Nantucket residents voted down a broad legalization of short-term rentals Tuesday, sparking what will likely be yet another round of debate in the multiyear saga over the right of homeowners to lease out their property to tourists on the island.
The vote in Town Meeting could force Nantucket to take a heavier hand regulating over 9,000 homes used as vacation rentals, the primary form of lodging for out-of-towners who flock to Nantucket in the warmer months.
In March, a state Land Court judge ruled that Nantucket’s longstanding practice to allow short-term rentals in residential areas violates the town’s zoning rules. The measure Tuesday would have changed those rules to clearly allow the rentals on most of the island, effectively nullifying the Land Court ruling. It needed a two-thirds majority to pass but received 713 votes in favor and 782 against.
Advertisement
Now it falls to Nantucket’s Zoning Board of Appeals to write short-term rental rules in meetings beginning next month. The breadth of those regulations will then need to be voted on again at Town Meeting, likely extending the conversation into next year.
Tuesday was the fourth time since 2021 efforts to legalize, restrict, or otherwise regulate short-term rentals have failed at Nantucket Town Meeting, highlighting just how divided the island community is over the issue.
In one camp are those who argue that unregulated short-term rentals are a burden on Nantucket’s roadways, utilities, and already limited housing supply, hurting long-term residents and local workers alike. In the other are those who believe Nantucket’s economy will suffer without the rentals and the travelers that occupy them, worrying that the loss of tourism dollars could spell doom for small businesses on the island.
Kathy Baird, president of Nantucket Together and a proponent of short-term rentals, said she worries what the vote — and the upcoming regulations — will mean for homeowners who rely on income from short-term rentals.
Advertisement
“We support the families who own homes here, and have owned homes for decades,” Baird said. “You can’t discriminate on how a person uses their property, based on where they live. ... Short-term rentals are legal. They’ve been here for 100 years, because there’s nowhere else for people to stay.”
But Peter McCausland, founder of Ack Now, a nonprofit that advocates for restrictions on short-term rentals, told the Globe last week that short-term rentals “gut the community.” In an email after the vote on Tuesday night, he said that residents had made their preference clear.
“Voters want the protection of residential zoning which they have enjoyed since 1972,” he wrote. “It is the [short-term rental] people who are trying to restrict or infringe homeowners’ rights here.”
After Tuesday’s inconclusive vote, expect both sides to continue making their case for months to come. A Special Town Meeting has been scheduled for September, at which local attorney Steve Cohen expects to see a new bylaw that will permit short-term rentals with a list of exceptions for where and when they are allowed.
He also commended the passage of another statute Tuesday, which mostly banned corporate ownership of short-term rentals.
“That passing proves for people that the process works,” said Cohen, a proponent of short-term rentals. “Nobody really wants large hospitality companies buying up houses for short-term rentals.”
Select Board member Matt Fee said that after the vote, the town does not expect to enforce any changes to short-term rentals this upcoming summer and that he hopes a solution to the debate is “not that far away.”
Advertisement
“Last night was the fourth bite at the apple. It’s the third time voters have voted against legalization. People want to know in simple layman terms what it will do, how it will impact them, and why it is a good idea,” he said. “They don’t want to be bombarded with constant threats from both sides. We’ve been banging our heads against the wall for too long.”
Diti Kohli can be reached at diti.kohli@globe.com. Follow her @ditikohli_.