Conway Planning Board member Bill Barbin makes a point about short-term renting while fellow board member Eliza Grant listens at the planning board last Thursday. (Screenshot by Daymond Steer)
The planning board is looking for ways to walk back proposed regulations that would allow owner-occupied short-term rentals only in residential zones.
They believe the proposed change could lead to a costly court fight.
Meanwhile, a video of the planning board’s meeting went viral after a board member Bill Barbin made an offhand comment about STR owners being perceived as “rats.”
Barbin actually opposes the owner occupation proposal and the local STR association is defending him.
On Feb. 13, the board voted 4-3 to remove a proposed revision requiring owner occupancy from the warrant article that they had backed at a previous meeting.
The vote to reverse course amends the proposed table of permitted uses and keeps the status quo and non-owner-occupied lodging houses in all residential and commercial districts.
Planning board member Ted Phillips said: “I’m fielding a lot of calls and concerns about changes we’ve made to the table of permitted uses concerning short-term rentals, many concerns about potential litigation.
“The one thing I haven’t heard is someone saying, ‘Yeah, let’s go back to court,’” he said.
Voting in favor of Phillips’ motion to modify the proposed regulations were Phillips, board chair Ben Colbath, select,men’s representative Steve Porter and Bill Barbin. Voting against it were Vice Chair Ailie Byers, Eliza Grant and Erik Corbett.
The question remains whether they can modify the article this late in the process. The board is seeking legal guidance on how to proceed. Monday was a federal holiday, and town hall was closed. Assistant Planner Holly Whitelaw said such a change would require a public hearing, and there isn’t enough time to meet the posting deadline.
Colbath appointed Phillips and Porter to serve on the subcommittee, pending state approval to remove the owner-occupancy wording from the proposed warrant article.
Josh Brustin, chair of the Mount Washington Housing Coalition, volunteered to serve on the subcommittee. Brustin said only a tiny minority of STRs are owner-occupied, meaning the owner-occupancy requirement is “essentially a ban” on them in residential zones.
He also said properties with grandfathered rights would be more valuable than those without, which could prompt a rush of homeowners seeking grandfathered status. He suggested this could increase the number of STRs from 600 to 1,500.
“This change would do nothing to increase the pool of affordable homes and with grandfathering, nothing to fix the nuisance property you may have next door,” Brustin told the Sun.
Nearby Madison recently banned non-owner occupied STRs in residential zones, which will be challenged in court. “With Conway mired in existing legal battles, why wouldn’t we let Madison’s taxpayers, and not Conway’s, foot that this one?” Brustin said.
Chair Ben Colbath said he’s torn on the issue. “I feel strongly in both directions. And then there’s that little bit of Mark Hounsell in me who’s like, Damn the rules we need to fight for 5because it’s what’s right,” he said.
Barbin and Phillips expressed concern that the public does not fully understand what is being proposed. “The reality is, we’re going to get sued no matter what we do; we’ve already been sued a couple of times over this. I’d rather us just pull back, come up with something concrete that everybody’s going to be happy with, and form a subcommittee,” Porter said.
Barbin wondered if anyone, including the planning board, truly understands what they are doing.
“You’ve got to really understand what that (permitted use table) is telling people to know how it affects your own property,” Barbin said.
“I’ve had concerns myself that I didn’t have at the beginning, because I felt like we’re fighting the good fight. ‘We’re gonna get those rats out of town,’ and as it’s evolved … I realize people don’t have the same mindset … They don’t know what we’re trying to do. And then I started to realize, I don’t know what I’m trying to do, either. Am I really trying to come up with a way to outlaw short-term rentals?”
The Sun asked Barbin to clarify his remarks. In response, he texted,
“The repercussions of the change to the table of use are more substantial than the voters, that I speak with, understand,” said Barbin.
“When I step back for a broader perspective I can see how this could be seen as a lack of transparency. The voters need more information and the planning board needs more information. We also need to hear from different perspectives. The rental association has been silent/absent at the multiple public hearings. I am glad the Mr. Phillips raised the same concern for transparency. Staying out of court again, is a valid concern,” Barbin said.
Mt. Washington Valley Association for Responsible Rentals defended Barbin in a statement released Monday. “We feel Mr. Barbin’s comments were taken out of context. When you listen to the entire discussion, he was clearly being sarcastic. He was highlighting how divisive this issue has become, and recommending a more rational path forward.”
Meanwhile, the selectmen and the budget committee are backing proposed changes to Chapter 72, Housing Standards, which would reinstate an inspection and self-affidavit system for all rental properties and implement an inspection process for homes that are not rentals but change use or undergo significant renovation. These changes to Chapter 72 will be on the ballot.
The association and the town are involved in pending litigation in Carroll County Superior Court, and the case may resume after the April 8 vote.
The board also unanimously voted to create a subcommittee, chaired by selectmen’s representative Steve Porter, to work on solutions to STR issues. .
This article is being shared by partners in the Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.
