Can you also provide me with the details of the voting that took place in order to approve a compliance committee. Perhaps I’m mistaken, but by reading the above I am under the impression that all activity in regards to disciplinary action etc. requires a vote from the majority of the community. Furthermore, I’m interested in understanding what percentage of the community voted on “short term rentals” that compiled a 70% agreement to discontinue short term rentals. Was it over 70% of the total community? Or was it 70% of the people in the community that responded? Because that could be 10 % of the total community which may not reflect the majority of the people whom have or have not an opinion? I’m just trying to understand how this topic became such an issue after living here for 14 years?????

Thanks for your attention to this as I am concerned for the well being of our collective community and fear we are being devisive for the good of the few instead of the good of the many.

Viki McCarty

When people purchase in our neighborhood, we tell them up front our community does not want nightly rentals.

For those that try, neighborhood yard signs about “no nightly renters wanted” tend to really dampen the enthusiam.

For those of us who live here, one of our major reasons is peace and quiet. We don’t want to me in a commercial business district, which is where nightly rentals belong, and where Leavenworth Zones them.

Some of the vacation renters don’t seem to care whether they jeopardize that, or anything else, and in some cases treat the community streets as their own racetrack. It is a hazard and a nuisance, especially at 2:00 a.m.

When it is your neighborhood, and you plan to come back regularly, there is a tendency to be a bit more considerate.

That ability to snowmobile is one of the things that makes the neighborhood so desirable. Putting that at risk doesn’t increase values.

For vacation condos, I completely agree. They do seem to get a better price when you can rent them in a short term fashion. They also typically have on-site management that can prevent some of the problems and parties that absentee landlords in single family neighborhoods couldn’t control if they chose to. Also, as pointed out previously, there are already other neighborhoods that allow vacation rentals. Having one neighborhood that doesn’t is different that having a whole town that doesn’t allow them.

In the Chelan area, single family homes in waterfront neighborhoods that allow vacation rentals don’t sell for any more money than homes in the city where the short term rentals are not allowed. In fact, Chelan is usually considered more desirable. There is one neighborhood in Manson that is relatively very high priced, but there are basically no vacation rentals.

So, since this particular neighborhood has little value to me or my family when it is filled with drunks driving machines at high speeds around where children want to play, I’m just as happy for the people that want to rent their properties to buy elsewhere where rentals are, and have been, allowed.

But, maybe I’m just a little different! It only takes a majority vote of the property owners to change the covenants. If a majority of the owners think they want to allow rentals, they could certainly allow them. However, I doubt the majority of owners there feel that allowing rentals increases the value of their property based on a survey that the board took a few months ago.

As far as the neighborhood, it is unfortunate that a few folks decided they could just ignore the covenants and create a big issue. No matter what is decided, somebody is likely to disagree with the outcome. That makes it a challenging issue to resolve.

With luck, some other folks will weigh in with their thoughts of what might make a higher value neighborhood for them! I sure appreciate the discussion, Thanks!

When you further consider that the covenants have never allowed the vacation rentals, and they are a small minority of the properties, there is cleary a market for recreation properties that don’t allow short term rentals.

I have been up there and experienced some of the issues with the short term renters, some of whom are beyond inconsiderate. I would personally pay more for a property that has restrictions against short term rentals. So, for me, the short term rentals detract from the value and utility of the property.

Whether it is a vacation property or a pernament residence, the tradeoff between the ability to use the property for short term income or have reduced nuisance from short term renters is something for any buyer to consider. Again, I see both types of buyers in the market.