HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-08-13 Planning MIN_ExhibitASTATEMENT ON TENANTS SUBLETTING SHORT TERM LODGING
I own 2 rental homes next to each other on Seena Lane in Ashland. The rental agreement for
one of the houses says the tenants can sublet. with the caveat that I need to meet and approve
the subletter. I agreed to this because they sometimes go away for extended periods and said
they were planning to leave for 2 months later in the year in which they first rented the home.
Because I was unaware at the time of City restrictions on rentals of less than 30 days, I did not
place any time limitations on their ability to sublet. I believe these tenants were also initially
unaware of the City restrictions.
I do not know when the home was listed on Air B&B, as the tenants did not ask permission to do
so or tell me that they had done this. When I found out about this issue through my work on the
Planning Commission, as well as finding out that my home was listed on Air B & B, I asked my
tenants to remove the listing, which they agreed to do. Subsequently these tenants contacted
me to ask if they could seek occasional subletters and roommates on Air B&B if they had a
minimum stay of at least of 30 days. I agreed to this and trusted them to do what they said. I
have since learned they did not change their Air B&B ad at that time.
At some point, the tenants in my other rental saw their neighbor's home listed on Air B&B and
decided this must mean that it was okay for them to list their home as well. They did not ask for
permission or inform me that they had listed the home. I actually discovered that this had been
done by meeting the vacation renters when I went by to do some yard maintenance during the
week of July 21. 1 asked the tenants to remove the listing; they did this and cancelled their
reservations as well. I checked Air B&B on Sunday July 28 and again on August 8, and did not
see either of my homes listed.
The tenants were the only ones who stood to gain from subletting these rental homes for short
term lodging. I did receive and will receive the same rent payments each month called for in the
rental agreements whether or not the tenants are engaged in short-term subleasing
arrangements.
Accordingly, I do not believe that I had or have an actual conflict of interest that precludes me
from participating in Planning Commission discussions and recommendations concerning
whether, where and under what conditions short term home rentals should be allowed. At most I
had what could be seen as a potential conflict of interest. To avoid even the appearance of any
such conflict, i decided to skip any further Planning Commission discussions and
recommendations on short term home rentals.
I did not explain my reason for absenting myself from that discussion at the last Planning
Commission meeting. It is my understanding that I was not bound by state law governing
recusals because I did not have an actual conflict. That is, 1 chose not participate in order to
avoid the appearance of a conflict - not to satisfy state requirements for handling either actual or
potential conflicts. The recusal requirements simply did not apply to my voluntary absence.
It is also true that I did not realize at the time that a fairly detailed public explanation is required if
one is declining to participate in consideration of agenda item in the event of a conflict of
interest. But in my case, a recusal due to an actual conflict was not required at all because
there was no actual conflict. Similarly, a recusal for reasons of a potential conflict was not
required at all because I decided not to to participate in the discussion in hopes of deterring
unwarranted questioning of the outcome of the Planning Commission's work.