While a group of neighborhood activists against residential STRs celebrated, the owners and operators of Airbnb and VRBO properties had to regroup and determine what their next step would be. But that June vote wasn’t the end of the story, just the end of a chapter. On Monday, the Dallas Short-Term Rental Alliance (DSTRA) announced it had sued the city of Dallas, seeking an injunction that would allow STRs to continue operating throughout the city limits.
The zoning changes voted on in June were more about from which areas of town STRs would be restricted than anything else. The decision to ban STRs in residential neighborhoods meant that an estimated 94% of the operating STRs in Dallas would be outlawed come December, when the changes would take effect.
Fueled by headlines involving STRs playing host to busted prostitution rings, out-of-control parties, gun violence and increased noise, traffic and trash throughout North Texas, the “Homes Not Hotels” side of the debate overpowered the progress that STR owners thought they had been making to find a compromise with the city between lawlessness and a nearly all-encompassing ban. Fort Worth and Grapevine have also instituted their own restrictions to keep STRs out of single-family residential neighborhoods.
“Over the last three years, the DSTRA worked with the City on several City-initiated Task Forces to try and craft sensible regulations about the handful of nuisance STR properties,” a press release from DSTRA stated. “Many of these sensible suggestions were rolled into the new Registration Ordinance also passed by the Council on June 14.”
"We don’t want party houses either. I don’t want to live next to one, you don’t want to live next to one, nobody does." – Lisa Sievers, Dallas Short-Term Rental Alliance
tweet this
That comment illustrates one of the chief sticking points for STR hosts: The June vote signified the city going from A to Z without any stops. By the city’s own admission, STR owners have been told to register with the city and to pay hotel occupancy tax, although there has never been a way for the city to enforce the edict, much less penalize any who failed to register.
Lisa Sievers, a board member for the DSTRA and a resident who owns a pair of STRs in Dallas, touched on another primary point her group has repeatedly raised over the past few years of STR discussion.
“By the city’s own statistics, and we've done three separate studies, all of them have said the same thing,” Sievers said. “That 80% of short-term rentals have zero 311 or 911 calls. There’s problems with a few, and what really needs to happen is we need to have good code enforcement, not a ban."
For those who have followed this debate, these are not new points. This means the DSTRA is relying on a judge being more receptive to its argument than the City Council was over the course of more than three years and multiple committees, briefings and masterplans. Through a spokesperson, the city and city attorney declined to comment, citing the pending litigation.
Group such as the Dallas Neighborhood Coalition successfully got across the notion that if a home owner is paying hotel occupancy tax, then it is a hotel and not a home, nor is it simply a business one is running out of their house. But the code enforcement issue Sievers mentioned is one that people on her side of the argument and the other side can agree on. The party houses and most of the properties that have caused some sort of disturbances in their neighborhoods typically do so on nights and weekends when the city's code enforcement employees are not on duty. On top of that, Dallas police consider calls for loud and overcrowded house parties a low-priority call, which often results in long delays between a neighborhood being disrupted and police showing up.
There’s a reason that party houses have garnered so much attention. An unruly party that spilled out onto an otherwise quiet residential street in North Dallas just before the pivotal council vote is an instance that’s too common, STR critics say. On June 5, gunshots hit nearby homes while families were inside. Video from the scene shows the sort of chaos that few, if any, homeowners would tolerate in their neighborhood.
Sievers understands that, but does not see eye-to-eye with how the city has responded to the problems party houses cause.
“A few bad apples ruin it for everybody,” Sievers said. “But the reason we’re at a lawsuit right now is because this has been so unfair. We don’t want party houses either. I don’t want to live next to one, you don’t want to live next to one, nobody does. But the problem is there is a small, vocal contingent of people who get very angry and upset, and they’re answer is to get rid of all of them [STRs]. This issue has always been about party houses. The problem won't go away simply because of the ban.”
