The city doesn't keep track of data relevant to anything that impacts renters or housing supply. If there's no data, there's no problem to address and they can continue to rely on plausible deniability for not knowing how bad things are.

How many landlords are in Portland? How many no-cause evictions? How many full time AirBnB units are being illegally rented? The city has NO IDEA.

But when it came time to get data to let Uber stay in town? They have data on every single rider, driver, call time, wait time, drive time, and pick-up and drop-off location.

Why is it so damn hard for BDS to keep a log of AirBnB complaints and fines assessed? Why is it so inconceivable that landlords (i.e. BUSINESS OWNERS WHO ARE PROVIDING SERVICES THAT ARE CRITICAL TO THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS OF PORTLAND) to have to have licenses and training and permit their properties and pay a fee to do so and for the city to enter their names into a damn Excel spreadsheet?

Thank you Mercury for being a watchdog on this issue! This is the kind of investigation and oversight the city really needs right now!

@Margot - Mandatory landlord training is a good idea! That might help prevent a lot of stupid mistakes.

The City already offers good landlord training, twice a year. I took it, and it was helpful. It's just not mandatory.

No one else is doing it, that's for sure.

@Reymont, mandatory tenant training would be pretty useful too.

Much harder to implement, though.

Tenant orientations would be great. They need to know their rights and and responsibilities. Could be part of the screening or move-in process.

Dear Ms. King:

Excellent reporting. With a shortage of affordable housing, is disingenuous to say that a few thousand illegal motels in residential neighborhoods are okay. It may be hard to prove, but investors buying condos and houses for
AirBnBs inflates housing costs- which is not good for prospective buyers or people who are just staying intheir home for awhile.

Another possible title is "Rich white people are above the law."

In the meantime, I won't be drinking Blue Bottle Coffee- it
has the aroma of gentrification with a bitter after taste.

This is a silly thing to be up in arms about. Typically, public bodies are compliance oriented when it comes to following rules. Rather than focus on PENALIZE, they focus on compliance. Yes, you can be penalized for breaking the rules, but we have so many rules, the main goal is educate and get them to comply. Air BnB should be viewed as the benefit it is. First, the people who are renting Air BnB units are by and large business people and tourists who are bringing money here. And not just for the rent payments. Second, as the city pointed out, Air BnB collects the tax revenue and pays the city.

Finally, the rule that you can only rent for three months a year is ridiculous. What difference does it make? Is there some rash of Air BnB related crime going on? If you want to find where bad things are happening in short term rental units, just check out the motels by the airport. Silly rules inspire rule breaking. Make sensible rules, and people follow them.

Oh, what ever is Blue Bottle Going to do, Reverend?

@Demondog says, "Finally, the rule that you can only rent for three months a year is ridiculous. What difference does it make? Is there some rash of Air BnB related crime going on? If you want to find where bad things are happening in short term rental units, just check out the motels by the airport. Silly rules inspire rule breaking."

~~~

There are a couple right off the top of my head:

1) Portland currently has what many are calling a "housing crisis". Buying a house in Portland with no intention of living in it essentially pulls yet another house off the tight market (pushing one more family out of the city) and contributes to increasing rents (pushing even more out).

2) A neighborhood is made up of the people who live and have a stake there (think stuff like schools). When the actual people who made a particular neighborhood desirable to short-term visitors are supplanted by those very visitors (and the absentee owners), the neighborhoods (and, again, stuff like schools) suffer.

It's worth noting that I don't really have anything against Airbnb, and think Portland's rather modest regulations strike a good balance: The people who make a neighborhood such continue to live there, sharing part of their house all of the time or all of their house some of the time. The people who live there still have a stake and visitors can have a good alternative to a chain hotel downtown (or, hey, even by the airport).

Not everyone finds the rules "silly", so advocating breaking rules you personally don't like is really just substituting your judgement for others, isn't it?

This matters. Really.

"They're only allowed to rent the home for about three months per year"... how does this work for ADUs? Can those be rented out year round or does 3 month policy also hold?