(Kelowna) city council and city staff are upset at the province nixing their request for some short-term rental exemptions.
Then why did council pass more restrictive rules than the province just a couple weeks earlier?
You may not like the province's rules (I don't), but at least (they are) consistent with it stated purpose—to open up more long-term housing. That's why the province's rules allowed for principal residences to continue to be used for short-term rentals.
The city, on the other hand, decided to be more restrictive and ban short-term rentals in principal residences as well. Why?
By definition, these units won't find their way into the long-term rental market as they are people's principal residences. So, it doesn't help with long-term housing needs, even though it does cut into tourism dollars.
Why did the city staff go beyond the province, with no benefit for anyone (besides the hotel industry)? And why did Couns. Rick Webber, Luke Stack and Mohini Singh vote for it, along with a tie-breaking vote by Mayor Tom Dyas? I’d like an answer to those questions.
In the meantime, those four can't decry provincial overreach when they decided to go further just a couple weeks earlier.
Bailey Klinger, Kelowna