a short-term rental if I didn’t need the money to stay in town. I need the additional money to stay in town,” said Segal, who is a single parent. “For me to stay in the house, it’s not easy to do it on one income. Staying in a house is a priority for me so I can stay in the school system, and I certainly count on the short-term rental income to offset the high taxes we pay in Woodstock.”
Have questions, comments or tips? Send us a message.
