Enables cities and towns to impose an impact fee of 2% on the total consideration charged for occupancy of a house, condominium, or other resident dwelling that is rented in its entirety for less than 31 consecutive days.
The primary impact of S2020 on state laws involves the authorization for municipalities to regulate short-term rentals more effectively. By allowing cities and towns to impose an additional fee, the bill aims to ensure that adequate public resources are available to address the fiscal responsibilities and challenges brought about by short-term rental activities. The funds collected from the impact fees are designated for local infrastructure projects, matching funds for municipal grants, and expenses related to the development and maintenance of housing units, highlighting an effort to mitigate community stresses associated with short-term rentals.
S2020, also known as the Short-Term Rental Community Impact Fee Act, was introduced by Senator Dawn M. Euer to address the community impacts of short-term rentals in Rhode Island. The bill allows local cities and towns to impose a community impact fee of up to two percent on the total consideration charged for the occupancy of houses or dwellings rented for less than thirty-one consecutive days. This short-term rental community impact fee is intended to generate funds that can be utilized for public health, safety, and welfare provisions affected by the short-term rental operations.
While the bill has the potential to provide much-needed funding for local governments, it may also raise concerns among property owners and rental companies about the additional financial burden of these impact fees. Proponents of the bill argue that the fee is a sensible approach to ensuring that short-term rentals contribute to the local economy and community welfare. On the other hand, critics may perceive this as an undue regulation that could drive short-term rental prices higher, complicating access for visitors and renters alike. As municipalities consider enacting ordinances under this bill, the debate is likely to center around the balance between community benefits and the interests of property owners.