We'd like to give some feedback after attending the Kingston Zoning Code Draft II presentation on 9/15/22. We are Peter and Peg, 21-year residents of the City of Kingston. We are owners and operators of a short term rental unit in Kingston. A little backstory on us…we moved to Kingston on a whim, way before it was a coveted destination, and we were immediately drawn to the potential the city had. At that time it seemed that we were among a select few that saw this potential. It’s a city full of history, beautiful (and in some cases crumbling) architecture, Hudson River access, Rondout Creek access, the quaint Rondout area, as well as the gateway to the Catskills. Obviously over the course of the following 20+ years many others have also realized the beauty and potential this city has. We both work full time: Peter works for SUNY New Paltz and Peg works for a privately held textile archive, we photograph weddings most weekends throughout the summer and fall, and we operate our short term rental which is conveniently located right next door to our house (the two houses actually share a driveway). Having four jobs between us is difficult to juggle at times but we’ve found it’s the only way to make ends meet. Salaries in the Hudson Valley have simply not kept up with the cost of living.

We believe that Airbnb/STRs are being used largely as a scapegoat for a much larger issue in the affordable housing debate. The amount of housing needed in Kingston far exceeds the amount of STRs. We believe that there has been a longstanding failure to attract more housing and development. For example, we've lived here long enough to remember that what is now Sojourner Truth Park could have been 1600-2500 housing units but was met with pushback as far back as 2002. Since then, while there have been some efforts for more housing (mostly by the amazing work of RUPCO), little has been proposed or achieved in large scale housing development. The need has never gone away, it has just been simply ignored. The pandemic of course has also changed the housing situation considerably in Kingston. As I’m sure you are aware, Kingston saw one of the most significant housing price increases in the USA as people fled NYC and found Kingston to be an easy city to move to and live in. There are many local examples of NIMBY attitudes and nixing housing projects. It seems as if local government is uninterested in educating their constituents that we need housing at a much greater scale than what Airbnb has taken off the market. Leaders should be looking at ways to entice developers to build here, not creating roadblocks and alienating local property owners.

We are not willing to be scapegoats, as we are a tiny and perhaps even insignificant part of this problem. Our officials need to act in the best interest of their constituents by taking this problem seriously and developing enough housing at all price points. If not able to STR these properties, many of these units will not magically become long-term housing for locals (ours included). It will hurt local owners who rely on that income to survive here themselves. Potentially putting our house (or any of the current SRT properties) on the market isn’t going to help local people who are looking for housing. It’ll make it so that affluent people may purchase them and that’s not solving the city’s housing issue.

We'd also like to point out that many people (ourselves included) haven taken the opportunity to restore decrepit homes and offset cost with short-term rental. Many of these properties were in major states of disrepair that would have continued if not undertaken. The character and history of our city is preserved and celebrated with these renovations. We’ve made an important, deliberate, significant and tremendous investment in the city and in particular a historic neighborhood and frankly it was a scary decision for us to make. Making improvements to properties is incredibly important especially in historically designated areas where any renovations can be very cost prohibitive if you’re just living off Hudson Valley salaries.

Lastly, Ulster County relies on tourism. STRs often attract people who aren’t interested in staying in hotels, especially young families. Visitors seek out accommodations in neighborhoods because they want to experience the destination as a local while enjoying the comfort of "home". Often hotels are in big-box and chain store areas and don't have a sense of character or community. People are more likely to spend money on local businesses (shops, restaurants, attractions) if they feel immersed in and part of the community. Not everyone likes or wants to stay at traditional hotels. These people would simply not come to Kingston if they had to stay in a hotel. There should be a variety of accommodations available to people who want to spend money in our community. While it's true that a local resident will also spend money in their own community, local people are not spending discretionary income on extras like dining and shopping the way that outsider tourists are. Small businesses here thrive on outside money coming in.

We believe our Airbnb contributes heavily to our local economy and that if nothing else, existing Airbnb’s should be grandfathered into the new city code. Our Airbnb is consistently booked with people who bring outside money into Kingston supporting our Kingston’s businesses. Ignoring this fact could be devastating for the hard work that has taken a city with lots of potential to a city that is utilizing that potential.

I want to begin by stating there is no arguing Kingston needs more affordable housing. I am potentially in full support of efforts that are fully developed, vetted and have the knowing consent of the people. However, I am opposed to the changes to the zoning laws which would abolish any non-owner occupied Airbnb’s begun after June 2021.

I am someone who has a vested interest in the overall well being of Kingston. I own two businesses here, and have renovated two Kingston properties into Airbnb’s - one of which was saved from being torn down.

It was only by happenstance we learned of the proposed changes to the zoning laws which would restrict any new non-owner occupied short-term rentals. While our Airbnb’s are grandfathered in, we are very concerned about the net effect of such changes.

We attended the public presentation meeting held on September 15th. Most every Airbnb owner I have spoken to, had no idea of the proposed changes. This is a big problem. The small number of people at the second meeting is also an indication that the effort to make people aware of the proposed changes was insufficient.

Areas of big concern:

There were few statistical facts presented at this public meeting. For example, there was no number given for how many Airbnb’s fall into this catagory of change.

The quotes presented from the first zoning meeting were made by a very small sampling of people. No one could say with certainty how many were in this sampling.

We need to learn the anticipated net effect on affordable housing, should this measure pass.

All the buisnesses in Kingston rely heavily on tourism to survive. The majority of the people who visit our stores on a weekly basis are staying at Airbnb’s. Based on our last accounting, sales to the Airbnb population was over 50% of sales! We need to learn how taking away this unknown number of Airbnb’s/short term rentals will impact our businesses, and the tax base as a whole.

If there is an insufficient number of places to stay, people will choose to go elsewhere. Plain and simple! As such, there needs to be a comprehensive study done before sliding this measure through. As stated in the Rezoning newsletter, the current code hasn’t been changed since the 1960’s. We cannot afford to push something through that has not been fully thought through, and all the facts unearthed. The ramifications could prove disastrous.

Do not ban AirBnB. This is a source of income for many residence in the area and brings new people to our area and allows them to explore and get a sense of what it is like to live and thrive in this area. It is such a small percentage of housing here it shouldn't make a difference. I believe it is less then 1% of total housing. Streets should be designed based of current location and potential use.

Each situation is unique. A standard should be set be easily adapted to what can be considered the best use. ADU should be accepted Rondout version 1 Of course anyone SHOULD be able to rent a room in their house. Its THEIR house. I'm surprised this is a question.

Shopfronts should be allowed to operate based on the owners desires. Affordable housing should be provided by the state not a private developer. If anyone feels otherwise they should develop the affordable housing themselves.

Hello, I don't think the city has any business saying how we manage our own primary residence homes. People have rented a room or more out of their own homes since forever, and it should not be a code issue or regulated by the city. People have also for probably as long in history, rented their whole house out when they go away, whether for a weekend or longer, and should not be regulated by the city.

I have no problem with a reasonable small tax law for such situations, but as my husband says, when the city starts paying the mortgage, then they can tell us how to manage our homes. Putting more rules on private homeowners for renting rooms is classicist and biased against renters. In this time when rents are more outrageous than ever, IF regular working class persons can even find a place, is frankly outrageous. And limiting what a private homeowner can do, if they go away and want to rent their home out, is also classicist and penalizes homeowners who struggle to make ends meet. I understand there is a big issue with Airbnb type models of renting out whole apartments and houses (that are not an owner's primary residence) and limiting the rental market, but addressing those issues should not include restrictions on primary home owners.

I am co-owner of Village Coffee and Goods and Village Grocery and Refillery both in Kingston.

I sadly have missed all the meetings regarding serious concerns over local residents STR’s.

If it’s not too late to chime in, I would like to share, as a local business owner, how intrinsic STR’s have become to the continued success of both our businesses, Village Coffee and Goods and Village Grocery.

I can see both sides of the coin; as we have had many staff find it extremely difficult to find housing but at the same time, such a huge percentage of our customers are short term rental guests to this wonderful town.

We love our community and we love our neighborhood and have got to know our local community members/ customers very well. We hear the conversations about how important STR’s are to many of them actually being able to afford to live, to afford to continue their small businesses. Many STR owners are entrepreneurs and small business owners, some of them very successful artists that STILL need to rely on the additional income from Airbnb.

I don’t want to be overstepping… I know we are in the middle of a housing crises but I don’t believe that exists because of Air Bnb and short term rentals.

What is the solution to encourage higher employment, more housing options, supportive re-employment options?

Local business thrives on out of towners visiting Kingston. Visitors are a part of our economy, so why are we trying to stop it????

Dear Mr. Starodaj,

I have mixed feelings about restricting short term rentals in Kingston and only allowing new owner occupied short term rentals. My husband and I are new to Kingston and we rent a house in the historic district of uptown. We really like Kingston but as we walk around it looks like uptown is struggling. There are lots of empty store fronts and closed restaurants. There are also lots of nice homes not being maintained. These homes could be rehabbed by people who want to use them as short term rentals. The short term renters would shop and eat in restaurants uptown.

Uptown needs this kind of foot traffic. I think you should allow more non owner occupied short term rentals uptown. I realize this could incentivize my landlord to turn our rental into a short term rental which would not be good, but totally eliminating new short term rentals for non owner occupied dwellings also has a downside.

I understand there is some regulations/restrictions being discussed on AirBNBs. I am writing to you as a resident in the area who is also an AirBNB host. It has been a dream of mine to be an entreprenaur and also give back to the community where I live. AirBNB has allowed me to accomplish both of these things. I am very rewarded to see firsthand people enjoying my AirBNB and uitilzing the local small businesses that we recommend to our guests. This includes restaurants, farmers markets and shops in the Kingston area. There are no motels or hotels in the area that can accommodate these guests so we are not taking away any business. Rather, we are encouraging people to visit the area and spend money.

Furthermore and also just as important, the income I have gotten by being an AirBNB host has allowed us to make improvements to our residence and contribute to my daughters college expenses. This would of been nearly impossible otherwise.

We have only had good experiences with our guests and hope we can continue to be AirBNB hosts.

Please don't come up with additional fees or rules that would take away income.

We have already submitted a various request asking for the exception to allow our 2nd home be allowed to list as a STR. By limiting the STR to true 2nd home owners Kingston is limiting job growth and affordable housing.

We have owned our home in Kingston since 12/20. The purchase of our 2nd home was to spend time with our new grandson that was born in February 2020 a week before the Covid outbreak. The purchase of our home gave us a safe place to spend time with our girls and our new grandchild. It was never meant for investments as we spend 4-5 months in Kingston and plan on making Kingston our retirement home verses Texas.

We take great pride in our home in Kingston and spent over $35,000 in improvements over the 2 years, while employing all local businesses. Without the earning of listing our property on Airbnb we would be limited to reinvest in our home in Kingston.

We also promote the city of Kingston of a wonderful place to visit and several of our friends/ family from Texas has used our property to enjoy the small town vibe of Kingston and enjoy the subrrounding beauty. As well as our guests from Airbnb. All spending money reinvesting into Kingston’s economy.

We do agree STR needs to be limited to primary and 2nd homeowners to keep the housing affordable. Investors should be limited to the number of property that can be STR.

Please reconsider limiting STR to allow 2nd homeowners that consider Kingston as there home away from and eventually making it there primary home.

Not allowing non owner occupied short term rentals is removing a very basic right of property owners.

When done responsibly, neighbors have a better experience and many of us are still trying to recoup from the devastation of more than a year of receiving no rent from long term tenants and trying to make repairs to properties that were damaged by tenants which we had no ability to remove.

If you are concerned about housing shortages, please don’t bankrupt property owners who are just trying to get all their properties rentable condition again. Additionally we also used short term rental income to avoid rent increases for our good long term tenants in other units.

There should be some way to look at these on a case by case basis rather than not allowing. We also provide well paying jobs as well as bringing customers directly to all our wonderful local businesses with our recommendations.

I operate a short term rental in an area that is not zoned for it. I support the proposal because we have a housing crisis. But I started the STR back when they were seen as an engine of growth and not a problem and have made an effort to build my little business since before the pandemic and before the city had a significant housing crunch. I've made investments. So I would urge the council to adopt a grandfather clause so people who are in my position don't have their livelihoods disrupted.

It is the proliferation of new STRs as Kingston has become a tourist destination that creates a problem.

My comments concern the definitions of owner-occupied as relates to short term rentals. As someone who has been a guest via short term rentals (Airbnb) in destinations in the US and beyond (and since the earliest days of the platform), as a former homeowner in a New England college town, and as a current renter in Kingston since 2020, I feel like I have experienced the margins between short term rentals, neighborhoods, homeowners and landlords from both sides of the booking engine. While I support some regulation on short term rentals as long overdue and applaud this process, I feel that limiting the opportunity to "only" houses where a bedroom, say, is offered, is unrealistic (not to mention potentially off-putting to single travelers and older travelers who might feel vulnerable being "in" someone's home overnight). I suggest the definition include owner-occupied multi-unit buildings such as duplexes or the classic triple decker in some of Kingston's neighborhoods. This eliminates the absentee landlord/investor turning potential rental properties into turn and burn Airbnbs but still allows homeowners here in Kingston to "share" their larger home with travelers. I had the experience in mid-2020 of renting a unit in a Midtown duplex, where our landlady lived in the unit downstairs. Our upstairs unit had been prepared as an Airbnb but the pandemic had forced her to consider different options. We ended up staying for a year before moving downtown; she returned the unit to short-term rental status then. Knowing how much of a positive role she played in our time there, knowing her investment in the house, in our block, in our community as a whole, is evidence that this is the type of homeowner who is looking for this option. I would hate to see thoughtful members of our neighborhoods who have invested in restoring multi-unit homes not have the option to have a spare unit in the short term rental pool. Sharing a roof is sharing a home--not sharing a hallway. Thanks for the opportunity to share my thoughts.

I have been a Kingston resident since June 2020, and have had a a very positive experience as a short term (and longer) tenant in the area. Our first landlord, Amanda, lives in the bottom floor of a two-flat building in Midtown that has been offered as an airbnb. We lived on the top floor for several months, and saw firsthand that Amanda has been a great neighbor and great contributor to the community. My partner and I felt welcomed by Amanda's neighbors, and we got to know Kingston well enough, and positively enough, to decide to live here permanently. In the process, we patronized many local businesses, bars and restaurants, and did our own small part to support the community. I understand the concerns about having absentee managers supervising often empty buildings where visitors randomly come and go. But I believe hosts like Amanda, who live on the property and engage directly with their neighbors and their neighborhood, and have improved their properties, are a very positive factor in the growth and resurgence of Kingston.

The housing crisis is very real and extremely concerning, but I believe it is also very complex and that Kingston had a housing crisis well before Air b n b became prevalent in the area. It seems as though Air b n b has become the scapegoat for what is a much broader issue. Prior to purchasing our home, my partner lived in two garages in the area and when he was finally able to find housing, it was less than satisfactory. This was well before Air b n b. There are vacant properties all over the city. I believe these vacant properties are another slice of the pie that need to be looked into. My partner and I have run an Air b n b out of an apartment on our property for several years. We did not displace anyone in order to rent it out as an Air b n b. The income we generate from this space has allowed us to make much needed improvements to the property that we would not have been able to afford otherwise. It also provides us with additional income that we as artists/small business owners rely on in order to pay our incredibly high property taxes and to continue to be contributing full time residents of Kingston. As the current draft stands, we would be grandfathered in as an owner occupied STR that was registered before the cut off, but if a further ban on Air b n b rentals in Kingston were to take place, we and many other full time residents and small business owners we know in similar situations would be put into a very difficult position. I do understand why non owner occupied STRs have become a problem. I believe in the move to require that STRs be owner occupied. I also think we need to look at all sides of the housing crisis when we start to talk about the potential of regulating Air b n b rentals to a point where 90% of them would be shut down if there is a motion to allow only single room rentals in owner occupied buildings to occur. The reality is that a huge amount of revenue is generated from short term rentals, not to mention that that we pay taxes on our Air b n b rentals. As full time Kinston residents, our incomes go directly back into the local economy. Thank for you for your time.

My husband and I live near an airbnb rental. Airbnb rentals can turn an otherwise neglected building into an aesthetically pleasing and very welcome addition to a neighborhood. Is there a housing crisis in Kingston? Absolutely.

However, the housing crisis existed many years prior to the advent of Airbnb in Kingston and solutions should be looked at a City level. Hard working Airbnb owners should not be punished for trying to make ends meet and doing so in a completely legal and honest manner.

I do not support the current proposed structure in the new Kingston Forward Zoning code that restricts Short Term Rentals (STRs) for private homeowners in the city of Kingston.

While some restrictions may be necessary to retain the core values of our community, the current proposal is too restrictive for private homeowners and MUST be reconsidered. It will have negative impacts on property values and the local economy.

None of these properties will be put on the ‘rental roll’ if you do this, so what is the gain here?

I want to make my voice heard.

I do not support the current proposed structure in the new Kingston Forward Zoning code that restricts Short Term Rentals (STRs) for private homeowners in the city of Kingston. While some restrictions may be necessary to retain the core values of our community, the current proposal is too restrictive for private homeowners and MUST be reconsidered. It will have negative impacts on property values and the local economy. Short Term Rentals have been bringing tourism to the city of Kingston for years. It's helped open our doors, revitalize our main streets and raise local tax revenues.

Why not single out corporate Airbnb owners. These privately owned homes that are successful STRs are not going to magically all of sudden become “affordable rentals” and solve the problems that our housing insecure neighbors are facing. What about homeowners like myself who have a basement accessory apartment? I WANT the ability to do as I wish with my legal apartment. In the current proposed code, I cannot operate a STR in the future because I have not been “grandfathered in”.

Limiting the use of my apartment, inside the structure of MY own residence which I occupy, to rentals longer than 30 days goes TOO FAR. I do not wish to share my home and property with a full-time tenant. My accessory apartment will end up housing no-one and sit vacant when it could be used to safely and occasionally house a short term guest who contributes to local economy, dine at our restaurants, shop at our local stores etc etc etc. What if I wish to rent my home occasionally to a short term tenant when I go out of town and I’m not using my residence? Again, your proposed restrictions go too far in limiting the use of my private property!

Kingston Forward, the new zoning code, is too much government interference. It takes away homeowners' rights to use and leverage their most valuable asset, our homes.

Why not build affordable housing and apartments? Why is it not easier for investors to build housing in Kingston?

I want to make my voice heard.

Hoping to have an input on the decision on changing STR rules/code for Kingston. For what it’s worth, we rely heavily on the income generated from our Airbnb which operates in our home (a multi family on west Chester st). It is basically our only income as we continue to come back from the struggles of keeping village coffee and village grocery open during the pandemic. That in turn employs 40 people, and you can imaging the struggle that ensues if we can’t pay our own bills.

I understand the possibility that we will be able to continue our own Airbnb (though if we can’t we would only continue to live in the whole house thus not adding to the rental housing market) but know the income we receive from out of town folks is essential to our businesses success.

Happy to be involved in any way to make a code that is fair for the city and our community. Also happy to elaborate on any of the above.

I do not support the current proposed structure in the current new Kingston Forward Zoning code that restricts Short Term Rentals ((STRs) for private homeowners in the city of Kingston. While some restrictions may be necessary to retain the core values of our community, the current proposal is too restrictive for private homeowners and MUST be reconsidered. It will have negative impacts on property values and the local economy. I want to make my voice heard. It is imperative that our private homeowners are protected and their home values considered.

I truly hope that you will listen to the voices of your constituents.

Dear City of Kingston,

I strongly oppose the current proposed structure in the new Kingston Forward Zoning code that restricts Short Term Rentals (STRs) for private homeowners in the city of Kingston. While some restrictions may be necessary to retain the core values of our community, the current proposal is too restrictive for private homeowners and MUST be reconsidered. It will have negative impacts on property values and the local economy. I want to make my voice heard. Thank you for your consideration. This is a terrible next step for the city of Kingston. A city that has struggled to revitalize and get back on the map. Short Term Rentals have been bringing tourism to the city of Kingston for years. It's helped open our doors, revitalize our main streets and raise local tax revenues.

Although I don't currently operate any STRs, I know many local homeowners and small businesses that rely on them for income and a portion of their livelihood. My Partner and I have used this business model in the past. I know our rentals helped support both our own personal goals as well as local businesses and initiatives such as;

• Housing audiences and artists for festivals like the O+ Festival

• Housing wedding guests for venues such as The Senate Garage

• Housing film industry experts participating in local productions (supporting the Ulster County Film Office)

• Proudly recommending, as hosts, all the local restaurants, activities, and retail shops available in Kingston

STRs are an integral part of what this community has evolved into. STRs contribute economically, creatively, and to our community's overall energy and livelihood. STRs are a right of home ownership and should continue to be a right of homeowners without the local governments’ interference.

Dear City of Kingston,

I do not support the current proposed structure in the new Kingston Forward Zoning code that restricts Short Term Rentals (STRs) for private homeowners in the city of Kingston. While some restrictions may be necessary to retain the core values of our community, the current proposal is too restrictive for private homeowners and MUST be reconsidered. It will have negative impacts on property values and the local economy. I want to make my voice heard. Thank you for your consideration.

I do not support the current proposed structure in the new Kingston Forward Zoning code that restricts Short Term Rentals (STRs) for private homeowners in the city of Kingston. While some restrictions may be necessary to retain the core values of our community, the current proposal is too restrictive for private homeowners and MUST be reconsidered. It will have negative impacts on property values and the local economy. I want to make my voice heard. Thank you for your consideration.

Dear City of Kingston,

I do not support the current proposed structure in the new Kingston Forward Zoning code that restricts Short Term Rentals (STRs) for private homeowners in the city of Kingston. While some restrictions may be necessary to retain the core values of our community, the current proposal is too restrictive for private homeowners and MUST be reconsidered. It will have negative impacts on property values and the local economy. I want to make my voice heard.

I do not support the current proposed structure in the new Kingston Forward Zoning code that restricts Short Term Rentals (STRs) for private homeowners in the city of Kingston. While I support restricting STRs to owner-occupied properties, defining owner-occupied as living within the same dwelling unit is too restrictive and will have negative consequences for many homeowners. It will hurt the property value of those with a 2-family house.

If the intent is to prevent the proliferation of Accessory Dwelling Units being built for AirBnB-ing, then the definition of owner-occupied should be 'Living in the same building'.

I DO NOT support the current proposed structure in the new Kingston Forward Zoning code that restricts Short Term Rentals (STRs) for owner-occupied private homeowners in the city of Kingston!

I DO NOT support the proposed restriction on ADUs (Accessory Dwelling Units) being used as Short Term Rentals (STRs).

While some restrictions and guidelines can be useful to retain the core values of our community, the current proposal is too restrictive for private homeowners, especially owner-occupied primary residences, and MUST be reconsidered.

In regards to the proposed restriction of an ADU (Accessory Dwelling Unit) being used for STR- that is ridiculous. Property owners who have a legal apartment in their home or on their property (guest house, basement apartment, a 2nd floor apartment) AND occupy the property as their primary residence should NEVER be barred from renting STR. My accessory apartment that is located inside the structure of my home should be not be limited to only full-time tenants or multi-generational housing. An accessory unit or accessory apartment should have less restrictions than a multi-family building when it comes to STR rules.

What do I support?? I support STR restrictions for those who do not occupy a home as their primary residence. How about limiting the number of days a year that a NON-Owner Occupied home can be rented on a short-term basis? How about putting a cap on the number of short term rentals one person can operate? Let’s keep entire bonafide multi-family buildings from being used as short-term rentals.

Do not restrict the owner of a home who uses the property as their primary residence from occasionally operating an STR.

My suggestion: Yes, those with existing short term rental permits should be grandfathered in and should be required to do 40 hours + total of annual community service via a tracked portal to maintain their permit. The work should be serving those impacted by the housing crisis in Kingston and uplifting the community.

About me: I’m not a millionaire investor. When I purchased my home in Kingston in August 2016, I had just turned 33 years old and ate ramen noodles for months so I could afford my 3.5% down payment. Being from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, a place that in many ways is similar to Kingston, I cannot tell you what brought me to Ulster County but I knew that it was my place.

Since then, I split my time between living in Kingston and Ridgewood Queens as I worked in midtown Manhattan and frequently traveled internationally for work. Due to this and my love for spending time in different homes around the world, I decided to place my home for rent on Airbnb. I hosted my first guest in February 2017 and have opened my home to hundreds of guests in every year that followed. Not only did I share my home with them but all of my small, local business recommendations. Our guests have ranged from former residents coming back to spend Thanksgiving with their family, travelers who are “Kingston Hopping” from Canada to Jamaica to New York, filmmakers, producers, bands playing O+, sheep & wool enthusiasts and families just looking to get away. Even people who are familiar with the area are stunned by the level of detail and nuances they find in my local guide.

The support I leverage to maintain the home are all local of mixed backgrounds. I’m friends with our neighbors (even those with political views that are radically different than our own), know local business owners on a first name basis, attend small event (i.e. Pinkster Day) and even served on the Live Well Kingston council member in 2019.

Our home used to actually be a resting place for 10+ people at a time. We’ve connected with the family who goes generations back in the home for more of the history. They often stop by when they see us, send us emails or write to us. Opening our home to many guests is actually staying true to its history.

So I ask, why can’t a home be a hotel?

Many of those with existing permits have done the work to connect with the community and will continue to do so. We didn’t see Kingston as an opportunity but more so a place that’s the best extension of ourselves.

My husband and I just moved into the multi-unit house that my husband had his doctor practice in for years. All the residential units are currently occupied by full time tenants HOWEVER, draft 2.0 bars us from ever renting any of our units as a STR. I don't feel like that is fair considering we live in the building as our primary residence. Because we didn't rent prior to July 2021, based on the current proposal we just can't ever do it in the future. How about choosing a date in the future that all of us have to submit an application for?

If I want to rent my apartment when we are away in Florida on a short term basis we should be able to. If I want to rent one of my apartments as a STR, I should be able to because I live inside the building.

Please reconsider your proposal and allow Owner Occupants the ability to rent their property how they wish and to whom they wish.

Consider more stringent restrictions to those who operate STR and don't even live on the property as a primary residence.

While I feel for those who cannot find rental housing, placing such harsh and restrictive rules on private land owners will harm the tourism industry in the City of Kingston. Kingston already doesn't have enough places to stay for people who come here to attend our festivals and events, and spend money in our shops and restaurants. Kinsley and Hutton Brickyards only have a limited number of rooms and a lot of visitors prefer staying in our charming single family homes over the apartments that are in such short supply here. There are no other decent hotels that NYC visitors want to stay in. Marriot Residence over by all the hideous big box stores? Their Teslas won't look good there...

There are SO many vacant dilapidated homes in uptown and Midtown. How about a proposal to renovate those houses and use them as affordable housing. Homes that have been purchased at values within the last 4 - 5 years will NEVER become "Affordable housing." The values are to high for owners to be able to rent them for "so little."

Focus your efforts on attracting developers to build more housing here and build in SMART and attractive ways. Kingston has made so many bad decisions in the past with development. Don't stop our city's momentum.

As a resident of Kingston for over a decade and a property owner who runs a short term rental to subsidize their income, I believe the revisions made in the 2.0 draft have become far too restrictive. By only allowing single rooms to be rented with in an owner occupied home, Kingston will essentially ban all short term rentals. Local commerce will suffer and a huge amount of revenue from every cafe, small boutique and restaurant will vanish. Residents who rely on the income from short term rentals as a means to afford their own house will be put into a tenuous housing position with the revised code. Yes, there is a lack of affordable housing, but in my own experience, Kingston has never had a hearty stock of places to rent. This is why a compromise needs to be made between an all out ban on short term rentals and an unregulated market. Other avenues such as vacant homes (of which Kingston has many), need to be brought back online or perhaps all short term rentals should be taxed on a non-homestead basis. Non owner occupied short term rentals should be prohibited going forward and retroactively. Owner occupied short term rentals who are not paying taxes and who haven’t registered should not be allowed to operate. Owner occupied short term rentals that are paying taxes and are registered should be allowed to operate anywhere with in their property.

I am writing to oppose the near ban on Airbnbs in the City of Kingston. We are able to afford to pay our taxes by renting out our back apartment attached to our home. In the past, we have rented to long-term tenants but that changed when NY State passed a law that severely restricted a landlord’s ability to evict problem tenants who refuse to pay rent. While not all landlords are good, neither are all bad. We simply cannot risk a loss of income due to a tenant’s failure to pay rent.

Moreover, in maintaining the Airbnb, we employ roughly 4 people who otherwise would not receive income from us. They live in Kingston and have become like family while economically benefiting from our guests.

Our guests also spend money in town eating out, shopping, and attending events. A very conservative estimate of the amount of money that our guests pour into the community is roughly $20,000. That calculation assumes that our guests only stay for two nights throughout the spring and summer months (fall and winter are not included despite the fact that we often have guests during that time and they frequently stay longer than two nights). The estimate also assumes that they spend approximately $300 shopping, eating, buying food, and attending the farmers market and events at Hutton Brickyards, for example.

Finally, Airbnb’ing our property gives us the flexibility to place my aging mother in the apartment during times when she needs care which has become more numerous.

I want to make clear that if Kingston bans Airbnbs, we will not rent to long term tenants until revisions are made to the just cause eviction regulations and the NY State law regarding rentals. Those laws do not fairly balance the interests and needs of the landlords with those of tenants. Without Airbnb to subsidize our income, we will consider leaving Kingston. Due to gentrification, we will likely be selling to those outside the community who come from other places and have greater wealth. In fact, we have seen the effects of gentrification on our street. Those buying homes on our street are not the individuals or groups in Kingston who demand bans on Airbnbs in the name of affordable housing. Instead, they come from L.A., San Francisco, Brooklyn, Manhattan, London, and other places that make Kingston homes seem very affordable as they drive up prices. In my estimation, without government investing in affordable housing and with a ban on Airbnbs, we will see a community that failed to address gentrification and affordable housing needs while driving out the remaining working- and middle-class residents. The ban on Airbnb will make the city wealthier, more exclusive, and will fail to address the pressing need for affordable housing.

If you believe that Airbnb regulations are necessary, I would respectfully request that you do so in ways that are more thoughtful and that allow for distinctions between the kinds of hosts that use Airbnb. An Airbnb host that is an owner who resides in the house is quite different from a large investment corporation who buys up homes without ever residing in the community.

I write in opposition to Kingston’s proposed near total ban on Airbnb properties within the city. Nearly all of the complaints about Airbnb’s miss the mark and a ban on them will not solve the very serious gentrification issue or the affordable housing crisis that the city faces.

Right now, Kingston hosts roughly 160 Airbnb’s, which, if banned, will come nowhere near the amount of housing needed to redress the affordable housing crisis. Banning Airbnb’s, as groups such as Homes not Hotels suggest, make several wrong-headed assumptions. First, many who currently Airbnb their homes will not rent them out to long-term tenants given the state of New York law, which gives landlords very little recourse to evict bad tenants who refuse to pay rent even as landlords themselves must continue to pay mortgages and ever-increasing taxes. The “just cause” eviction regulations fall woefully short as well. Many landlords fear bankruptcy should a bad tenant refuse to pay rent as eviction may take years. Not all landlords are wealthy and bad while not all tenants are good and decent. The New York law places its thumbs on the scale toward the side of tenants without recognizing that landlords sometimes have legitimate concerns about tenants and yet have very little legal recourse to redress those issues.

Second, those demanding a ban on Airbnb’s not only wrongly assume that such a prohibition will lead owners to rent to long term tenants but also that these potential tenants can pay the cost of the rent. Unfortunately, as taxes and utilities rise, so does an owner’s expenses leading to higher rents in an environment where gentrification is ongoing.

Third, the affordable housing crisis is not caused by Airbnb. Cities across the country such as San Francisco and New York have banned Airbnb without solving the affordable housing crisis, which started before the pandemic and has been exacerbated in its aftermath. The roots of the affordable housing crisis lie in a decade's long failure to meet growing demand, not Airbnbs. Affordable housing is a public good and it requires a public solution, which means that government has a responsibility to do its job and invest in solutions which a private market cannot afford to redress given the tremendous expense combined with profit loss. The blaming of Airbnb’s for all of these issues is a convenient strawman for those elected officials to avoid making difficult investment decisions about our declining infrastructure. In short, elected officials are conveniently passing the buck onto a vilified middle class struggling to pay increasing taxes and costs in Kingston even as the Common Council and the Mayor granted an $18 billion dollar tax cut to a wealthy real estate investor in exchange for a paltry number of affordable housing units in a luxury building development deal.

Additionally, the complaints that some make about Airbnb’s and the negative effects on the community are the very same complaints often made about renters. Those complaints follow along the lines that Airbnb guests have no stake in the community – that they are transient and make noise to cite just a few examples. We need only substitute “renters” for “Airbnb guests”. Nor is there empirical evidence to suggest that Airbnb guests are somehow noisy and require greater demands on our police department or other neighborhood resources.

Finally, Airbnb guests not only serve to help struggling families meet their tax and mortgage obligations, but also bring employment, revenue, and greater exposure to what was a once struggling upstate city. Groups like Homes, Not Hotels give elected officials a free pass when those politicians fail to meet their obligations to the community by investing in affordable housing. Instead, both groups such as Homes, Not Hotels and our elected officials pit struggling families against struggling families while subsidizing the profits of wealthy real estate investors. If the Mayor and the Common Council ban Airbnb’s, neither the gentrification issue (which preceded Airbnb) nor the affordable crisis will be solved. More families, struggling to pay taxes and to make ends meet, will suffer. Some may sell their homes, but the buyers will likely not be those demanding an end to Airbnb but rather to wealthier new buyers from outside the city.

The near ban on Airbnb’s is reactionary, thoughtless, and equivalent to using a sword when a more precise knife wielding instrument would be appropriate. If you seek to regulate Airbnb’s, perhaps consider important distinctions among hosts. Try banning large Airbnb real estate companies, or limit the number units any one owner may Airbnb. Require, for example, that those Airbnb’s that aren’t owner occupied have a local manager run the property in an effort to increase local employment. Instead, the near ban punishes struggling homeowners in the name of some kind of hollow progressivism. Wealthy communities like Rhinebeck and San Francisco ban Airbnb not to solve the gentrification issue nor the affordable housing crisis. Instead, they do so because their residents are wealthy enough to not need supplemental income. The ban on Airbnb in those wealthy cities has solved none of these very serious housing and gentrification issues. What the bans have done is solidify that only the wealthy can afford to live in such communities.

I own a 2-unit property in Uptown Kingston, which is my primary residence. The upstairs unit is a year round rental and I live on the first floor. When I purchased the property in 2020, it was mixed use, and I converted the first floor from an office to my residence (creating more housing).

I have been renting out my guest suite as an Airbnb since May of 2021 and just learned that I need a permit (which I am applying for as we speak). I am concerned about the proposed restrictions on airbnbs in our city. I have year-round tenants in the upstairs unit, and when their lease was up for renewal, I did not raise the rent. I was able to offer that because I do have income from renting out my guest suite. If I am no longer allowed to rent out my guest suite, I will most definitely be raising rents on the year-round tenants.

My home is 150 years old, and very expensive to maintain. Without airbnb income, I would have difficulty keeping up with maintenance and repairs. Last year I was able to add insulation to the home, which reduced heating usage, this year I will be doing roof repairs to prevent water damage. Next year I hope to paint the property and create outdoor space for my year-round tenants.

As an airbnb host, I go out of my promote local businesses, shops, restarants, etc., which stimulate the local economy. I use local tradesmen, plumbers, electricians, yard crews and cleaning people, which also stimulate the economy.

Furthermore, I do belive it is an overreach of the government to tell me what I am able to do in my own home. I believe in restrictions on "corporate short term housing", but not for those of us who live in our homes and rely on short term room rentals to supplement the high cost of living. If I were to find myself unemployed or with a health challenge and needed to rent the entire first floor on a short term basis (rather than just my guest room), I feel it is my right to decide how I use my home and not the government.

I am a single mother that managed to buy and renovate a dilapidated house only because of airbnb.

Working in sections, gaining finance via airbnb to continue with renovation.

This winter I will airbnb only weekends, whilst staying with friends, to pay off the 20,0000

heating system I could only gain credit for via airbnb income, despite having a full time job I was refused a home equity loan. I had to take out a personal loan based on additional airbnb income.

This is my home and will not be available for rental.

I feel it is easy to target middle class hard working individuals to point a finger at.

To block owner occupied airbnb rentals in this current climate will be DEVASTATING to my family and will result in homelessness. I will not be able to live in my own home. Are you in touch with how many families working full time are dangerously close to foreclosure and only hanging on due to Airbnb? I am $1200 behind on my Central Hudson due to the hikes.

My daughter and I will not be able to keep our home. I am begging you to consider us.

I’m originally from Sweden and have made Kingston my home. In Addison to the landscape reminding me of my country, I’ve also been able to connect with the amazing and diverse local Jewish community from reform to orthodox. We’ve been in the community for six years now and also do short term rentals. My neighbors, generations of Kingston natives, constantly call me for car advice. From day one we were like family. We’ve invested in this community and want to continue to do more. Please allow those with existing short term rental permits to continue.

The ban on "short term" rental seems bizarre, considering Kingston's focus on tourism, yet there exist a lack of lodging near tourism centers, such as Uptown, downtown and mid-town. Kingston clearly and admittedly has a zombie housing problem. Short term rental investors have helped local contractors and rehabilitated dilapidated housing. Disincentivizing the economics of short-term rentals and therefore rehabilitation of housing is nonsensical, and will result in more zombie houses. Hotels in Kingston are mostly by the mall and freeway, requiring auto travel to other places (accept the mall). Either the economic engine of local business needs to be boosted or the housing quality decline will continue. Rehabilitation for short-term rentals has been helpful as an economic engine. It appears this position against short-term rentals is based on salacious news stories of anti-social behavior at short term rentals on occasion around the country. In reality Kingston has no data showing this is a problem in Kingston. Additionally such behavior could result in arrest and revocation of permitting to address any such problems should and when they occur. The purveyors of short term rentals such as AirBNB & Marriott, have taken strong steps to prevent such bad and , in reality, rare circumstances . Please reconsider this illogical knee-jerk to a few salacious stories. Presuming this is the logic, I'm confident Kingston would have opted out of Marijuana dispensary permitting. Yet Kingston has not. Are we saying cannabis smokers are preferable over tourist? Please take this seriously, study the issue deeply and do not knee-jerk, hurting the economy, property values and according tax revenue. It take in extraordinary amount of cannabis sales to make up the taxes of a 100k plus rehabilitation. Not to mention please consider what we incentivizing / inviting? housing rehab, substantial local contractor and supplier revenue and related economics for tourism, or pot smoking?