City of Columbia, Missouri

Meeting Minutes

Planning and Zoning Commission

Council Chambers

Columbia CIty Hall

701 E. Broadway

Thursday, December 7, 2023

7:00 PM

Regular Meeting

I. CALL TO ORDER

MS. GEUEA JONES: I will now call the November 9th -- or that -- this is not -- that's

not today. How about December 7th, 2023, Planning and Zoning regular meeting to

order.

II. INTRODUCTIONS

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Carroll, may we please have a roll call.

MS. CARROLL: Commissioner Loe?

MS. LOE: Here.

MS. CARROLL: Commissioner Stanton?

MR. STANTON: Here.

MS. CARROLL: Commissioner Dunn?

MR. DUNN: Present.

MS. CARROLL: Commissioner MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: Present.

MS. CARROLL: I am here. Commissioner Geuea Jones?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Here.

MS. CARROLL: Commissioner Placier?

MS. PLACIER: Here.

MS. CARROLL: Commissioner Ford?

MR. FORD: Here.

MS. CARROLL: Commissioner Wilson?

MS. WILSON: Here.

MS. CARROLL: We have nine; we have a quorum.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you very much.

9 -

Present:

Sara Loe, Anthony Stanton, Michael MacMann, Valerie Carroll, Sharon Geuea

Jones, Peggy Placier, Shannon Wilson, Zack Dunn and Matt Ford

III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

MS. GEUEA JONES: Mr. Zenner, are there any changes to our agenda for the

evening.

MR. ZENNER: No, there are not, ma'am.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Is there a motion to approve?

MR. MACMANN: Move to approve.

MR. STANTON: Second.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Moved by Commissioner MacMann, seconded by

Commissioner Stanton.

(Unanimous vote for approval.)

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thumbs up approval on the agenda? Unanimous. Thank

you.

Move to approve

IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

November 9, 2023 Regular Meeting

MS. GEUEA JONES: We should have all received a copy of the November 9th, 2023

regular meeting minutes. Are there any changes or adjustments to the minutes?

MR. MACMANN: Move to approve.

MS. LOE: Second.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Motion to approve by Commissioner MacMann, seconded by

Commissioner Loe. Thumbs up approval on the minutes?

(Eight votes for approval; one abstention.)

MS. GEUEA JONES: Unanimous with Commissioner Wilson abstaining. All

right. We just have one issue on our docket for the evening.

Move to approve

V. PUBLIC HEARINGS

Case # 45-2023

A request by the City of Columbia to amend Sections 29-1.11(a)

[Definitions], 29-3.2, Table 29- 3.1 [Permitted Use Table], and 29-3.3

[Use-specific Standards] of Chapter 29 of the City Code (Unified

Development Code) pertaining to the regulation of residential dwellings

used for the purposes of short-term rental (STR). The amendments

propose new definitions specifically tailored to STRs, revisions to the

permitted use table indicating what zoning districts allow STRs, new

“use-specific standards” that describe a three “tier” structure governing

STRs that contain operational and rental day limitations, and supplemental

“use-specific standards” addressing licensure, site, and operational

limitations/ requirements.

MS. GEUEA JONES: May we please have a staff report?

Staff report was given by Mr. Pat Zenner of the Planning and Development

Department. The Commission has the following four options as related to the attached

regulations:

1. Continue the public hearing to permit for further Commission discussion.

2. Adopt the ordinance as written.

3. Adapt the ordinance subject to specific amendments.

4. Deny the ordinance.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you very much, Mr. Zenner. Are there any -- well,

before we go to questions for staff, I just want to do a little bit of housekeeping. As we

can all see, we have a lot of folks here tonight. I think we should do everything we can up

here on the dais to make sure all of them get their three minutes to speak. So I would

ask my fellow commissioners to be as succinct and brief as we can. We have spent how

many work sessions -- 25, 26 work sessions discussing this. We all know what each

other thinks. I think we all know what staff things, so let’s try to really put our focus on

our guests this evening. With that, are there any questions for staff? Commissioner

Stanton?

MR. STANTON: Mr. Zenner, in absence of there being any regulation for short-term

rentals, is that land use legal at this time?

MR. ZENNER: I'll let Ms. Thompson respond.

MS. THOMPSON: Not currently a permitted use in the City.

MR. STANTON: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any other questions? I have two clarifying questions, much

as Mr. Stanton did. Mr. Zenner, the days limit on the tiers is on the total number of days

rented as an STR, not on the number that's listed or advertised. Right? So you could do

almost every weekend a year and still be within your 120 days?

MR. ZENNER: That is a correct statement. The rental day maximum per calendar

year does not limit one from listing that short-term on a platform 365 days, and hence the

reason why an outside service may be utilized to monitor that rental calendar.

MS. GEUEA JONES: And the other question that I had, and this is also based on a

lot of the comments that I saw. If you are doing a contract to rent that is more than 31

consecutive days, that is not a short-term rental. So a 90-day visiting nurse contract is

not a short-term rental; is that correct?

MR. ZENNER: That is correct. The dwelling would need to be duel registered,

however, as both the short-term rental for those periods when it's less than 31, and then

the dual registration with the long-term rental process, the rental compliance or rental

conservation law would allow for that 90-day contract to be valid and legal.

MS. GEUEA JONES: And that's regardless of when you advertise it?

MR. ZENNER: That is correct.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Okay. Any final questions? Commissioner MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: Pursuant of our clarifying questions, I have a clarifying question for

legal. Ms. Thompson, am I correct in assuming that if we were to grandfather anything,

we would have to treat those being grandfathered and those who weren't grandfathered

equally? Did I put that question -- you know what I'm asking you? Did I put that question

in an understandable fashion?

MS. THOMPSON: You did. The City is required to treat similarly situated property

owners the same. Property owners that currently have a short-term rental that is now

being lawfully operated are similarly situated to a property owner in the future that wants

to have a short-term rental after these regulations are passed. Those two property

owners need to be treated the same.

MR. MACMANN: Thank you very much, Ms. Thompson.

MS. THOMPSON: You're welcome.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Any final questions? Seeing none. We will open

the floor for public comment. Here's what we're going to do. Three minutes if you're an

individual, five minutes if you're a group?

MR. ZENNER: Six.

MS. GEUEA JONES: -- six minutes. Sorry. Five minutes at City Council, six

minutes here. So six minutes if you are representing a group. If you are the

representative of the group, you have to be the representative of a group. Right? So you

can't have three people here that are all the representative from the same group and get --

all of you get six minutes. So three minutes individuals, six minutes if you're the

representative for a group. Please speak clearly into the microphone. Not only do we do

verbatim transcripts, but we also have quite a large audience tonight online. Please state

your name and address for the record, and with that I don't think there's any more

housekeeping, so who wants to go first? Oh, yeah. And this is my red light. I figured

out what the button did.

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED

MR. YRONWODE: I'm not shy. I'm willing to go first. My name is Peter Yronwode;

I live at 203 Orchard Court. I operate a single short-term rental in a property that is not

my principal residence. I -- I did provide you with extensive comments, but they were

based on a proposal -- a proposed ordinance that was issued -- posted by the City

Council. It may not be exactly the same as the document before you, but I hope some of

my comments, which I'm sure you've -- I hope you've seen are still cogent. I have a

couple of questions. Obviously, they won't cover everything that I'm concerned about.

The first one is the phrase in whole or in part, referring to the tier one STRs. What does

that mean? Is that the property in whole or in part, or the number of days in whole or in

part? And that goes along with another very significant question. I'd like to have these

questions addressed one at a time. If Mr. Zenner chooses to respond, I would like that to

be subtracted from my three minutes. Well, that's only fair. The other matter is most

STRs are rented for the weekend, so that would be from Friday, in my case, noon, which

is the check-in time to Sunday, which is -- at noon, which is a check-out time. That's 48

hours. Is that two days or three days. I proposed that rather than use days, we use

nights because that -- that renter is only there for two nights. Now I did spell that out in

my comments, and I'd like that to be adjusted. A natural person, I assume, precludes a

corporation or an LLC or something like that. I'd like that to be addressed, as well. Most

tier two -- most STRs in town are tier two, and I believe that it's appropriate that an STR

that's operated by a single person, for example, one STR operated by a person should

also be included in tier one because that's the least restrictive. However, 30 days is an

impossible standard for anyone to meet. It means that, basically, for 11 months out of

12, that property cannot be used, and I think that's unduly restrictive, and yet it applies to

what Mr. Stanton has repeatedly suggested is the quintessential and original meaning of

an Airbnb or a short-term rental, so I don't know why it's such a short amount of time

compared to the others. I suggest that all of them have that 120-day limit, though I

believe that is also too restrictive because it means that that property is effectively vacant

for, what is it, two/thirds of the year.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you, Mr. Yronwode. I appreciate that, but that's your

three minutes.

MR. YRONWODE: Excuse me?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Your three minutes are up.

MR. YRONWODE: I understand that. I'll be happy to take any questions, and I

would like to hear my questions addressed by Mr. Zenner.

MS. GEUEA JONES: All right. In the interest of again getting to everyone, are there

any questions or comments for this speaker? Commissioner MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Yronwode, for your edification and

for everyone else here, if we're gabbing or, God forbid, MR. Zenner is gabbing, because

we know that can happen, that does not count against you. That's the time that you're

speaking, not that we're getting your questions or that --

MR. YRONWODE: Do you have a question for me?

MR. MACMANN: I do have a question for you. I wanted you to define -- to clear up

something. I wanted to make that point, and I found your point about nights to be

interesting. I'm going to have to review that more.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Do you have a question, Commissioner?

MR. MACMANN: I do. When you were referring to in whole or in part, were you

referring to the section in the tier one ordinance that does refer to the structure?

MR. YRONWODE: That's where that language occurs. Yes.

MR. MACMANN: All right. That's what I -- that's what I wanted to know.

MR. YRONWODE: But -- but it is important to determine whether that means in

whole or in part of the dwelling unit, or in whole or in part of the days that are rented.

That is clearly ambiguous as I read the ordinance.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Carroll?

MS. CARROLL: I was wondering if you would be comfortable sharing with us how

many days or nights in this case you operate a year, or how many nights you would like

to operate in a year?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Or they are actually filled?

MS. CARROLL: That it's actually filled. Right? That it's actively rented.

MR. YRONWODE: Well, of course. Of course. When it's actually rented.

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to calculate that exactly, but the most recent year that

I've looked at, we had 138 days, and -- and that's counting, in my case, if it -- if it was a

weekend, as I discussed earlier, I counted it as two days. If you're going to count it as

three days, basically, I'm screwed. I also have had several instances where we have had

extended stays, and I'm glad to see that those are exempted from this ordinance.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner -- I'm sorry. Commissioner Carroll, did you

have something else?

MS. CARROLL: That's all I meant now. Thank you.

MR. YRONWODE: All right. Thank you.

MS. LOE: Just because you've asked for responses to your questions, I did want to

comment that I thought your observation regarding days versus nights to be astute and I

do believe long-term rentals typically done -- leases are done in days, whereas hospitality

is typically done in nights, and I did want to bring that up as something we would

consider.

MR. YRONWODE: I think it's appropriate to treat them as a hospitality.

MS. LOE: So thank you for bringing that up.

MR. YRONWODE: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. And I am going to suggest -- I know that Planning

and Zoning staff has already started doing this. I'm going to suggest that more detailed

answers to the questions be put on the FAQ page as opposed to trying to address

everyone's tonight because, otherwise, we will not get through everyone, and I do want

everyone to have a chance to speak.

MR. YRONWODE: All right.

MS. GEUEA JONES: So thank you so much. Who is next?

MR. TRABUE: Good evening, Commissioners. Tom Trabue with Trabue

Engineering, offices at 4750 North Booth Lane. I'm representing the Columbia Board of

Realtors this evening and would like the extended six minutes for my presentation. The

board has been following and providing comments to the Commission and Council

regarding this ordinance for some time, dating back to 2018. We have consistently

suggested that the ordinance be simple and address four key priorities. Number 1, define

and establish STRs as a legal use. Number 2, make provisions to allow the lodging tax

to be collected. Three, create parity with the current rental regulations. And four, not

restrict one of the basic property rights of renting one's property. As we expressed

concerns about the ordinance, we were encouraged to draft an alternative ordinance.

Based on that advice, we drafted an amendment sheet, if you will, to the current

ordinance, which I think has been provided to you ahead of the meeting. We have also

provided the commentary with some supporting information for the changes that we've

proposed. In developing this alternative ordinance, the Board of Realtors, the Columbia

Apartment Association worked directly with a group of current STR hosts in our

community to have a strong working knowledge of their needs and concerns. So we

didn't draft our amendments in a vacuum. This alternative ordinance has strong support

among the current STR hosts, many of which I think you're going to hear from this

evening. While we're proposing several changes for your consideration, I can't possibly

go through all of them at the dais tonight. I'd like to highlight the following sticks.

Number one, remove the tier system to make the ordinance easier to read and

understand. This just made sense to use, and it's consistent with advice that was

provided by -- to the Commission by the planning staff and the legal department late in

the game. Number two, establish an allowable number of days for rental that is more

aligned with anecdotal data provided by our local host and national statistics provided by

our property management and hosts. We propose a conditional use permit process for

hosts that want to operate above that limit. Our hosts will tell you that they serve guests

that are visiting our community all through the year for a multitude of events. Not just

football weekends and not just weekends. They -- they rent these facilities for a lot of

days during the year. Number 3, allow more licenses than the current limitation of one.

National statistics bear out that 89 percent of STR hosts operate five or less STRs. This

is primarily a cottage industry, and we think it's appropriate to provide a limit to avoid this

being driven by investors or corporate investors -- or corporate interest. One license,

however, is overly restrictive. Number 4, allow transferability of licenses similar to

long-term rentals as an administrative process. Number 5, remove the requirements of a

business license from the ordinance, again, consistent with long-term rentals. We don't

believe that business licenses are a land use issue, and the City Finance Director has

told us that a business license is not necessary for the lodging tax to be collected.

Based on discussion by Commissioners during the work sessions, many of the

provisions of this ordinance were driven by complaints about noise and parking. We

propose that the City utilize and enforce nuisance ordinances that already exist in the

City code. We strongly support the City staffing at 24/7 on-call position coordinated with

the 311 system to address violations of the nuisance ordinances whether they be STRs

or other nuisance properties. To that end, we encourage removing those items from this

ordinance. Over the last year, we have inquired a number of times about complaints

about STRs. Each time the answer has been we're not receiving too many. There have

been limited complaints about STRs. This is a customer review driven business model,

and it's heavily reliant on good customer service and well-kept houses to obtain five-start

reviews. STRs are generally the best maintained homes on the block. The occupancy

rate of STRs in our community is a testament to the desirability and the need for this

type of rental. I believe that many of our local hosts again are going to testify this evening

regarding their individual stories and the importance of allowing STRs in our community. I

want to thank you all for your efforts in developing this ordinance. I was right there along

with you for a lot of the work sessions. I appreciate the amount of time you spent on it.

We appreciate your consideration of the amendments that we have proposed. We're very

confident that our amended ordinance is fair and will best serve our community. And I

would be glad to answer any questions.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Are there any questions for this speaker? Seeing

none.

MR. TRABUE: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Next?

MR. NORGARD: Good evening. My name is Peter Norgard; I'm at 1602 Hinkson

Avenue. I have a feeling most people aren't going to like what I have to say. First of all, I

appreciate the time and effort you all have put into this. I've been following along for the

last five or six years, as well. I frankly like your ordinance. I think it is not restrictive

enough in some ways, and I know there's a lot of people out there that think that there's

no complaints coming in. Complaints don't come in because it doesn't matter if you

complain, nothing happens. We've had numerous Airbnbs, with problem Airbnbs, and

we've complained, and nothing happens, so what's the point? We stopped complaining.

You complain to Airbnb, nothing happens, so what's the point? I appreciate the notion

that this is a tax collecting opportunity for the City, and I assume that's one of the

reasons that it continues to drive forward. I appreciate that. I don't know. Thank you for

your effort. I fully support this.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you very much. Any questions for this speaker?

Seeing none. Thank you. Who is next? All right, folks. Somebody get -- okay. There

we go. I was going to say you didn't all come here tonight just to watch Tom speak.

MR. HAWLEY: Good evening. Thank you for your time. My name is Matthew

Hawley. I own and operate two STRs here in Columbia that are not my full-time

residence. I find this to be restrictive and I'm especially concerned about the 120 days.

My two Airbnbs average probably 60 percent or greater occupancy, and I employ two

property managers to manage and clean those Airbnbs. I'm concerned that 120 days will

encourage owners to not be as courteous to neighbors. I really was very conscientious

when I opened an Airbnb, they were homes that I previously dwelled in, and I

communicated with my neighbors to let them know what I was doing. As my family

expanded, grew, I needed a bigger home. I kept my smaller homes and turned them into

short-term rentals. And I have maintained that clear and respectful communication with

my neighbors, and they have given me overwhelmingly positive feedback that they were

very trepidatious at first, but it has gone surprisingly well. We had one party in two

years, and it was shut down within 15 minutes. My neighbors called me directly, I went

over there and talked to the occupants. I let them know very clearly that Airbnb and our

rules don't allow parties. Airbnb already regulates parties and hasn't allowed them since

2020. I think that's been very effective. As represented in my experience, we have not

had people trying to have parties. People who rent Airbnb generally don't -- they're not

trying to have parties. They're trying to bring their families to Columbia to enjoy our

beautiful city and to take their kids to sports events and go to the hospitals and go to

concerts and go to football games. I think it's a huge boon to our economy, and it's a

huge support for my family and my friends whom I employ. I encourage you to -- to look

at that 120 days because what it's going to do is it's going to encourage us to -- to be

profitable, to maximize the cost and the number of occupants. So I can -- I can turn

down large groups on holidays because I don't need to make more money. But if I only

have 120 days, I'm going to say yes to the most people that I can get in there because

that's what I need to do to make a profit in 120 days. That's really hard to do. It's already

a very small cottage industry that has extremely low rates. Some of the Airbnbs are $86

a night. For me to be profitable with 120 days, I would have to increase my rates by 50

percent, and try to maximize occupancy. So in support of Airbnbs, and in support of my

neighbors, I think that you need to deny this ordinance or extend the amount of period

that you turn -- you activate it. I really support Airbnbs. As a family when I travel, I use

Airbnbs and I think it's wonderful way to -- to meet people, to get into a community, and

get insights into where to go out to eat, what to do, and you can feed your family and

cook, and it makes travel affordable. I think Airbnb is wonderful, and I support it fully as

an owner/operator and as a family in Columbia. Thank you for your time.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you, Mr. Hawley. Any questions? Commissioner

MacMann? Sorry.

MR. MACMANN: Thank you, Madam Chair. Is it Hawley?

MR. HAWLEY: Yes, sir.

MR. MACMANN: Okay. Hi. I saw you online earlier today. Anyway, just real

quick. The first question is if you would extend the days above 120, what would you go

to?

MR. HAWLEY: I think over 200 would be a lot more realistic.

MR. MACMANN: All right.

MR. HAWLEY: Right.

MR. MACMANN: And just real quickly, you -- your story captures some things

here. I had this one party one time -- you live close. They called me, and I was over

there in 15 minutes. I have no doubt that's -- that's true. We're seeing a lot of growth in

the out-of-town owner, the investor owner. They are not here. Should we have different

standards for those people?

MR. HAWLEY: I mean, I think if they're trying to buy an excessive amount of

homes, yes. But I think that as the earlier comments had mentioned, I think five or

greater, that might become an issue, but I don't think -- I think that one is way too

restrictive. My homes, I started, I lived in them, and then my family grew and I kept

them, and it's been a wonderful opportunity for me and my family, and I think it's a

wonderful opportunity for a lot of American families.

MR. MACMANN: All right. Thank you, sir.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Stanton?

MR. STANTON: I yield.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Carroll?

MS. CARROLL: Yeah. I think Mike asked some of my questions. Am I right in

understanding you actively rent your property 219, 220 nights a year?

MR. HAWLEY: It's pretty close to that, yes.

MS. CARROLL: Okay.

MR. HAWLEY: We've had 100 percent occupancy in some months. We had -- and

75 percent all through the summer. In the winter months, it tapers off significantly, but

it's still close to 40 percent, 50 percent.

MS. CARROLL: Okay. Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Anyone else? Mr. Stanton:

MR. STANTON: So I'm going to assume that you -- do you rent your home you stay

in? Do you do an owner-occupied kind of thing?

MR. HAWLEY: When I first started, I rented the -- our only home. I went and stayed

with my mother on weekends. And then when we sold that, when we moved into another

home, we kept it and Airbnb'd it, and then we moved into another home and kept it, and

Airbnb'd it. I own three homes in Columbia.

MR. STANTON: I'm going to assume you've been following this process?

MR. HAWLEY: Absolutely.

MR. STANTON: So you understand some of the things we're facing from our point of

view and then from your point of view as an entrepreneur. What is a good win-win

situation as far as the number of licenses?

MR. HAWLEY: The sum total number of licenses?

MR. STANTON: Like how much do I -- how many licenses should I let you have as

an individual entrepreneur in Airbnb space?

MR. HAWLEY: I think three to five would be fine for most small-time entrepreneurs.

MR. STANTON: All right. Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Anyone else? I see none. Thank you very much, Mr. Hawley.

MR. HAWLEY: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: There we go. Now we're -- now we're figuring it out.

MS. YANKEE: Hello. Good to see you all again. My name is Jesse Yankee; I live

at 17 West Parkway. I am short-term rental owner at 121 West Boulevard North, which

is also the Gingerbread House or Hobbit House, as many people know. I also manage

for some owners in town. I also administer a group of now 85 short-term rental owners in

Columbia that represent over half of the short-term rentals we're discussing tonight,

although I'm not speaking on their behalf, so I will stick to my three minutes. If anybody

here is not in our group, please see me after this meeting. First, I do want to thank all of

you. I know you're exhausted, I'm exhausted. I'm exhausted by the Facebook

arguments, I'm exhausted by neighbors arguing. I want this to be over as much as you

do. There are many reasons that I support short-term rentals in Columbia, but I’m going

to speak tonight only to the one that I consider most important, and that's not profit

because mine operates at a loss due to the enormous upkeep of that home. Short-term

rentals bring large and/or multi-generational families to Columbia. They come for

graduations, holidays, medical procedures, simply vacation, visiting grandchildren and all

of the above, not just Mizzou football. They bring their outside dollars into our community

that support our restaurants, our retail establishments, our universities and overall

tourism. Columbia short-term rental owners are willing and excited to support the growth

of our airport and support the further development of affordable housing projects funded by

the tax dollars being left on the table right now, not being taxed by the City. Frankly, the

regulations currently drafted by the Commission are anti-family. They are too restrictive,

and they will drive family travel away from Columbia. As a person with a family of six, I

can tell you that hotels are simply not an option when traveling with four children. It

would be a shame for Columbia to be seen as anti-family in this manner. I want to thank

the Columbia Board of Realtors and the Apartment Association who have spent an

enormous amount of time and resources to submit what all of us consider to be fair

regulation amendments that will keep short-term rentals as an option for Columbia

visitors. We support a reasonable cap on number of licenses, on a registration process,

and also the future taxing of our rentals in the same vein as other lodging. I am asking for

you, the Commission, to please truly consider the set of amendments in front of you

tonight and submit them to -- for approval to Council. Thank you, and I'm certainly happy

to answer any questions, and I do have one question for you for clarification. Where is

this data about outside investors buying Airbnbs?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you very much. Are there any questions for this

speaker? Commissioner Stanton?

MR. STANTON: How many licenses should I let you have as an individual

entrepreneur?

MS. YANKEE: I fully support the eight listed. If I'm being completely honest with

you all, I think five is also a great number.

MR. STANTON: Eight to five, five to eight?

MS. YANKEE: Five to eight. We'll go for eight, but I would be happy with five,

personally.

MR. STANTON: So you've been following this whole thing?

MS. YANKEE: Right.

MR. STANTON: We do have that data about outside investors. I can't just rap it off

the top of my head, but with that said, do you see an impact of short-term rentals to

long-term rentals and affordable housing? Do you believe that statement?

MS. YANKEE: I do. I actually -- this is a longer conversation. My -- you guys know

I love working in advocacy. My next advocacy venture after this is going to be more

accountability for long-term landlords. I think we have a bigger problem with the complete

-- it's -- I don't even want to say what circus for what's happening with our long-term

rentals with the rent out of control I'm also a long-term landlord, as well, so I do think it's

a problem. I don't think short-term rentals are the catalyst for that problem. I think they

add way more value to our community than they are any type of problem.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any other questions? Commissioner Placier and then

Commissioner MacMann.

MS. PLACIER: Yes. Since you are in such close contact with a lot of short-term

rental operators, it's always puzzled me is when they got into this business, because you

use the term lodging. These are lodgings. They are guest accommodations, and there

was no provision in our Code for that to be allowable in residential districts. And yet

people took a risk and got into it. Why do you suppose they engaged in something that

was not lawful?

MS. YANKEE: Yeah. Absolutely. I don't think the general public knows that it's

unlawful. I think if there isn't a specific -- I guess you could say there's a specific law, but

I doubt anybody on the street can tell you what our Universal Development Code says. I

know there was even comment in Commission earlier about there already being a

preexisting regulation surrounding ADUs, but something like only four were registered

with the City. So I just think it's -- it's not of them being willing to break the law. I think

people simply didn't know that they were doing something that was unlawful.

MS. PLACIER: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Mr. MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: To clarify, our data -- and I just got an update on that.

MS. YANKEE: Great.

MR. MACMANN: Our data isn't -- has demonstrated increased multiple listings. Not

all of those people are from out of town.

MS. YANKEE: Right.

MR. MACMANN: Ten, thirty, seventeen. I would characterize those as investors. I

would like to clarify something just a little bit. I do not suppose that the units that any of

you people run would be leased directly to anyone who would have -- in need of affordable

housing. We're talking about this is one element, one element of taking housing off the

market, and we're over 400 right now. Just a little clarity. Thank you for the leeway,

Madam Chair.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Of course.

MS. YANKEE: Can I ask for a clarification? So I do think there is a giant different

between investor and out-of-town investor. And what's going on on social media,

especially even with the past Council member is they're -- they're literally saying and

spitting -- spreading misinformation that out-of-town investors are buying all these

Airbnbs, and I just don't think that's factual in any way. So I think if we're going to say

out-of-town investors, we need to actually know what that data is instead of just saying it,

because I do think -- I would guess out of what I know about that over 90 percent are local

residents that own our short-term rentals. Even the ones that own a ton, they're local.

But as I said, we -- the majority of short-term rental owners -- vast majority do support a

license cap.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you very much.

MR. MACMANN: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Stanton?

MR. STANTON: Should an outside investor be treated differently than a local

investor?

MS. YANKEE: No, absolutely not. But they would be subjected to the same cap as

everybody else. So these ten, twenty, thirty, forty units underneath what we are

suggesting to adopt the amendments to have a maximum of eight I think would be the

universal rule.

MR. STANTON: Are you saying that an outside investor that doesn't have anything

to do with our community should -- we should treat them just like you, as a local investor;

is that what you're telling me?

MS. YANKEE: I --

MR. STANTON: Even if the data showed different than --

MS. YANKEE: As long as they're a good host, and offering this to our community,

and they're following the law, then, yeah. I do think that they should be treated the same

as anybody else.

MR. STANTON: Okay.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Sorry. Commissioner Carroll?

MS. YANKEE: Sorry. I'm calling on people like I -- so sorry.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Yeah. Thank you. Commission Carroll?

MS. CARROLL: I was ready to be called up. Sorry. Yeah. You said you represent

80 hosts?

MS. YANKEE: Eight-five.

MS. CARROLL: Eight-five hosts, and that's what percent of --

MS. YANKEE: I'm not sure, because I'm not sure the number of the short-term

rentals currently operating. But I know it's over half because many of our owners have

two or three.

MS. CARROLL: Over half. I -- I think that's a point I'm --

MS. YANKEE: Sorry.

MS. CARROLL: -- trying to understand myself.

MS. YANKEE: Got you.

MS. CARROLL: So over half of the listings --

MS. YANKEE: Correct.

MS. CARROLL: -- not over half of the short-term rental hosts?

MS. YANKEE: I don't know. See, you might have more data than I do regarding the

-- we say there's, what, 400 units? I don't know how many hosts that is.

MS. CARROLL: Yeah.

MS. YANKEE: It's much less because of the few that own many, many.

MS. CARROLL: Yeah. A little bit over 100 as of 2022.

MS. YANKEE: Right. So 85 of them --

MS. CARROLL: So we have to pull it back.

MS. YANKEE: So we have 85 of them in a group together.

MS. CARROLL: So -- sorry. We have 111 hosts that own -- manage only one

property.

MS. YANKEE: Okay. Got you. I see.

MS. CARROLL: So I'm trying to figure out if the percentage --

MS. YANKEE: I'm not -- I can't answer.

MS. CARROLL: is a percentage of listings or a percentage of hosts.

MS. YANKEE: I would say of listings.

MS. CARROLL: Thank you.

MS. YANKEE: Yes.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Okay. Thank you very much. Anybody else? Last call.

Thank you, Ms. Yankee.

MS. YANKEE: Thanks.

MS. GEUEA JONES: So far we've been respectful. We've got one coming

behind you. I don't mind respectful applause, but if we start getting rowdy, I'm going to

start getting mean. Thank you.

MS. WATSON: My name is Kim Watson, and I have one VRBO. I just thought

perhaps I could present what I'm doing, and you could ask questions to get a better

perspective on what life is like for a host. The home that I am using as a STR is right

across the driveway from the house I live in. The house I'm using as a STR, my

husband's parents bought in 1945, so it's been in the family that long. My husband

passed away last year, and while he was in the hospital, the nurses who were working on

him were telling me how much they hate staying at the hotels, so that's when I came up

with the idea, and after he passed away, I reached out to them and offered the home.

Most of the folks that stay with me, right now, I've got a couple that came in from

Alabama, who were here to be with family for about five days. It's not just weekends, it's

not just events that happen in town. I was sitting back there just now counting how many

days I had booked this year, and, again, I'm new to this. I haven't been pushing it or

promoting it, and I've booked 180 days. I think it should be open to 365. I count on this

as part of my income. Anyway, what questions might you have for what I do? I clean it

myself. I'm there all the time. I've had to call the police about neighbors being loud,

thinking they were going to disturb my guests. I've had nothing but good experiences

with folks. They're all so grateful, too. It's really quite neat.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Questions for this speaker? So when you rent to

the nurses, the nurses I know who are traveling nurses are usually here on 60- or 90-day

stays.

MS. WATSON: Well, unfortunately, they were on a 13-week contract. They were

from Kansas City. They were friends. And their contracts kept getting messed up, so

they couldn't even -- they couldn't keep -- stay for very long. So -- and it was very spotty,

from what I remember. It was a year ago summer, so, like, June-ish, May, and that's

when I went into the VRBO and started doing, you know, that instead of the nurses.

MS. GEUEA JONES: So they might have signed a 13-week contract and then had

to leave early?

MS. WATSON: Yeah. Yeah.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Okay.

MS. WATSON: Because the people who they signed the contract with didn't honor

it. They were without a job.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Right. Right. What I'm saying is, if you signed a 13-week

contract for them to stay in your home, that would not be a short-term rental.

MS. WATSON: Right.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Even if they left early.

MS. WATSON: Right. Well, and I didn't even know there were rules about it.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Right.

MS. WATSON: In my mind, I own this home, I can do with it what I wish, but,

I'm sorry, I was ignorant.

MS. GEUEA JONES: No. It's fine. I think what I'm trying to say is from what you

described, you may be able to continue operating the way you're operating --

MS. WATSON: Yeah. But that was --

MS. GEUEA JONES: -- for the most part.

MS. WATSON: -- in the beginning, but I could go back to the other. But I would

hope for the majority of Columbia residents who are counting on something like this as

part of their income, that the limit of days could be expanded. I think the real fear is

those outside investors or people who are buying up affordable homes, you know, in a

certain area of town, and taking that away from folks that want to buy a house like that,

you know. So that's why I would focus your limitations on, is licenses, or, you know,

other things.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Carroll, and then Commissioner Stanton.

MS. CARROLL: Yeah. I think we are attempting to focus our limitations in that

respect, as well.

MS. WATSON: Okay.

MS. CARROLL: So -- and I'm sorry if I missed. I'm trying to take down notes as

quick as I can and crunch numbers.

MS. WATSON: That's fine.

MS. CARROLL: Did you say -- so you operate one, and is it a residence of yours?

Do you live there for any part of the year, or not at all?

MS. WATSON: Well, so my husband's parents bought this house in 1945, and it's a

shared driveway and actually a shared garage, and then the house I live in they bought in

the '60s, so we own both. We call it the Watson compound. Our kids lived in that house

when they were going through college, after my husband's parents passed away. We've

always just used both houses as one big house for ourselves until I started doing this.

MS. CARROLL: And how many nights is a typical stay?

MS. WATSON: On the average, I wouldn't probably necessarily have a number

maybe -- you know, because some are just the weekends, and I would say 50 percent of

them are longer than weekends, so maybe an average stay could be three to four nights.

I've got people coming for Christmas to be with family who -- their kids actually just live,

like, a block away, and they thought it was really cool that they could have room for their

extended family.

MS. CARROLL: How many nights did you say you think it would need to operate?

So total for year?

MS. WATSON: I don't know why it can't be year around, I mean, because we don't

know when people are going to need it. You know, you can't limit it to just weekends.

MS. CARROLL: Oh.

MS. WATSON: Yeah.

MS. CARROLL: It's how many nights do you have actively booked --

MS. WATSON: Myself --

MS. CARROLL: -- so you can offer it year around.

MS. WATSON: Well, myself this year, I counted 180.

MS. CARROLL: Okay. Thanks.

MS. WATSON: Yeah. Yeah.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any other questions? I'm sorry. Commissioner Stanton?

Yes, that's right. I have a list.

MS. WATSON: I like your sweater.

MR. STANTON: Yeah. So that doesn't mean just weekends, that means total days

or nights hopefully --

MS. WATSON: That's how many nights I counted from January through end of

December.

MR. STANTON: Yes. Yeah. I just wanted to makes you need to know how to do

that.

MS. WATSON: Right.

MR. STANTON: From your perspective, how many licenses should I let an

entrepreneur like you have?

MS. WATSON: Well, I don't consider myself an entrepreneur in that respect, though

I have been a business owner in Columbia since 1995. I think that three to five range

wouldn't be a horrible number, you know, because, again, I see some folks wanting to do

this just as extra income, but it's those investors that are, you know, looking to build ten,

twenty, that could take away some affordable housing for folks. And my homes are very -

- if you -- 1945, they're very humble little, you know, frame homes, not far from the library.

So -- but those are some of the houses that folks look for for their first -- first purchase.

MR. STANTON: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: Madam Chair, Ms. Watson, hi. I'm by your place occasionally.

We'll just -- I won’t say where it is.

MS. WATSON: Okay.

MR. MACMANN: You may have caught in Planner Zenner's presentation that you

could also have a long-term rental license and a short-term rental license?

MS. WATSON: Maybe in the future.

MR. MACMANN: Would that -- was that something that would work for you?

MS. WATSON: Yeah, I think it could, you know. Yeah. I could balance the two

somehow.

MR. MACMANN: Like if you do get those 13-week nurse contracts or something like

that.

MS. WATSON: I -- it just didn't work out for me in the beginning like I thought it

would.

MR. MACMANN: And you're -- the way you're located, you have some flexibility with

academics and health care. Okay. I just wanted to see how that might work out for you

to have both of those things available. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.

MS. WATSON: Thank you, everyone.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Thank you very much. Next?

MS. BALL: Hi. My name is Elizabeth Ball; I operate three short-term rentals, two of

which I purchased as distressed properties, so they would not have been able to be sold

on the retail market. They would not have passed for any sort of affordable housing loans

like FHA, USDA. So that being said, they required a large investment in order to make

repairs to then be able to turn them into short-term rentals. The very first one I started -- I

do have some long-term properties that we have occupancy -- rental occupancy for. And

one of the folks from Neighborhood Services came and said, oh, I don't need to do this.

You don't need the certificate for this. So that was actually how I learned that there was

not any sort of safety standards, which I am in complete support of. The other property

we did rent. It does have a long-term licensure, and the other one also has a long-term

licensure, so I do understand that there is a difference. The choice to be a short-term

rental is for wear and tear of property. I have rented affordable housing, and have had

massive destruction in the last year, over $12,000 in damages not covered by any sort of,

you know -- oh, my gosh, I'm sorry, I’m nervous -- money that we get up front for repairs

or damages. So that's all out of pocket. So at this point, I am probably doing what you

were concerned about, and I put the property on the short-term market in order to try to

recuperate some -- some of my investment. It's not happening. The market is quite

saturated, as you know. You said there's 400 out there, so we are seeing that now as

hosts where we're having to lower our prices in order to get the occupancy filled. So if

you really to want to be closer to that 60 percent, you are going to have to rent that $86 a

night, which is very great for families coming into our city, but not really feasible for

everybody either. So I would open -- if you have any questions for me, I'm happy to

answer them.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Questions? Commissioner Stanton?

MR. STANTON: You brought up a very good point, so I'll just -- I'm going to play

devil's advocate here. Let's say we just let this be wild, wild west. Let everybody have

what they want, and it saturates the market with short-term rental. Right? Which in

economics means the price will go down. Right? So now we have a gluttonous

short-term rentals on the market. What would you do as an entrepreneur with -- in that

situation?

MS. BALL: To be honest, currently, I've looked at --

MR. STANTON: I’m just --

MS. BALL: -- what our profits are, and they are -- they are actually less than if I

rented on a long-term market. So I -- it is really, I think a lot of people, it comes from a

hospitality standpoint from a standpoint of understanding that this is a need for our city. I

mean, the group that Jessie runs, if there are big events coming up like graduation or

things that people are coming to our community and they can't find hotels, she's posting

out, hey, I've got people who are looking for places, or somebody been double booked.

So there is a need. If you have over 400 properties that are booked during these weekend

events that we're bringing in, where are they all going to go? And saturation-wise, we're

already seeing that. So my personal experience is that in order to get occupancy, I've

had to lower my nightly rate, which is fine, I can do that. I don't think everybody is going

to be in the same boat to be able to do that. Barrier to entry is not a bad thing, and even

if that is just having some sort of safety criteria in line, we should all have the -- the

normal, you know, smoke detectors, carbon monoxide detectors. I like the exit plan. I

like the idea, like, we should be able to put out a fire. Right? So all of that stuff needs to

be in our properties for the safety of our guests, and I could probably say that most of us

already have that in place.

MR. STANTON: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any other questions? Seeing none. Thank you very much.

Next?

MS. GARDENER: Good evening. My name is Christine Gardener; I live at 112

Anderson Avenue, which is in the First Ward. I'm hearing a lot of love for out-of-towners

from Columbia tonight. Isn't that kind of interesting? I'm not hearing much about the

actual people who live in these neighborhoods. First Ward being a critical point in this

whole discussion, because we have 40 percent of those short-term rentals in the First

Ward, where we already have a very critical shortage of housing. And interestingly

enough, we are the only ward of any of them that has a number of people who own ten or

more short-term rentals. The people that began getting into this business outside of

owning their own home and using that as a short-term rental have gone into an

investment knowing should -- they should have known that it was an unregulated wild

west, as Mr. Stanton said. We feel the effects of that now. There are streets in my area

that almost have no one actually living in them anymore, there are so many short-term

rentals. And, you know, it's very nice that we have extra hospitality for people coming in

from out of town, but really who are you serving here? And I ask very strongly that you

hold to the strength of this draft, because we need this kind of regulation in the First

Ward. Thank you very much.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you very much.

MS. GARDENER: Any questions?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any questions for Ms. Gardener? Commissioner

Stanton?

MR. STANTON: Good evening.

MS. GARDENER: Hi.

MR. STANTON: If you were an entrepreneur in this space, what would be a tolerable

number of licenses that would allow someone in this space to have?

MS. GARDENER: Honestly, I believe that until everyone has a home that they have

shelter in, no one should have more than one home. I find that exploitive. There are

hotels, there are the guest accommodations, but homes are for people and families to live

in. That's what I believe.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none. Thank you very

much.

MS. GARDENER: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Next?

MS. DRYWATER: Good evening. My name is Tina Drywater; I live at 2415 Cimarron

Drive. I started with Airbnb six years ago, and my very first guest was a professor at

Mizzou. She ended up -- she stayed with us three nights a week, ended up staying with

us for two years. We have also continued renting to some other professors from the St.

Louis area because of her. She had told some other professors. And so it has been for

us, when she first came, she stayed 100 nights that first year. The second year, she

stayed 90 nights. We also did rent for the weekends, so that 120 days, as far as our

family is concerned, is going to be prohibitive for us. The part that they rent is our

basement. We live upstairs for our family. As far as parking, it's on the side of our

house, and since the professors have left, we have started renting to some nurses. I did

have one travel nurse. He comes -- he would come in for, again, three nights a week, and

then he would go back home for the rest of his time. He ended up renting from us for 70

days. So we do open, not every weekend, but I, you know, do list it, and I know last year

I did rent our basement 195 days, and during, of course, the pandemic area, that was a

little prohibitive, but we have been averaging over the -- if you take out, like, 2020, we have

been averaging around 195 days a year. And -- and, again, it hasn't been like big parties

or anything. Like I said, a lot of our guests are -- have been returning professors, and

then on the weekend, has been parents of students. And -- and, fortunately, many of our

guests are returning guests. Out of my next ten bookings, eight are returning guests

from families who have stayed with us over the years, and it's nothing extravagant for us,

but it is helping pay for my son's room and board at his college, so that's how we are

using our income through Airbnb. So thank you very much.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Any questions for this speaker? Commissioner

Carroll and then Commissioner MacMann?

MS. DRYWATER: Yes.

MS. CARROLL: How long would you say a typical rental is? So, you know,

someone makes a reservation with you. How many days would they make that

reservation for?

MS. DRYWATER: The longest rental I've ever had has been five days. The majority

of ours have been two to three days a week, so I -- this week I had one person who

stayed two nights. I had someone stay -- I had one person who was here Monday and

Tuesday night, someone for Wednesday night, and then I have someone coming Friday

and Saturday night just this week.

MS. CARROLL: Besides the groups that are operating -- that are renting 111 days,

for example?

MS. DRYWATER: Yeah. The people who are coming, like, the professors that

come, they've only stayed three nights a week.

MS. CARROLL: Okay.

MS. DRYWATER: And -- but they did that for -- like, our one professor, she stayed

with us for two years, but just three nights a week. The majority of the people who have

stayed with our family has been three nights a week. Does that answer your question?

I'm sorry.

MS. CARROLL: Yeah. I'm trying to figure out -- so someone is renting for extended

periods. I'm trying to figure out how that is not a long-term lease, and I think that you

could legally do that.

MS. DRYWATER: I thought that long-term, it had to be consecutive, because this is

-- it's not consecutive.

MS. CARROLL: Well, I leave my house, as well, and return to it. I think that that

would be a dwelling.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner MacMann?

MS. CARROLL: Yeah, sure.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: Thank you, Madam Chair. Ma'am, it's interesting, your personal

story is very similar to where the few of us who were here five years ago, it's where we

started the -- I guess you’re Airbnb or VRBO or who are you?

MS. DRYWATER: Airbnb.

MR. MACMANN: Airbnb. That's kind of where we started, and Commissioner

Stanton kicked up and said we want to do what you do. You're paying for your kids to go

to college and stuff. You said you have 195 days-ish in the last 12-month period, and the

market is getting tighter. Do you think 180 would be doable for you? Could you manage

that?

MS. DRYWATER: I could manage it. I mean, I would push for a little more, but, I

mean, yes, I could handle that.

MR. MACMANN: Well, how much -- could you be more specific, how much more?

MS. DRYWATER: Out of the 365 days a year, I would, for me, 225 to 250 days a

year.

MR. MACMANN: Two twenty-five to two-fifty. I have another question. This is not a

reflection on your character. I'm trying to find out what is -- what knowledge is out there

in the public. You said you started this six years ago in 2017-ish?

MS. DRYWATER: Yes. Actually, when the total eclipse happened was my opening

-- that was our first booking.

MR. MACMANN: And we were booked, the whole town was booked when that

happened. Did you know, and this is -- I'm not -- I just wondering what the level of public

information has been. Did you find out maybe about a year later that short-term rentals

were maybe not legal in Columbia?

MS. DRYWATER: When I first was looking into this, I had contacted the City office,

I had contacted, like, the health department. Do I need to have inspections done? What

-- do I need to have a license? I did all that prior to opening. I also had some business

with Mr. Ford with his realty company, and he had told me he did Airbnb, and had given

me some information on what to do as far as just a day-to-day basis.

MR. MACMANN: At any time in that process, did you find out that there was -- that

they were either unlawful or there was a moratorium on enforcement, or anything --

anything like that? Did that ever cross your radar from anyone in the press or anyone

you spoke with?

MS. DRYWATER: No, sir.

MR. MACMANN: All right. Again, I'm just trying to gauge feelings here --

MS. DRYWATER: Uh-huh.

MR. MACMANN: -- or information. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam

Chair.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Wilson?

MS. WILSON: So it's me. So is the reason that you would oppose using the

long-term rental because it allows you the freedom to rent to others who may not be that

nurse or that professor who was renting multiple times. Right? So in the middle of that,

you may have someone else who wants to rental -- who wants to rent?

MS. DRYWATER: Honestly, I don't want the long-term because -- it's our basement.

We use it sometimes. I like being able to have days in the week to go downstairs and do

stuff for us. I don't have, like, a full kitchen. It's just a -- we call it a kitchenette area. So

it's probably not the best for somebody who is looking for a long-term rental, because

there is no stove, which is why we've never done that. We've just offered it for, like I said,

just a couple nights a week.

MS. WILSON: Thank you.

MS. DRYWATER: I don't know if that answers your question.

MS. WILSON: Yes, it does. Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any other questions? Seeing none. Thank you very much for

being here tonight.

MS. DRYWATER: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Who is next?

MS. LIBERT: My name is Linda Libert; I live at 920 Cherry Street, known as Anita

Meyer Apartments, that were saved quite a few years ago by the City of Columbia.

Thank you. In that space, there are 28 apartments. There's also where I live, and also

have a -- I was going to open a bed and breakfast, and a four bedroom, two bath there,

and going through the logistics of City, there's too many rules as a bed and breakfast, so

I went into the Airbnb mode. With that said, I mean, I apologize for the ignorance,

because I have not been to all of these meetings. I'm not wore out like you guys. I have

a lot of energy because I have a lot of questions and I'll keep it to a minimum. But I don't

understand how I could, like, the first few months out of the year, I call them sponsoring.

The University of Missouri depends on me a lot to throw -- or someone from India coming

in and they need five days before they go off to St. Louis or a different college. It could be

ten days; it could be 15 days. What happens when I get to right before football season.

I'm at my 120 days, and I'm already booked through football. I don't -- do you cancel

those people? I don't know. What do you do with your reservations for the rest of the

year if you hit your 120?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Yeah. I'll take care of it.

MR. MACMANN: All right.

MS. LIBERT: Okay. I don’t --

MS. GEUEA JONES: You're an M-DT?

MR. MACMANN: Yes.

MS. LIBERT: I don't know.

MS. GEUEA JONES: You're zoned mixed use downtown --

MS. LIBERT: Uh-huh.

MS. GEUEA JONES: -- which would mean you could be a tier three and rent

365 days a year.

MS. LIBERT: Three sixty-five. Okay.

MR. MACMANN: Commercial.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commercial. You're in a commercial district, you're not in a

residential district.

MS. LIBERT: Okay. And so -- oh, so -- okay. So the -- already booked through --

I'm sorry -- booking through the middle of the year, and they already -- but, for example,

I’m already booked solid every day next year.

MS. GEUEA JONES: It -- it just depends on what zoning district you're in.

MR. STANTON: It doesn't apply to everybody.

MS. LIBERT: So they would have to cancel their reservations.

MS. GEUEA JONES: No. No. No. It depends on which zoning district you're in, so

for you, the answer is you are zoned commercial.

MS. LIBERT: And I'm okay. I'm asking for my peers now.

MR. STANTON: Yeah. Sure.

MS. LIBERT: And they're in residences that say --

MS. GEUEA JONES: I'm sorry. We have interrupted you. I will let you finish your

presentation. We just didn't want you to be -- misunderstand.

MS. LIBERT: Okay. I guess the other thing I had, too -- well, first of all, to answer

for them, do they have to cancel their reservations if it hit the 120 before the year is over,

and they may want to know that answer. And also, like, there was -- you said 30,000

letters times two, which is 60,000 letters went out, and only 60 comments came back.

I'm not sure if they're positive or negative, but I guess probably maybe a portion of that is

positive, a portion is negative. That's not a lot to have all this hoopla -- I don't know. I

mean, that's a lot of letters for a very little -- little come back. So my thought is were

they all negative 60? Even if they're negative, the percentage is so low to give these

people -- take away income from people. Take away space from the university. I think

the university depends on me quite a bit for housing their people. I've taken people that

are vets that have no place to go, that I set them in my Airbnb so that they find homes for

them. I did -- did that for a month and a half in the month of June, and part of July. I take

in the orchestra that comes in from Canada and New York. So, again, I'm going to speak

from a different space, but I kind of feel bad if I was four blocks away, I would be super

limited, and I just hope that you can answer that for them.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Okay. Thank you very much. Any questions? Commissioner

Stanton?

MR. STANTON: You're blessed.

MS. LIBERT: I guess.

MR. STANTON: Focus on your zoning and what you can do. You can't answer for

them. You're blessed in where you are, and I would utilize what you can do where you're

at. But I'll say again, at this time, short-term rentals are illegal. They're not a defined

land use. So you're blessed.]

MS. LIBERT: I guess I have -- I am blessed. And so I feel -- what did you say,

illegal?

MR. STANTON: Yes. They're illegal. It's like me having a --

MS. LIBERT: That's been a given from the time that you buy a house --

MR. STANTON: It has not been a defined space. It's like me trying to run a whore

house from my house.

MS. LIBERT: Okay.

MR. STANTON: Can't do it.

MS. LIBERT: Okay. Okay.

MR. STANTON: It's an illegal use of the space. It's undefined.

MS. LIBERT: Okay.

MR. STANTON: Can't do it.

MS. LIBERT: Okay.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: Just a little clarity folks. We're going to try to stay on focus here.

I appreciate your concern. You may have caught in Mr. Zenner's presentation, we've

been doing this for five years, and though there were only 60 responses, I'm also

disappointed in that level of responses because I would -- you could ask the

Commissioners up here and Mr. Zenner, and probably many of these people here.

They’ve probably had 600 conversations on this very topic. Not everyone chose to

respond. It would be great if everyone did, but they did not, and this has been ongoing.

MS. LIBERT: Yeah.

MR. MACMANN: And I will say to you, to your second point about it's a very low

response, why would we change it one way or the other. We all, all of nine of us, with

the assistance of staff, and they're wonderful, we have to take into consideration the

needs of everyone in the city. And everyone has different needs, and not everyone has,

and there are several folks in here -- can afford paid representatives to come up and take

a 100 of those 600 conversations. We're trying to be fair. We're trying to be just.

Different towns, as you guys know, Dallas, for example, or New York City, essentially,

they're out of luck. We don't think we should go that far, but we do have to balance the

interest of you all need to make some money. The woman before, she's that model. She

was the -- you know, five years ago, and the needs of neighborhoods and the needs of

people that need housing and stuff like that. But, believe us, this is been a very intense

conversation, and many of these folks and all of these folks have been very involved in it

for five years.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you, Commissioner. Any other questions? I see none.

Thank you for --

MS. LIBERT: So if I'm downtown, I'm not illegal. I can rent the way I want to rent.

That's what you're saying?

MS. GEUEA JONES: I think you should call the City department and get clarity on

your specific situation offline. Thank you very much.

MS. LIBERT: Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Next?

MR. KELLEY: Devin Kelley. I'm a Columbia native, and I've got a couple of long-term

rentals and one short-term rental. And I'm not going to offer anything of massive utility

here. I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on this subject matter, but I -- I will say

that I appreciate all the time that you guys have been putting into this. This is amazing

that you guys would be, you know, able to invest this much of your expertise and

everything. And I appreciate, ma'am, in that red jacket, the things that she said, you

know, the very serious matters, and I'm not sure if this level of restriction on short-term

rentals is necessarily the answer to some of those really massive challenges in the

community, but again, I'm not going to offer much utility in this, but the short-term rental

that I bought on North Ninth Street earlier this year was a 1905 home, and we actually

went and talked to as many of the residents on the street as we could before we, you

know, fully committed to that project, and just talked to them about what that would be

like, and we had unanimous support for what we were wanting to do at the home, and I

think it's a great addition to the downtown community.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you very much. Any questions? Commissioner

Stanton?

MR. STANTON: How many licenses should the average Airbnb operator have?

Looking at our point of view and your point of view as a business person?

MR. KELLEY: Yeah. Yea. One definitely seems too restrictive. There's just so

many situations. I do feel like five is probably in the neighborhood of a -- a fair number.

That's an ignorant response, you know, based on my lack of work done on this, but my

answer would be five.

MR. STANTON: Okay. Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Any other questions? Seeing none. Thank you.

MR. KELLEY: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Next? If it's helpful, you all can come up to this front row to

start -- be ready.

MS. HAMMEN: That would say time, wouldn't it? Janet Hammen, 1844 Cliff Drive.

And thank you all so much. I know volunteering for City commissions is a

time-consuming task, and especially Planning and Zoning. So thanks so much for doing

this. And I have followed -- more earlier I followed more than lately, but I -- I feel

compelled to speak about -- I think there's some amendments in front of you tonight, and

I would just like to encourage keeping the tiers. You know, I was so glad when the

R-MF zoning got added in with other residential, and it's actually being considered a

residential zoning because I have -- I feel that there's many areas in the city where R-MF

is not considered residential, and they're giving -- you know, they're not considered in the

same light as R-1 and R-2 zoning, and so thank you, and I hope you will keep that and

keep the tiers in. Also the transferrable on sale, please keep that. I personally think that

long-term rentals should become, once again, transferrable on sale. That's neither here

nor there at this point, but they did used to be. And, you know, it would behoove, I think,

the affordable housing issue to have that happen. so for this issue, I thank you for doing

that. And the business license, of course, and I also think that long-term rentals should

be -- have a business license. They're not a service organization, they're a

money-making, it's an enterprise. But this keeping a business license, so the one thing

I'll say, I live in an R-1 area now, the same neighborhood, but four blocks from where I

lived for 30 years in R-MF. There is one short-term rental and it's very well maintained

and there's lovely people who rent and lovely people who own it. I have no idea how to

get ahold of somebody, though, if there would be a problem. And I do know from many

years’ experience in East Campus when you called the police, it's hard to get, you know,

enforcement. And so I would just say that, you know, the owners that leave a number

that you can actually reach them is -- is very nice, but that's not usually the case. So

thank you very much.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Any questions for Ms. Hammen? Commissioner

MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: Hi, Janet. I know Janet. I just need a clarification. The

transferability, Mr. Zenner can help me. Right now, long-term rentals, that certificate is

transferrable; that is correct?

MR. ZENNER: That is correct, within 30 days of the sale of the property.

MR. MACMANN: And our proposal was that the short-term rentals are not

transferrable. That's the --

MS. HAMMEN: Was I saying it the wrong way?

MR. MACMANN: I wasn't sure what you were saying.

MS. HAMMEN: Okay.

MR. MACMANN: That's why I'm asking.

MS. HAMMEN: Transfer it. Don't transfer it. Sorry.

MR. MACMANN: Okay. So you like the system the way it is right now, long-terms

are transferrable, and the post --

MS. HAMMEN: No. No. No.

MR. MACMANN: -- what do you want?

MS. HAMMEN: No. Make them reapply for a short-term rental, same as long-term

rental. Don't transfer it automatically within 30 days. Just have them reapply.

MR. MACMANN: All right. Thank you, Ms. Hammen.

MS. HAMMEN: Sorry.

MR. MACMANN: That's okay. I just wasn't sure. I thought that's what you meant,

but I wasn't sure that's what I heard. Thank you very much.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any other questions? Seeing none. Thank you very much.

MS. HAMMEN: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Next?

MR. MCCOLLUM: Hello. I'm Patrick McCollum; my wife and I live at 1409 Windsor

Street. My wife and I, we operate three short-term rentals. Two are in the home that we

live in. It's a 100-year-old house that is split up into apartments, and so each apartment

is their own -- has their own entrance, kitchen, bathroom. We live on the main level, and

we also have a full-time tenant that lives there, as well. The other one that we have is just

down the block from us. So we've been doing this for about four years. We're pretty

comfortable with it. We just enjoy the short-term rentals more than long term. We also

have another long-term rental. One thing that I can speak to is that, you know, the

short-term rental income allows us to keep our long-term rentals at rents they don't go

up. They're the same as what they've been for years, so, you know, that money does,

you know, keep their rents lower. One of the other things I want to speak to is some of

the misconceptions on -- you know, on the Airbnbs and the short-term rentals. The

impact to neighborhoods. You know, there's very little. The property next to us is a

duplex that houses eight different residents. You know, they have a much higher impact

to our neighborhood than we do. Every one of them has a car, you know. At our place,

you know, we have each place only -- we only allow two guests per, and so, you know,

it's usually one vehicle. So pretty low impact to the neighborhood. There's just never any

problems at all, so -- and we rent anywhere from 180 to 220 nights per unit. Be happy to

answer any questions that you might have.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Any questions? Commissioner Stanton?

MR. MCCOLLUM: Yes, sir.

MR. STANTON: What's your take on the number of licenses the average person

should be able to have?

MR. MCCOLLUM: You know, we have three. We're not really looking to expand on

that, so I think five. I think, you know, maybe even up to eight would be okay. A

question was asked earlier about, you know, outside investors or out-of-town investors.

You know, maybe that should be treated differently. You know, if you're a local and you

do it all yourself, you know -- you know, having, you know, five licenses is okay. You

know, we do everything. We do -- we make the beds, you know, we clean the toilets.

You know, it's a glamorous life.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Stanton, go ahead.

MR. STANTON: So you have an owner occupied, and then you have another one

that's you just own it, but don't live in it. Correct?

MR. MCCOLLUM: Correct. Yeah.

MR. STANTON: What if you're out of town?

MR. MCCOLLUM: We don't rent.

MR. STANTON: If you were out of town, what would be your system? What is your

system if you're out of town, well, you don't rent, so that's your system?

MR. MCCOLLUM: We don't rent. Yeah. Yeah. We go on vacation, we just shut it

down.

MR. STANTON: Okay. Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any other -- Commissioner MacMann and then Commissioner

Carroll.

MR. MACMANN: How many days do you think would be appropriate amount? You

said 180 to 220?

MR. MCCOLLUM: That's -- yeah. Our most popular one rents for about 220. Yeah.

MR. MACMANN: Okay. I have a real quick comment. I -- I think most of the

Airbnbs are probably fine, just like most long-term rentals are fine, but every time -- the

woman said she had $12,000 in damages. I don't doubt that. We had over $25,000, so

when a handful of people does something bad, it's problematic. We've heard some

stories about some short-term rentals, also. And out of the 400, I don't think it's a

significant percentage, but it certainly does catch the attention -- $12,000 in damage, a

weekend long party by 30 people and the cops don't do anything.

MR. MCCOLLUM: Sure.

MR. MACMANN: So that's getting to the basis and dealing a little more facts

and have more of a conversation, that's kind of what we're doing up here rather than

hyperbole, because that's -- it's easy to be hyperbolic for everybody.

MR. MCCOLLUM: Yeah.

MR. MACMANN: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Carroll?

MS. CARROLL: Yeah. You said you had one property that you live in, that's your

principal residence, that you rent --

MR. MCCOLLUM: Uh-huh.

MS. CARROLL:

-- and you have two other properties. Did you say you have a

long-term tenant in one of the other two properties?

MR. MCCOLLUM: It's in the building that we live in, and our -- we do have an

affordable house -- or affordable housing. It's subsidized housing. It's a single-family

home, and that has a long-term tenant in it, yeah. And we have a long term -- long-term

tenant in our house, too.

MS. CARROLL: There is a long-term tenant and --

MS. GEUEA JONES: Four-plex.

MS. CARROLL: Okay. Thanks. Are they four addresses or a single address?

Mr. MCCOLLUM: Our home has four addresses, yes.

MS. CARROLL: All right. Thanks. You know, you talked a bit about how your

opinion is that Airbnb short-term rentals actually don't have much impact on the

neighborhood in terms of nuisance impact. And -- and I think I see the logic there. I

wonder what kind of impact you think they would have on economy and housing

availability.

MR. MCCOLLUM: You know, there's going to be some effect. You know, I think

with, you know, 50-some thousand housing units in the city, I don't think 400 has a huge

effect, you know. But to say there is none, you know, that would be wrong. I think

there's also a lot of other -- you know, if you're looking at affordable housing, you know,

there's a lot of other avenues to go down, too. I mean, I know that the City is looking at a

lot of those different things as far as auxiliary dwelling units and, you know, allowing more

permits for -- for those to come in.

MS. CARROLL: How do you think --

MR. MCCOLLUM: In fact, I have a neighbor that's going to build two -- or going to

build one just, you know, across the street from us, or catty-corner, applied for auxiliary

dwelling unit, so --

MS. CARROLL: Thanks.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Anyone else? No. Okay. Thank you. Next?

MR. JOHNSON: Hello. My name is Dan Johnson; I'm one of the evil people that own

26 units that are Airbnbs, and I thought I would just try to talk a little bit why I got into

Airbnb. I'm not an outside investor. I already owned these properties as rental

properties. They were student rentals. And so I think you've all heard a lot of complaints

about students and now these properties are occupied by parents, families, construction

workers, nurses, and they're only occupied, you know, 60 percent of the year, so when

they're not occupied, they're -- they're obviously not creating party situations when

they're -- when they're not occupied. One other point I wanted to make was a healthy

occupancy rate for a hotel, if you talk to the different hotel owners in town is between 60

and 70 percent, and it really applies the same for an Airbnb operator. They need to have

60 to 70 percent occupancy to make up for the operating expenses that, you know, we

provide toiletries, we provide cleaning, and there's just also the hassle factor of being an

operator. Like we spend a lot of time coordinating with the guests, you know,

coordinating with the cleaners to where I think a lot of people are telling the truth about

them not making that much money on Airbnb, because I can say over these 26 units,

that I'm not going to all of a sudden just be, like, oh, crap, I've got to sell all these units

and flood the market with housing. I'm just going to turn them back into student rentals.

So my 26 units represent 5 percent or actually 6 percent of the 400 units that are out

there. And if the goal is to get some affordable housing out there, my 26 units are not

going to become affordable. They're going to be rented to students at between $500 and

$600 a bedroom, and we're going to have students back in these houses rather than

families. And then also as far as number of units, I would say under a normal

circumstance, eight -- eight to ten, but I think we're being optimistic to think that Covid is

in the rearview mirror completely. We've got variants that are coming out. There could be

another pandemic. And I really think that Airbnbs are difficult to ramp up. And if we get

rid of all these Airbnbs, and then Covid rears its ugly head again, we're going to be in a

situation where traveling nurses don't want to pay extremely high hotel rates or higher

Airbnb rates because there's just fewer of them. It's a good thing that's happening where

we have lower rates per night because there are so many Airbnbs. It makes things

affordable for the nurses.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Okay. Thank you very much. Any questions for this

speaker? Commission Placier and then Commissioner Carroll?

MS. PLACIER: I know one of the written comments we received talked about the

people with multiple Airbnbs as being like a decentralized hotel, that you are like a small

hotel owner with none of the costs associated with licensing and safety and all of that.

You've been able to just make profit. I'm sure you have to pay for cleaning and that kind

of thing, but you have not had involvement with government the way a hotel would. So I

just wonder what your response to that comment might be. Don't you think there should

be some regulation on an operation as large as yours?

MR. JOHNSON: I do think there should be a lodging tax charge. We -- all these

properties were preexisting rental properties, so they have the rental compliance

certificate. They have the tri-annual HVAC inspection. They have to be kept to a certain

standard by the -- the office of Neighborhood Services that monitors whether there's trash

in the yard or anything like that, which all those complaints are from the remaining

student rental properties I have. I never get a complaint about trash in the yard in a

short-term rental. And I can't emphasize enough that the profit isn't there. There's not

going to be out-of-town investors coming in and being, like, yeah, I'm going to put a bunch

of money into this space and operate at the margins we are already having to operate at

as local investors where we can just, you know, drive five minutes. It would -- it would

scare me to death to own a property in Tampa, Florida, where I know what goes on as far

as, like, hey, I can't get the thermostat to work, or, you know, like, random phone call.

There is just -- there's not enough profit in these things to incentivize out-of-town

operators, especially with what's -- the saturation is a good thing. It's bringing the prices

down to where there's actually less incentive for an out-of-town operator to come in,

because there -- it's just not healthy. But I don't know if I answered your question.

MS. PLACIER: Yeah. That gave me a perspective.

MR. JOHNSON: Okay.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Carroll?

MS. CARROLL: Can you tell me what the difference is between student housing and

housing for a regular single working individual?

MR. JOHNSON: Sure. So the first property that I turned into an Airbnb was

originally a small dormitory for Mizzou, and then I rented to a fraternity. The fraternity

tore it to pieces. And we talked about $12,000. This was, like, $100,000. And then I

had a vacant property that I had to remodel and then I just slowly rented to people. And

so it was all an experiment for me. I didn't know what I was getting into. I just had to do

it by -- with no choice. But what I found is that there's just so many different people that I

would have never imagined use Airbnbs -- nurses, like a lot of business comes from the

hospitals, from families that have, you know, kids that are sick or death in the family or, I

mean, those are the more dramatic ones, but there's also just families that are visiting

for, you know, they've got five kids in the Show-Me State Games. But it -- it's just a --

people from all walks of life. So we actually do feel like we're helping the community, and

I think that's why maybe Jessie -- I didn't know she operated at a loss, but I understand

why she's willing to operate it at a loss, because you actually feel like, hey, we're helping

in the situation of Covid. We're helping people that don't have a lot of money be able to

afford a place to bring their kids where normally they wouldn't even enter that tournament

because they can't afford the hotel rooms.

MS. CARROLL. So I do remember your property. I actually lived very close. What

prevents -- if this were a long-term renter, what prevents someone who is not a student

from renting it, besides it was once a dormitory?

MR. JOHNSON: Nothing. I mean, I have long-term renters that are not students, so

it's a little bit of a mixture now, short-term and long term. So some of the long -- some of

the short-term renters, like people doing a trial and error with the university that's possibly

going to turn into a long-term position, they'll stay there for a month, two months, and

then either they find another place, or they're, like, hey, this is so close to campus, I'm

just going to keep renting here. We like -- like what it is, but yeah. I'm -- I've always

been amazed at how many different types of people rent these short-term places. I can

tell you the impact on the neighborhoods. I have 26 examples of it being way less than

what use I had prior to it being a short-term rental.

MS. CARROLL: And your one month, two month stays, those are long-term

tenants?

MR. JOHNSON: What's that?

MS. CARROLL: Your one-month, two-month stays, those are long-term leases?

MR. JOHNSON: I consider it long term, and then a lot of the stuff is two to three

days.

MS. CARROLL: It is, yeah. So not subject to this ordinance, is what I was trying to

say.

MR. JOHNSON: No. I'm saying I will be greatly affected by this ordinance. I'm

going to have to get rid of -- I'll have to fire three cleaners or at least two of the three, and

probably bring it down to either none or five. I don't know what the final number is going

to be, but I can tell you I have already gone through the thought process of what I'm going

to do to adapt, and it is not to unload all of my properties. It's not going to all of a sudden

create a big supply of affordable housing. I'm just going to put it right back to student

housing of $500 to $600 a bedroom, so there's a notion that this is going to solve

affordable housing just -- I don't see how that works. The problem with affordable housing

is inflation and the fact that there is 2.65 percent interest rates that have been locked in

to where people don't want to sell their home. They want to keep that 2.65 because it's 8

percent right now or 7 percent, and there's multiple articles that have been written about

that.

MS. CARROLL: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Dunn?

MR. DUNN: So help me understand --

MS. GEUEA JONES: Oh, wait. Sorry, sir. Commissioner Dunn.

MR. DUNN: No, I appreciate it. I just want to ask you, you know, you're one of the

kind of bigger operators here right now. But we've heard several operators say that

there's little to no profit --

MR. JOHNSON: Right.

MR. DUNN: -- in short-term rentals. At the same time, you know, we're seeing a

growth in short-term rentals here in -- here in the city.

MR. JOHNSON: Right.

MR. DUNN: So help me understand a little bit about what's kind of driving that

growth, you know, because if -- I'm thinking about this from a business perspective.

MR. JOHNSON: Right.

MR. DUNN: Why would I want to go into a venture that's not profitable? Either we're

in a room full of bad business people, or there's another, you know, purpose that's driving

that expansion. Could you --

MR. JOHNSON: I think a certain amount of it is you do get a certain amount of

warm, fuzzy feelings helping families out, so I mean, I wouldn't want to personally

operating things at a loss --

MR. ZENNER: Sir. Sir, can you talk into the microphone, please.

MR. JOHNSON: I wouldn't personally want to operate at a loss. I think what a lot of

people are saying is there's not a big difference between it is a long-term rental and as an

Airbnb. I wouldn't doubt that there are some people that actually lose money doing it,

and there are certain properties within those 26 where I am definitely losing money, but

then I make up for it on some other property that rents all the time, but it just kind of

washes it out and is a giant time burden for not a lot of extra profit. For me, it's probably

5 to 10 percent more than a long-term rental. That's -- so there are -- like, I feel like there

is, but if you take into account your time, there isn't. It's very, very minimal, and it kind of

messes with your mind to where you're like, okay, it's like renting to a -- to a tenant and

saying the utilities are included, and the price is $1,000 a month instead of $750. And

you're, like, wow, I’m making $1,000 a month, but you keep forgetting, yeah, you're

paying for the utilities, you're paying for the utilities, you're paying for the Wi-Fi, you're

paying for the cleaning. It's not just cleaning. You have the utilities on all year. You

have a Wi-Fi. You have cable TV, possibly. You have pots and pans that get ruined.

There's just a -- you have to pay the cleaner to go shopping to get new supplies. They

nickel and dime you to death on -- which they should. I mean, they should be paid. And

it's just not as rosy as people are making it out to be, and I was surprised that some

people are operating at a loss, but I don't doubt it just because it is -- it does feel like

you're helping the community. It's, like, our way of giving back.

MR. DUNN: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any other questions? Seeing none. Thank you.

MR. JOHNSON: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Next?

MS. RUTH: Hi. My name is Caitlyn Ruth; I own two short-term rentals in Columbia.

Just a little bit about my properties there and how my experience has been. I actually

started doing this not necessarily to make a profit right now. It's to make residual income

in my and my husband's older days. So right now, we're not getting a loss, but we're

definitely not making a whole lot. But the idea is that once this mortgage is paid off,

once everything starts going, if this continues to go, we will be able to make something

as we are in retirement age. I looked up on my Airbnb, I currently manage three of them.

Two of them are mine, one is another individual's, and they are booked out on just Airbnb

for 548 days out of the year. On VRBO, it's 174 days, so that's 722 days total of the

year for three of them. So many families come to town for and stay at Airbnbs. I know

we all know that. I've got a smaller home and really people come because they travel

with animals. I accept animals, cats, dogs, who knows what else, people are probably

bringing them there, but I've had lots of different things. I know a bunny was in there one

time. People are very attached. Covid was a big thing with that, too. So they had a

place to go with multiple animals, which a lot of hotels do not allow more than one dog, if

they allow dogs at all, mostly not cats. I've had lots of traveling nurses. I've had my

neighbors use my properties multiple times when they've had family come to town,

especially for holidays, graduations, anything like that, barely in the home. They're just

using it as a place to sleep. They want to be with their friends, their family, all that. I've

had somebody come and stay at my house because he had a tree fall on his house in

town, so he needed someone to stay while he had construction done, and it was nice for

him, who was a disability, a physical disability, who had a bed, who was able to stay in,

and he needed his care nurse with him, so he needed a home to be in, not a hotel that

had multiple stairs or elevators and stuff. His equipment simply wouldn't fit in there. I've

got a larger one. I've hosted construction crews, returning construction crews, and they

will come and stay for a week, they'll be gone for two weeks, they'll come stay for another

week, and stuff like that. I don't get those reservations until probably about 48 hours

beforehand. So when that comes through, it's really hard to understand that if there is a

limit on days, them not being able to come and continue to do that. And I know that's on

them, they'll have to find somewhere else to go, but it's really hard, as somebody who

has these reoccurring guests, to not be able to allow them to come back. And guests

that are good and are doing things inside of the city that are helping either build

something up or set up lights or whatever they might be doing. I've hosted people coming

in for weddings, high school wrestling teams, lots and lots of people coming for funerals.

I have a larger house. The house is ten people, and in that house, I have lots of people

that come in for funerals. There are lots of -- I've hosted the Ultimate Frisbee Team there.

I have hosted lots of random things, definitely people coming into town to spend money in

our town and --

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you.

MS. RUTH: -- boost the economy.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you very much. Any questions for this speaker?

Seeing none. Thank you very much. Next?

MR. MURPHY: Good evening, Chair and Commissioners. Kevin Murphy, 1119 Lake

Shore Drive. I'd like to start out by saying I do not agree with limiting the days or

occupancy or zoning tiers with this whether it's hosted or non-hosted in any residential

district. Probably get into some legalities of that possibly later, but I'm here speaking for

myself and for my girlfriend. I'm speaking about five properties that are Airbnbs. We have

lived in some of these properties, and so we know the neighbors very well. One property

that we bought, a stand-alone property, one of the first things we did was introduce

ourselves to the neighbors and let them know what we were doing, gave them our contact

information. This has been going on in total for four years with not a problem at any of

these properties. Again, I'd like to point out the City's -- you guys have made multiple

attempts at outreach opportunities for folks, and I think the limited responses you did get

back were definitively in the majority opinion that minimal or no STR regulations was the

preference. I know with just trash roll carts is quite the opposite. There's a lot of opinion

that they didn’t want trash carts -- roll carts, but now we've got those, so I'd -- anyways,

jumping around here, trying to read my notes. I just would like to see maybe a show of

hands. If you up here stayed at Airbnbs or STRs, and do you think if those regulations

like these, would those places -- did you enjoy it? Will they be available at the times that

you want them to be available, if they were limited, as we're talking about? Just

something to think about. Anyways, other communities, we've talked about

grandfathering and discussions, but I see none of that in the thing here. Other

communities have grandfathered these. I don't know why I think it's a legal opinion or a

legal staff. As far as it not being a legal use, I think that's another legal opinion, that

there's legal precedence that these are residential dwelling units. There's nothing in our

Code that says a single family attached -- or a single family detached house cannot be

rented, specifically. So I've just -- a few things off the top of my head, but thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Murphy? Commissioner

MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: Hi. To answer your first question, would that still be available, yes.

The first one I stayed in was in Morehead City, North Carolina. I'm kind of glad you

brought that up. The entire coast of North Carolina is essentially devoid of natives.

MR. MURPHY: Devoid of -- I'm sorry?

MR. MACMANN: They have no one who was born and raised in North Carolina.

They all sold out. They're all -

MR. MURPHY: They have vacation homes and --

MR. MACMANN: They're all vacation homes. Which leads me to another thought.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner MacMann, do you have a question?

MR. MACMANN: I do have a question. The questions is as follows. Cities like

Dallas have made them illegal. Do you think they have missed the mark?

MR. MURPHY: Yes, I certainly do.

MR. MACMANN: Can you think of any reason why a community might make them

illegal or fairly restricted?

MR. MURPHY: I would say that, well, there's definitely in the vast minority. I think

Dallas, New York City, you pointed out, they're very dense, different situations than what

we have here in town. They've got their own issues, you know, being large cities, urban

cities, that they've got enough issues to deal with on that that are completely different

than our situation.

MR. MACMANN: All right. Thanks.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Carroll?

MS. CARROLL: I'd like to answer a question, and I will be as brief as possible. You

asked if you thought that regulating with regulations such as this would decrease

availability. A city that I visit quite frequently is a city that I used as a model ordinance to

compare to our own. I've been there three times in the last six months, all staying in

Airbnbs. There's quite a few available that would fit into what we would describe as a tier

one description under our current ordinance. I don't see a limitation.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you.

MR. MURPHY: Well, just a question back to you is, do you think that that would

proliferate these that so instead one person having five or eight or ten of these, if they

were limited to one, do you think there would just be ten more people having one STR?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Mr. Murphy, I don't really want us to get into a bunch of

conversations tonight. I am sorry. Thank you so much. I'm sure you have all of our

contact information.

MR. MURP0HY: Yes.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Feel free to email staff or the Commissioners. Thank you.

MR. MURPHY: Okay. Thanks much.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Anyone else? Next?

MS. LITTRELL: Hi. My name is Courtney Littrell. We are babies compared to all of

these people. We started in October at 302 North College. We solely did this because

we have a two-year-old, and we want this to be an investment for her college fund and

then a place for her live when she's in college. I work at the University Hospital, so we

get the discount, so I'm hoping she'll go here. But that is the only reason we do this, and

to limit the number of days would make that really not possible for us because we

wouldn't make the amount of money we would need. We would break even. We wouldn't

be able to save for her college. Sorry, my voice -- I don't like public speaking. But I also

have used -- we want to use this for a bit of financial freedom for myself. Having her

during Covid caused a lot of anxiety for me, and I would love nothing more than to be able

to stay home with her. Right now, I have to work full time. So this, for us, was a way for

our family to have more time together and the limitation on the number of days will not

make that possible for us. So two questions for your guys, unrelated. We live two miles

north of Columbia as our permanent residence, so the -- I forget what it's called, the

designated something. Yes. The designated agent. So being in the City of Columbia,

we don't live in town, so we would have to hire somebody to do that, so I was wondering if

that could -- oh, my God. I'm so sorry. I was wondering if that could be maybe a

distance instead of an in-town thing. And the second question I have is, why can't it just

be a case-by-case based on the nuisance ordinance? Why does it just have to be your

punishment?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Any questions for this speaker? Seeing none.

Thank you very much.

MS. LITTRELL: Okay. Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Next?

MS. WILLIAMS: My name is Donna Williams; I live at 700 Stillwater Drive. I was not

planning to talk today, so I'm trying to keep to my three minutes. I do support and like

the idea of safety protocol. I think that's just important and valuable, and as you can

hear, we have a lot of heart in short-term rentals and being hosts, so we wouldn't want

anything to happen to our guests any more than you would. The short-term rental, I've

been an operator. The previous speaker inspired me because we opened ours in August,

so also newbies to the space, but with that said, we've been booked every single

weekended, and I was also pleasantly surprised that it's typically not football season that

drives the traffic. We've had parents of athletes that want to come see their kids

compete. We've had weddings, we've had people that want to have a 50th birthday party,

not in our unit, but just take somebody out to dinner that lives in town. We've got families

that want to be close to each other for the holidays, so I just wanted to share that. I'm

kind of concerned about what came up earlier about the potential quick cancellations or

unexpected cancellations if you do hit your number of restricted days in part because

Airbnb and platforms like that operate on algorithms, and setting cancellations could

really hurt your standing and your ability to attract more bookings, whether you're really

aware of it or not. In addition to that, I really do like the idea of over 30-day rentals, like

travel nurses or people that do work in the city that need some longer stays. But what

I've noticed is also that the -- I would call it the kind of the commitment of somebody

that's reaching out, if you're staying for more than 30 days, they're more critical and

they're vetting the properties more -- more diligently, I would say. If somebody is staying

for the weekend, by the time they reach out to you, they've kind of decided on your place,

and they want to book. If they're evaluating because they're going to stay there for two to

three months, it's possible that they're -- they might not even call you back because

they're sending the same message to five, six others. So if we're hurting our algorithm or

our standing for short-term rental, it may not be easy to pivot to a longer-term rental on

top of the fact it could be hard to predict when you'll hit your threshold of days because

cancellations happen, you have no control over that. Also what if you hit your number in

the middle of somebody's booking, what would happen then, as well? So those are just

some of the things that I'm thinking about, as well as we get to help employ a lot of local

individuals, which is nice, and it's nice to interact with more people, people that cut our

grass, people that clean our homes. They're not massive corporations, they're local

individuals that live or -- and work in the area, so I like the opportunity to support them.

And then just two other points. We purchased our two homes under an LLC, but they're

-- I'm not the big, bad investor, I'm the local investor that also lives and we support the --

we work locally, as well, but that's really for personal legal protection and a degree of

anonymity. Nobody wants to necessarily be Googled all the time. So I just wanted to

add, and my final thought is just that I'm -- I'm concerned that the poor police response

seems to be impacting hosts, because that sounds like a police -- something that the

police should be addressing, not us, but in my own personal house, I would want the

police to respond if there's a wild party going on down the street. I don't think that has

anything to do with the operators. We would want the same amount of control and safety

expected in our own neighborhoods.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you very much. Any questions for this speaker?

Commissioner Placier?

MS. PLACIER: A couple of things. I hope it's been clear that if you are renting to

someone for 30 or more days, that is not a short-term rental, so that would be the long --

MS. WILLIAMS: That -- yeah.

MS. PLACIER: Okay. I just want to be sure.

MS. WILLIAMS: Yes. My concern is that --

MS. PLACIER: Because you did mention that.

MS. WILLIAMS: -- if I run out of days to rent to short-term people. So say you go to

September, October, now I need to turn to travel nurses or somebody that is a longer

plus 30 -- over 30-day stay. It's that I'm going -- it could be more difficult because there

are going to be more selective, and when they reach out and inquire about a space,

they're not ready to book necessarily. They may just be evaluating a lot of spaces, so

there's really no guarantee that the mortgage for that will be covered by any guests. It

could remain unoccupied for an untold number of months even.

MS. PLACIER: Okay. Well, my second question had to do with something I asked

an earlier speaker. And that is when you got into this, and you purchased two homes

specifically for this, did anybody mention to you that short-term rentals were currently not

legally authorized? Might that concern you or --

MS. WILLIAMS: My original intention was what I consider mid-term rental, which is

over 31 days, but not a full year, like, not a year-around tenant. And some ways to find

them is using an Airbnb and VRBO platform. They do allow such ability for guests that

want to stay for more than 30 days, so I set up Airbnb actually as a backstop to help find

travel nurses that use Airbnb and VRBO for extended stays. And so I happened to --

unexpectedly, I fell into a lot of short-term bookings. But to your question about what I

was aware of, I knew that there were rumblings of potential ordinances and regulation, but

I wasn't under the impression that they were active and there was nothing to be enforced.

It was just something to kind of keep an eye out for.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Commissioner Stanton, did you have -- okay.

Sorry. I thought I saw your hand. Anyone else? Seeing none. Thank you very much.

Next?

MR. CLAYBROOK: I have not done much in my life in three minutes, so I'm going to

do my best here. My name is Scott Claybrook. I am a host, but I am not speaking from

that perspective as much as I am from the perspective of community transformation,

which is what I give a lot of my life to. My wife and I have made a pivot, being small

business owners when the pandemic came. We found it extremely difficult to keep

running a brand agency that we owned and operated, and wanted to create jobs and/or

income, as well as housing opportunities in our First Ward neighborhoods. I live in the

First Ward, and I want to underscore tonight that this is a problem for our neighborhoods.

It's -- it's a big problem, actually. And because of the number of Airbnbs, affordable

housing is affected, and that affects people that I love and I care about. And it's tough,

because I own First Ward neighborhood Airbnbs. Why did we do that? We did that

because we felt like the need for creative affordable housing options also is in conjunction

with the need creative micro enterprise. And to take away both of those things, you

know, the ability to create affordable housing by having unregulated Airbnbs is a problem.

The ability to have micro enterprise through Airbnbs, which has low buried entry that we

could actually train neighbors with that I have done is also a problem, and I think it

presents a unique challenge that could kind of complete one to another. I sent you guys

a letter that's more formulated. I'm tired, I've been working all day. But what is in the

letter, high level, is that employment comes out of this, that's a real plus. So all of our

employment is hyper local. We've got local cleaners that have launched full-time

businesses on the back of this that would literally go out of business, and that's a large

number of the cleaners that are represented here, as well. Snow removal, lawn care,

home maintenance, et cetera. Again, micro enterprise, there's been a huge ability to

create low entry micro enterprise and something that's trainable. I've ran Instacart

groceries during the pandemic. I did a whole lot of things to keep my family afloat, and

this was a creative way to do that, as well. Again, I want to underscore that it affects our

affordable housing stock, and it unequally affects my dear brothers and sisters in the

First Ward and the neighbors that I love. Diverse guests, I just listed in my letter a quick

example of one month's stay in November. We are 90 percent and more booked, and

have been for two years. So 120 days is really challenging. I think 210 is -- is a little

more realistic. I think 365 in your mixed commercial spaces makes sense, but this is

what our November looked like, because we asked all of our guests what they're doing in

the city. We're very vigilant. A traveling nurse working at Boone, a couple visiting family,

concert goer, local Columbia neighbor renovating their own house and needing a

temporary stay, visiting businessman for a local conference, visiting parent of MU

student, football goer, traveling professional MU Health, MU alumni visiting friends, some

are visiting friends and shopping local, football goer, professional working on the I-70

bridge -- and I'm out of town -- a family staying for Thanksgiving, another family visiting for

Thanksgiving, other visiting procedures and medical -- a lot of medical. All in all, what I'm

trying to say is that I think we have a way forward through regulation, but I do think we

need avenues for local owners. Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Any questions for this speaker? Commissioner

Carroll?

MS. CARROLL: So, yeah. I hope you can see that we're trying to balance the same

thing that you're drawing attention to here. So you operate one that is your primary

residence, and others, and do you have long-term rentals in the other ones?

MR. CLAYBROOK: So we have a mix of Section 8, long-term rental. We subsidize

some of our own rental for families we walk with through our short-term, so actually we're

creating our own subsidy through short-term rentals, so we have mix in our neighborhood.

Uh-huh.

MS. CARROLL: Can -- can those people -- can -- can that subsidy come through

them managing the short-term? So one of the things that you're drawing attention to is

that operating a short-term rental in your own house gives you an income that helps

defray the cost of living. Can the people that you're subsidizing with the cost of the

short-term rental manage that rental and that be their business?

MR. CLAYBROOK: You know, honestly, I'll just offer this to anybody. I'm willing to

talk all fine with the real explicit details. I’d even open up my Airbnb and talk to you

about how the backend works. The numbers that you are proposing are just not

economically possible. To do what you just described, it is not possible. It can't be

done.

MS. CARROLL: So what numbers are possible?

MR. CLAYBROOK: I think you've got to go over 210 days in all districts, and 365 on

a commercial makes sense to me. I think that makes a lot of sense. I think you --

you've got to limit this to three. I'm not probably popular in the room for that, but there

you can make a good living off of, and you could even do creative things again, like we've

done. I think anything over five, you do run the risk of detriment to our neighborhoods,

and that's concerning to me. So if that's helpful to you, 210 days, 365 in a commercial.

Three units, I think, is a really good number.

MS. CARROLL: By my math, five would be approximately two-thirds of the

short-term rental market in Columbia.

MR. CLAYBROOK: All right. I didn't understand what you're saying. Five --

MS. CARROLL: Presumes with five listings, if five listings were allowed, that would

be about two-thirds of the market in Columbia.

MR. CLAYBROOK: Yeah. Like I say, I think five is a problem.

MS. CARROLL: Three might --

MR. CLAYBROOK: I think three is more realistic, yeah. Again, if you're just purely

looking at a business owner who wants to make a viable model that they can live on,

three is about the base if you were going to do this as a full-time endeavor.

MS. CARROLL: All right. Thanks for your comments.

MR. CLAYBROOK: Yeah. You bet.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any other questions for this speaker? Seeing none. Thank

you.

MR. CLAYBROOK: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Next?

MR. GALEN: Good evening. I'm Jeff Galen, I'm the current president of the Columbia

Apartment Association. Thank you very much. I'm actually going to be very short. I

wish I was as eloquent as many of the speakers that came before me, but I'll just do a

quick discussion. What we would like to again encourage you all is to look at the

amendments we proposed to the current ordinance. We do support many of things that

are in that ordinance. I would also like to echo that many of the concerns that the

audience here has presented tonight were actually addressed in the amendments that we

put out there. I will also say that I am a short-term rental owner, as well, but I am not a

short-term rental owner in Columbia because, quite frankly, I couldn't make the business

model work here. Several of our people would not be able to keep their properties

operating as short-term rentals, as well. I'm being short, so thank you very much. If

there's any questions, I'll be happy to take them on.

MS. LOE: Thank you. Are there any questions for this speaker? I see none. Oops.

Commissioner Stanton?

MR. STANTON: Fair question?

MR. GALEN: Sure.

MR. STANTON: Small operator, how many licenses should I let you have?

MR. GALEN: All right. So I'll tell you -- well, I'll tell you my personal opinions, and I'll

tell you what we recommended as a group. My personal opinion is that I think we

shouldn't limit it at all because I am an entrepreneur, and I think that reality is the homes

we run and operate are far better than many of the homes that are in those

neighborhoods. Having said that, I'm actually quite happy with the eight. I know many

people here have said five to eight, and, you know, I would support that, as well.

MS. LOE: Any additional questions for this speaker?

MR. GALEN: All right. Thank you all very much. Have a good night.

MS. LOE: Thank you. Any additional speakers on this case?

MS. DOKKEN: My name is Dee Dokken; I live in the First Ward at 804 Again Street,

and I appreciate the proposal that this group has worked very hard on. I think you've

taken a lot of factors into account. I have been somewhat persuaded that maybe if it

worked with neighborhoods, maybe the days of use should be increased, not increasing

the number of properties people own, but increasing the number of days might be a more

efficient use of the property and still -- I don't necessarily think people should be making a

living off of this and requiring to have three to eight properties, but a supplemental income

with one that was allowed to operate longer or maybe under a conditional use, they could

go to longer. Seeing -- I'm being convinced of that, just listening to the testimonies

tonight. Thank you.

MS. LOE: Thank you. Any questions for this speaker? I see none. Thank you, Ms.

Dokken. Any additional speakers on this case?

MR. FLEISCHER: Hi. I'm Steve Fleischer, 2007 South Country Club Court. I haven't

really been following it for the last five to six years because, oh, about eight months ago, I

bought a house for my mother, and I was going to put her in it. Circumstances changed,

so I'm contemplating doing the Airbnb. So I've come to the meeting, and in looking at

this, I agree there's some -- there needs to be some regulation, some type of definition so

we don't have advertised that there are 400 people breaking the law on Airbnb. Right?

Am I -- am I off base there? So something has to happen. I'm all for smoke detectors,

inspections, and some type of regulation. The number of days, I feel is -- that should be

allowed 365. Number of licenses someone can have, I don't think there should be a limit

on it. I mean, this is -- this is a market, so as we're talking about saturation, prices

coming down, some of the owners will -- they'll exit, just because they're not making a

profit. I -- I feel for you if you've been doing this for five years, but maybe it needs to be

shrunk a little bit.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you very much. Any questions for this speaker?

Commissioner Placier?

MS. PLACIER: Is the house that you bought in a residential zone?

MR. FLEISCHER: It is.

MS. PLACIER: I think another thing that has not come out this evening, and that is

the aspect of limitations on Airbnbs in residential zones where people can lose a house

that used to have a family, or they used to have neighbors, and now it is an Airbnb.

MR. FLEISCHER: Right.

MS. PLACIER: And so this is a commercial use. It is guest accommodation. It is

not -- and some people have almost presented it as a social service or something.

MR. FLEISCHER: Right. Right. Right.

MS. PLACIER: It is a business. It is commercial. And I can't just buy the house

across the street from me and turn it into a coffee shop.

MR. FLEISCHER: Right.

MS. PLACIER: Everybody would have, you know, a conniption. So why is it okay to

turn it into a mini-hotel? I mean, what was your thought process on that?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, a mini-hotel, you're talking about more than one unit. I

mean, these are providing for families coming in town. I liked all the previous comments

on reasons why. I'm just being put in the situation, I thought, well, this would be a good

route. I do own long-term rentals. I do have an Airbnb at the Lake, and I will tell you I get

petrified if the place isn't spotless because I might not get a five-star rating. And the

long-term rentals I have here, I guarantee you I won't get a letter from the City saying I

have 12 bags of garbage sitting in the front yard, or the grass hasn't been mowed. You

know, the tenants are responsible for that, but, ultimately, I get the letter. On the Airbnb,

that grass will be mowed, the lawn will be -- I mean, the place will be nice and clean. I

did want to address, what -- what is the penalty if you go over 120 days?

MS. GEUEA JONES: That -- the penalties themselves and fines and fees and stuff,

are for the administrative part. That's not our role. We're just land use.

MR. FLEISCHER: Okay. So, I mean, the -- the -- simplifying it would be a great

start.

MS. GEUEA JONES: All right. Any other questions for this speaker? Seeing none.

Thank you.

MR. FLEISCHER: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Next?

MS. FOWLER: Good evening. Pat Fowler, I live at 606 North Sixth Street in the

First Ward, and I'm delighted to be here with you this evening. When I attended the work

session on December 21st, 2022, as a member of City Council, I had both a voice and a

vote. You've done the research and shared it with us over the past year and a half, data I

paid close attention to as a City Council member. Tonight I have a voice as a

neighborhood advocate, so I hope to say something that matters. I received a forwarded

email from Airbnb corporation urging me to oppose the ordinance as written and to

contact my elected officials. Put a pin in that for just a minute. I'll circle back to that.

Thank you for working so intentionally and doing the courageous work you have done,

courageous work in the face of all kinds of pressure, and lots of extra adjectives and

adverbs. So here's the heart of my message. You have done impressive work. Stand

behind it and approve it as written. Do not vote to make changes. The amendments can

go to Council for their consideration. The very same Council, the very same elected

officials that Airbnb's letter wants all of us to lobby and implore them to intervene and,

presumably, to defeat the ordinance. Elected officials know there are consequences for

their actions as it should be. Should our elected officials choose to deepen the housing

crisis we already are experiencing, to deepen the hollowing out of neighborhoods we were

already experiencing, and to look away from the data and experience of other cities,

cities that are showing courage in the face of fierce oppositions, that is their elected

officials’ responsibility. All of these suggestions and amendments can go to Council. I'm

sure they will watch the video and listen to all the questions you've asked tonight and all

the testimony that's come back in response. You have queued them up well. Stand

behind your work and move this forward tonight. I'm happy to answer any of your

questions, including questions you might have of what information came to me as a

sitting Council member, and how I responded to members of the public when they

brought me their concerns. Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any questions for this speaker?

MS. FOWLER: Yes. Oh. Oh. I’m so sorry. Let me defer to the Chair.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Stanton, go ahead. The transcriptionist gets

very mad if I don't call out people's names before they start speaking.

MR. STANTON: Based on the data you have available, do you have any data that

supports or does not support short-term rental effect on affordable housing, or I'm going to

get off of that. Let's get off affordable housing. Existing housing stock in Columbia, let

me get off that affordable housing kick. Existing housing stock available for local or new

residents.

MS. FOWLER: I'm not going to answer your question directly but let me say this.

When I came to that December 21st work session, I dreaded what we were going to talk

about. I wanted to put my head on the table and cry. And then you came forward with

an ordinance that I think is and remains brilliant. You showed me the data, you put

illustrations up on the screen, and I walked out of there and thought, oh, my gosh, we

have a chance to balance an enormous amount of competing interest, and to look at this

from multiple perspectives, which is what you did. I'm sorry. I don't remember all those

screens right now, and, as you know, I have some other pressures in my life right now.

I'm no longer a sitting Councilperson. But your work was brilliant, and at the time, I

looked carefully at what you had done, so that's why I'm here to encourage you to stand

with what you've done and move it along.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any other questions?

MS. FOWLER: I would -- Madam Chair?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Yes.

MS. FOWLER: I'm concerned that there is an impression out there that by inquiring

of city staff, you weren’t told that we didn't have authorization for short-term rentals. And

one of the things I know I voted on at least once, we vote to suspend regulation and

enforcement, not because it's not important, but specifically because we wanted to give

space for your work. We didn't want to presuppose or create a property right that then

would be brought to your attention and to Council's attention as being a taking. So we

were really public about that, and when people wrote to me and said, you know, I have --

I'm a grandparent and I have -- or I have short-term rentals, I always wrote back and said

you realize these are currently unregulated, but regulation is coming. I trust that that's

exactly what my fellow Council members did, as well, because we knew, we voted to

suspend regulation to allow room and space. And while I've had my disagreements with

City staff over the years, many of them have played out in public, I believe that City staff

would have informed everyone who inquired exactly what the status was of our

withholding of regulation for an interim amount of time. Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Anyone else? Final call. Thank you very much. Oh, sorry.

Commissioner Dunn? You've got to raise the hand higher.

MR. DUNN: Thank you. Sorry. We heard some comments today about the lack of

community input on this issue, only having so many handfuls of comments. I also know

as a City Council member, formerly, that you've been engaged in this issue much longer

than I have had the privilege to be. Do you expect that as this continues through the

process and goes to Council, that we'll hopefully see more community engagement?

MS. FOWLER: So I don't really -- I appreciate the question, and community

engagement matters a lot to me. I'm about to return to the practice of law, and -- which

excites me to no end, and I'm following what I call the hearsay rule. And for a question

like that, if I haven't seen it, touched it, tasted it, felt it, I don't know that I am qualified to

answer it. But I don't -- I missed the opportunity to -- to respond to whatever survey the

City put out, so I'm disappointed in me that I didn't know about that. I know that

BeHeard.CoMo is an awkward tool for most of us, and I also know that many of my

neighbors in the First Ward don't have -- and I've got an unlimited data plan here. And as

awkward as I am with my fingers and thumbs, I tend to get some things done on it. But if

you don't have an unlimited data plan, and you don't have a Smart Phone, I mean, this -- I

have a computer in my hand, I don't know that people are looking for BeHeard.Como as a

way to respond. So I think we still have a lot of disconnects, and we call it the digital

divide and -- but we -- I think it's the digital disconnect, and I think that's still at play here.

MR. DUNN: Thank you.

MS. FOWLER: Thank you. Thanks for asking.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Last call. Thank you so much for coming tonight.

MS. FOWLER: Again, it's really nice to be among you. Thanks.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Good to see you. Next public speaker? Looking for someone

to stand up. Going once. Okay. In that case, we will close public hearing and go into

Commissioner comment.

PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED

MS. GEUEA JONES: We have before us the four options, so I think as we go into

this, I'd like to hear from folks what they want to do. Do we want to delay, amend, or

send it to City Council? Commissioner Stanton?

MR. STANTON: I wanted to clear something up before we get started.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Please.

MR. STANTON: I want to apologize for my example, but I’m not apologizing for my

intent. My intent is to make clear that this is an unregulated, thus illegal operation until

we get this cleared. So I want us to really hone in, and I love this discussion tonight. I

think it was one of the best ones I've been at concerning this issue, so your voices have

been heard, but I did want to kind of clarify that. I want you to constantly understand that

this is an illegal land use until we fix it, heard it from our lawyer, so I just wanted to make

that clear.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: I do want to make a quick statement. Thank you, any of you were

here five years ago. I know Mr. Toohey was. It was a far more painful experience five

years ago for everyone involved. That said, this ordinance was -- I'm getting there,

Madam Chair. This ordinance was adopted as a baseline to put it out there to see what

worked and to see what didn't work, and then modify it. I believe in that process. I truly

do. If we go too big, we've seen other cities who went too big, it had a problem. We can

always go bigger, we cannot go back. With that in mind, and because this will be

litigated no matter what we do intensely before Council, the lobbying will get even more

intense on us and on them, I suggest we send it upstairs.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Anyone else? Commissioner Stanton?

MR. STANTON: Oh. I support what Ms. Fowler said. You know, I've said in work

council, we produced a good product, but I also think this is an organic document. I think

we heard a lot of good things this evening, a lot of points of view. I think we tip-toed

around some things that I don't think was really addressed, but that's the audience that

came. I would like to continue the public hearing for further P & Z discussion. I think

going back and let's digest what we learned and make some amendments based on what

we learned, and that's something that I want to have a debate about, and come up with a

solid language for that, that's kind of where I'm leaning.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Ford?

MR. FORD: I would like to continue talking about this. I think the public made some

really, really, really good points.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Wilson?

MS. WILSON: I would prefer to suggest amendments this evening and go ahead and

vote on it. I think the two major things that we saw that needed amending were the

number of days to be greater than 120, somewhere maybe 220, and then the number of

licenses. My preference is three. I think that if you're a local resident, more than three is

you're getting into doing more commercial things rather than, you know. So I'd -- I'd

rather have a -- a vote brought forward and us go ahead and vote on those amendments

this evening.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Dunn?

MR. DUNN: I think I concur. I think there's some amendments we could make this

evening that could accommodate some of the concerns that were raised. The first that

comes to my mind is the very first speaker who kind of, I think, rightfully highlighted the

difference between days and nights. I think that that would be a very clean amendment.

And, you know, if the Board would allow me to go ahead and make that motion, I would

move to make an amendment if it's not out of -- are we just in conference?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Can you -- we're just doing comments. I mean, technically,

it's in order, but I'd prefer if you'd wait to the courtesy of your fellow commissioners.

MR. DUNN: Absolutely and happily, yeah.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you.

MR. DUNN: Yeah.

MS. GEUEA JONES: But I have made a note, and we'll come back to you.

Commissioner Carroll?

MS. CARROLL: I feel that this has to go forward to Council. I think we spent five

years on this. I have heard a lot of comments tonight. I've read a lot of comments over

the past two weeks and over the past five years. I'm not sure that I've heard anything that

is very significantly different than what I heard when we were drafting this. You know, I

still highlight the -- the rights of the property owners who own homes and live in their

homes. And I -- and the silent majority and, in this case, even the STR owners who, you

know, the vast majority, 74 percent as of 2022, only owned one, I don't view one license

as a taking, but I do view it as a protection that may not harm the majority. The

comment for days to nights, I think that's very valid, and I would certainly entertain an

amendment on that behalf. I -- I just think that given everything that we've heard, I'd like

this to go forward to Council and Council may consider the next amendments, if they see

fit. And -- and I do understand the day limit. I would be open to increasing days,

especially in the tier one.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Anyone else? Commissioner Loe?

MS. LOE: I also agree that this should move forward. I believe there's a few

amendments, more housekeeping. The night and day one, I think, is easy enough to

make. There's a few typos. I don't know if we need to pick those up. But I do believe the

comments tonight are in line with feedback we've gotten during the process. I also would

like to say that this ordinance was crafted with a perspective of encouraging and

promoting the neighborhoods and housing available to residents in the city, and it was not

intended to allow fully commercial enterprises in residential zones. We do not allow fully

commercial enterprises in residential zones. I think many of the comments we received

tonight were how to conduct a fully successful business, and this was carefully crafted

not to necessarily do that. You get the opportunity to do a limited business in residential

zones. If you want to run a fully commercial hospitality enterprise, we have zones that

that can be done in. We heard from one speaker today who is in such a zone. They are

fully capable of moving forward in that zone. So I'm -- I agree that the days and licenses

were the issues that came up. Those days are intentional, so I'm not ready to move on

that. And the licenses, this ordinance is carefully crafted on the use of that license, so

changing that would be actually a big rewrite, so I'm not prepared to do that at this point

either. Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Stanton?

MR. STANTON: My highly intelligent colleagues, I agree with everybody, but being

an old vet of this process, and the strong voices and very intelligent people in this

audience, I do not want this to be a political issue when it goes in front of Council. I think

a lot of these things we can address in amendments. I don't want lobbyists. I don't want

strong letters sent to nobody, pressuring politically things that we're trying to deal with

with our neighborhoods and our -- these are tactical, these are physical things we need to

address. So I want to tighten this up, and I think we can listen to what we heard tonight,

make some adjustments, and don't leave it to Council completely for those amendments

to be done. I feel like it'll -- the pressure is going to be on, and the votes are going to be

pushed around, and we're not going to like the amendments, so I think we can make

some strong suggestions right here -- not tonight. My opinion, not tonight, but before it

goes to City Council, I -- I definitely want us to make adjustments and vote on it.

MS. GEUEA JONES: I know Commissioner Loe has a comment. Before I call on

her. Legal staff, if we wanted to do a work session to craft the amendments, is that

appropriate, or would we do it in the public hearing, and if we do have to do it in a public

hearing, does our schedule allow that at our meeting on the 21st? I'm worried about

delay.

MR. ZENNER: I'm -- and I'm processing through my mind without a special called

work session, to try to work the amendments into a work session, and then allow for that

amended ordinance to be reposted in time for the 21st meeting, I believe it would be very

challenging to do that. The earliest that this item, from a tactical perspective for us in

order to allow the agenda to be reposted with the amended ordinance property, is really a

January 4th continuation. We continue it to January 4th. We would discuss the text

chances that may be desired at the January -- or December 21st work session, which will

be your next work session. And between that work session and the publication deadline

for the January 4th meeting is when we would incorporate all of that and republish. If is a

continued hearing, if that is the direction that you are pursuing, it does not require

additional advertising, but I -- I do strongly recommend that we have the amended

ordinance available for public consumption before you hold that next hearing.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Okay. Commissioner Loe?

MS. LOE: I would just like to remind the Commission that we have already made

one round of amendments based on feedback from a hearing with City Council, and that

was one of the changes that we made was to remove the definition of non-principal,

non-local owner to simplify the tiers. And some of what I heard tonight was to request

provisions recognizing local owners, which, in my mind, is going back another step. So I

would prefer not to make further amendments prior to City Council having their vote on

this, because it's beginning to be a back and forth.

MS. GEUEA JONES: I do think that there are two things that were brought up in

both the written comments we received and tonight that are not what I would call

substantive changes, that I think are things that we should consider before it goes to City

Council, namely, the idea of a distance instead of city limits for the registered agent

response. That makes some sense to me, and I think is in -- is in agreement with the

intent of what we're trying to do. And the other thing is the night to days, days to night

conversation. These are more like hotels in their operation than they are long-term

rentals, so that also makes some sense. And neither of those things, to me, are

substantive changes to our discussions, and I think are pretty easily handled this

evening, if we wanted to do that. If we do want to delay, that means another month

before City Council looks at it, so City Council wouldn't be looking at this until February, if

they have space on their docket to do that. Just bringing that to everyone's attention.

Commissioner MacMann, and then Commissioner Carroll, and then Commissioner

Stanton.

MR. MACMANN: Thank you, Madam Chair. One of the reasons I wanted to move

this thing forward mostly as is, Commissioner Loe has mentioned, and to Commissioner

Stanton's point, I'm loathe to make substantive changes before it gets to Council because

I believe they're going to move. And if we start moving, they're going to move a lot further.

We have a concise instrument. It is not perfect. It can be opened up. I think Council --

we'll do some opening, but we'll see about that. In regards to the Chair's concerns about

days and night, I think that's a simple text change, and I -- the grammatical way to add

the thing about the distance, we could literally put a clause in there with a comma, just

real, real simple, rather rewriting the entire thing. And those would be housekeeping

amendments. Everything else would be technical corrections -- spelling, grammar. And

we can move forward. I am loathe also to delaying more. I also loathe to legislate from

the dais. I despise it because it's in a motive, less than filling formed activity. I yield.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Carroll?

MS. CARROLL: Commissioner MacMann hit a lot of my points. I think that delaying

has been extraordinarily unhealthy for this process. I think that it creates a presumed

right with the stay of enforcement. I think that it wears down public involvement. I think

people stop showing up. And I realize that there are lots of people here. There were

more people here five years ago -- many more. I don't think that we are substantively

different in comments from before. I still think it's most healthy to move it forward to

Council.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Stanton?

MR. STANTON: Oh. Pushing time. Worried about time. I worried about product.

We need to have a unified front. As long as everybody is ready to jump on their sword,

that's what I'm saying, and I'm really telling you, people out here that are talking tonight,

and the people writing these letters and the people that are going to be putting that

political pressure on Council, I'd rather have our point of view out, solid and clear. And I

think the things that we talked about tonight, we can make a solid amendment, you

know, first one, days and the nights, it's a given. But other ones that we can talk about

and make a solid amendment, and then forward that to City Council based on people that

have really chewed on this data, no one has looked at this data, and wrestled with this

data better than us. Who is better to make the amendments that we heard tonight based

on the data that only we know as good as we do. Not second hand, but directly.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Placier?

MS. PLACIER: So I agree with you, Commissioner Geuea Jones, about the two sort

of easy ones, and I -- I don't know if those could be done this evening without messing up

wording. But I -- I'm of two minds about whether we go back, because I think the same

points are going to be made at Council, word for word. And frankly, this crowd does not

represent very many of the people in Columbia. I mean, this looks like a big crowd

compared to our usual, but this is not all of their constituents, by a long shot. So I know

they'll come out again to Council, but we can fix those two points and I know they'll make

their arguments. And so my tendency is with those two exceptions, to go forward.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any other comments from the Commissioners?

Commissioner MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: Madam Chair, procedurally.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Procedurally.

MR. MACMANN: Procedurally. As a concept for the next 60 seconds, before we do

anything else, could we clean up the two that everyone agrees on and go from there, and

then I'll have a motion; how about that?

MS. GEUEA JONES: In which case, Commissioner Dunn, would you like to make a

motion?

MR. DUNN: Yes, Madam Chair. I would like to make a motion that, as it relates to

short-term rental tiers one, two, and three, we revised days to nights to reflect 30 nights,

120 nights, and 120 nights, respectively, to the tiers.

MR. MACMANN: Second.

MS. GEUEA JONES: The motion was made by Commissioner Dunn and seconded

by Commissioner MacMann. The Chair is looking at legal to make sure the motion is

clear.

MS. THOMPSON: I think that's sufficiently clear.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Is there any discussion on the motion before us?

Commissioner Stanton?

MR. STANTON: Can you repeat the motion, please?

MR. DUNN: Absolutely. I make the motion that, as it relates to short-term rental

tiers one, two, and three, that we revised days to nights, so it would be 30 nights,

respectively, for tier one, 120 nights for tier two, and 120 nights for tier three.

MR. STANTON: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any further discussion? Seeing none. Commissioner Carroll,

may we have a roll call.

Roll Call Vote (Voting "yes" is to recommend approval.) Voting Yes: Ms. Loe,

Mr. Stanton, Mr. Dunn, Mr. MacMann, Ms. Carroll, Ms. Geuea Jones, Ms. Placier,

Mr. Ford, Ms. Wilson. Motion carries 9-0.

MS. CARROLL: We have nine votes, the motion carries.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. Is there another motion with regards to the

response time? Commissioner MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: I have a clear motion, but I need help -- staff's help with the

location. Can you queue that up for me, please? I want to add a comment, a clause,

and a comma. Real simple.

MR. ZENNER: So it will be under the definition of designated agent, which is at the

very beginning of the -- I've got to go the other way. So it will be under the definition --

well, it's not going to matter. It's not the full definition. So it would be in the definition of

designated agent. The comma would follow -- would following this statement, "An

individual or management company located within,"

MR. MACMANN: Period. Stop. Oxford. Oxford. I'm going Oxford here, or within 20

minutes.

MS. GEUEA JONES: So within the City of Columbia, or within 20 minutes thereof, --

MS. THOMPSON: Twenty minutes is --

MR. DUNN: Subjective.

MS. GEUEA JONES: That's pretty far.

MS. THOMPSON: A subjective 20 -- do you mean 20 miles?

MR. MACMANN: I'll do ten.

MS. THOMPSON: Ten miles.

MR. MACMANN: Unless you guys want to go further.

MS. THOMPSON: And then my second question --

MR. MACMANN: I'm getting a look. I need to go to 15. Do I get support for 15?

MS. GEUEA JONES: That’s Ashland.

MS. PLACER: Miles or minutes?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Miles.

MR. MACMANN: Miles.

MR. ZENNER: Let me --

MS. THOMPSON: Is it within 15 miles of the City of Columbia, or of the short-term

rental?

MR. MACMANN: Of the short-term rental.

MS. GEUEA JONES: That's too --

MR. MACMANN: That's too restrictive?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Yeah.

MR. MACMANN: I'm in Cooper County in a lot of places.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Yeah. But you can get here quickly.

MR. ZENNER: If I may.

MR. MACMANN: Certainly.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Mr. Zenner?

MR. ZENNER: So the apartment association and the CBOR request recommends

that inserting in the place of the City of Columbia, remove the City of Columbia and insert

Boone County. What that will allow you to do is it will allow you to take you to the south

of Ashland and allow you to take to north of Hallsville.

MR. MACMANN: It’s everywhere.

MR. ZENNER: It's in the city -- it's in Boone County, which I think is a more

definable geography. We do not have to be making measurements based upon where

the short-term rental is.

MR. MACMANN: Or within the County of Boone.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Do you want to do "or within the County of Boone," or do you

just want to say located within the County of Boone?

MR. MACMANN: I personally want or.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Okay. Legal?

MS. THOMPSON: I mean, if it's in the county -- if it's in the city, it's also going to be

in the county of Boone, so there's no need to --

MR. MACMANN: That's true. I would rather have designated agent in the city.

That's where I -- that's the only place I'm going here. But located within the County of

Boone, that is available 24/7. Okay. That's an hour for some of these people, but are

you guys good with that? Do I get any nods, bobs? Anybody have trouble with the

County of Boone?

MS. GEUEA JONES: I would ask that you restate the motion in a precise manner.

MR. MACMANN: I certainly will.

MS. GEUEA JONES: I'm sorry. Commissioner Dunn, did you have something

before he does that?

MR. DUNN: I was just going to say, in my experiences in some of, like, in doing

some political boundary type work before, doing a radius based on the City's political

boundary wouldn't be a bad precedent, you know, given other cities, I know that they have

done a radius, too, on various things. So if we wanted to do a ten-mile radius outside of

the boundary, you know, that would expand Ashland, it would go, you know, north as

well. But to kind of the point, it would not be an hour commute to their properties. So

there’s options there. To me, it's not super -- something I’m going to die on, it's just

options.

MR. MACMANN: If I may?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner MacMann, it's your motion. You can do

whatever you want.

MR. MACMANN: Thank you.

MS. THOMPSON: Mr. MacMann, can I jump in one more time?

MR. MACMANN: Certainly.

MS. THOMPSON: I just want to note that the amendment needs to be made both in

the definition of designated agent in Section G, short-term rentals, and then also in the

supplemental use specific standards.

MR. MACMANN: As stated by staff. Thank you. I appreciate and I've made those

same works. I think for the simplicity of it, the County of Boone is a much simpler thing

to deal with, because staff doesn't have to get out the, you know, the GIS work, and so,

you know, Harrisburg doesn't count, but Ashland does.

MS. GEUEA JONES: In which case, would you like to concisely restate your

motion, please?

MR. MACMANN: Yes, I would. I would like the designated agent, the number as

stated by staff, to read as follows. The individual or management company located within

-- strike the City of Columbia -- add the County of Boone that is available 24 hours a day,

and then goes on from there.

MR. DUNN: Second.

MS. GEUEA JONES: And the use specific standards -- and do the same in the use

specific standards.

MR. MACMANN: And do the same in the -- thank you very much.

MR. DUNN: Second.

MS. GEUEA JONES: We have a motion by Commissioner MacMann, and a second

by Commissioner Dunn. Are we good with that amendment? Is it clear to staff?

MS. THOMPSON: It's sufficiently clear, yes.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. In which case, is there any discussion on the

motion? Seeing none. Commissioner Carroll, when you're ready, may we have a roll

call.

Roll Call Vote (Voting "yes" is to recommend approval.) Voting Yes: Ms. Loe,

Mr. Stanton, Mr. Dunn, Mr. MacMann, Ms. Carroll, Ms. Geuea Jones, Ms. Placier,

Ms. Wilson. Voting No: Mr. Ford. Motion carries 8-1.

MS. CARROLL: We have eight yeses and one no. The motion carries.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. All right.

MR. ZENNER: Ms. Geuea Jones?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Yes, please.

MR. ZENNER: Before we move on, two technical corrections and staff identified as a

part of the ordinance, and Ms. Loe may have additional. At the end of tier two, which

would be on page 4 of the proposed ordinance, there is an extra number 4 that should

have been stricken. It was not. And then in tier three, for the purposes of consistency,

items ii and iii need to be reversed; iii needs to be the second element, and then ii is the

last. And with that change, the semi-colon and after ii needs to be deleted.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Would it be sufficient with whatever motion we make to say

subject to technical corrections?

MR. ZENNER: That is correct. And if Ms. Loe has any others that need to be

placed on the record, if she will so state?

MS. LOE: I have one. There's a space missing, but we can pick that up, can't we?

MR. ZENNER: Let me know when --

MS. LOE: All right. The other one may be a little more critical. It's the definition of

long-term resident. Currently, it states that it's the owner or a tenant under a signed

lease greater than 30 days that's authorized by the owner to conduct a short-term rental

within the dwelling unit. Are we saying that only authorized long-term tenants are

considered long-term residents? We qualify the designated -- we have added registrant,

which qualifies that the tenant must be authorized, plus we have another qualification at

limits on licensure, which states must be issued per owner or authorized tenant. So we

have authorized tenant, and I was just questioning that that definition appears to limit

long-term tenant only to tenants who have been authorized.

MS. THOMPSON: A long-term resident?

MS. LOE: Or a long-term resident.

MS. THOMPSON: A short-term rental can only be issued to a tenant who is

authorized by the owner to operate that unit as a short-term rental.

MS. GEUEA JONES: So for the purposes of this ordinance, you are not a long-term

resident, and you're not subject to all of the privileges given to long-term residents unless

you are authorized.

MS. LOE: All right. Just wanted to make sure --

MR. ZENNER: This does not -- we would not interpret in the issuance of a licensure

in the -- in the absence of an authorization from the owner of record as defined within the

Boone County Assessors. If they did not have an authorization from that owner, we

would not issue a license.

MS. LOE: No. No. No. I understand you have to be authorized. It was just the

definition of long-term resident versus authorized tenant. Long-term resident only

includes authorized tenants.

MS. THOMPSON: It does.

MR. ZENNER: That is correct.

MS. THOMPSON: We don't have a need really to refer anywhere in the ordinance to

a tenant that's not authorized to register for a short-term rental, so we just wanted a term

that could capture all of those people that are authorized to operate a short-term rental.

MS. LOE: That’s -- and that's what I just wanted to make sure of.

MS. THOMPSON: Yeah. Yeah.

MS. LOE: Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Do we want to have some further discussion so that it is

verbatim and, on the record, about either the number of days or the number of licenses

this evening? Commissioner Dunn?

MR. DUNN: I appreciate everybody that came today to testify. You know, I'm a new

Commissioner, so I haven't had the privilege and opportunity to spend as much time and

dedication that everybody else here on the Commission has spent. I will say, you know,

for me, there's kind of two competing principles -- not principles, but there's two

competing issues in my mind, A, the question of number of licenses, B, the number of

days. I feel very comfortable with one license. I do. But I do think some of the

concerns, as it relates to how do you operate a short-term rental in a way that's profitable

and way that's going to ensure that they're able to make the most out of their one

license. I do think that if there was a compromise to be made, it would be on the number

of days, increasing that. Whether that's to 210, 365, to me, it doesn't really matter. For

me, I think the issue of how many short-term rentals are out there and what are the

consequences of that is a much larger issue than the number of days that they're

actually being utilized as a short-term rental. So I -- that's kind of what -- how I see that.

I would like to see an increase of days, if any changes.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Do you have a specific number in mind?

MR. DUNN: I'll defer to the Commission.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Okay. Commissioner Carroll?

MS. CARROLL: Yeah. I wanted to comment on the number of licenses. To me, the

one thing that matters most in this ordinance is limiting the number of licenses. More

licenses has greater impact. More licenses is more commercial. It -- there was a very

astute comment tonight that limiting the number of licenses may proliferate the number of

STRs. There may be more STRs with individuals that have a single license. I think that

the data that we saw showed that the areas that had a higher involvement of -- of owner

operators and people with only one license were less impacted neighborhoods.

Therefore, I am much, much less concerned about proliferating the number of single

licenses than I am about proliferating the number of multi licenses. The lowest income

areas tended to have the highest multi-listing licenses. I -- I don't have a problem with

many people that have only one license, and I think that's the majority of our Airbnb

operators. Likewise, I think we need to be equally considerate of our long-term renters as

we are for our long-term homeowners. Renting rental housing is supportive of -- of people

who live within the city, and I think we should consider their interests equally.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Do you have an opinion about the number of days?

MS. CARROLL: Yeah. Sorry. Number of days, I could go up on tier one. I -- I don't

think it's our consideration to make it profitable, but I do think we should consider making

it easy to operate and defray the costs of homeownership or renting.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commission Stanton and then Commissioner Ford.

MR. STANTON: Kind of see where this conversation is going, I really don't think --

we're either going to vote this in or don't. I don't think we need to do these amendments

right now.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Okay.

MR. STANTON: Especially not without just looking at all the data. I think we're

setting ourselves up.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Loe? Oh. I'm sorry. Matt, did you have

something?

MR. FORD: I yield.

MS. LOE: I'm just thinking back to when we debated the number of days, and am

keeping in mind that we, at that time, had Commissioners that didn't believe short-term

rental belonged in residential neighborhoods at all. And this was our compromise. And

we had unanimous support, and it is going to be a compromised ordinance because there

are a whole array of opinions about this use, and I'm very aware of that.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Ford?

MR. FORD: I wanted to wait, just as I'm also a new Commissioner here, everybody -

- if we want to vote on the number of licenses, I would propose that we go eight. If that

doesn't pass, five. If that doesn't pass, three. If that doesn't pass, then I'd keep the one

we have. And we could do the same tactic for the number of days. Start at 365, take off

30, and keep voting until we pass it.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thirty days at a time. Okay. Let me -- Commissioner

Wilson?

MS. WILSON: So there was someone who came to speak who is the reason that I

thought varying the number of licenses made sense. It is something that I have

considered before my daughter bought her own home, I was going to buy her a home.

And if I had done that and had -- then I would have two homes, and that's something that I

think I would want to have that opportunity. In this case, I believe she said that her

in-laws purchased the home across from her or attached to her, and she had her home.

So that puts you into the position of where you are the resident of two homes. So to only

have one license in that instance is really kind of -- you know, I don't want to use the

word unfair, but it's unfair. So I feel like it's -- it's logical in that example to have more

than one license. Do I think it should be five or eight? No. I feel like, at this point, you're

just running a business. You're just straight running a business if you're -- if you're in that

space. But in the example that she provided, that made sense.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Stanton?

MR. STANTON: If we say five, the lobby said eight. They're going to go to City

Council, they're going to push eight. That's why I don't want to do this right now.

Whatever we say, if it ain't what the people, the lobbyists want, they're going to push it

up. So let it go in front of City Council and let them fight that out and have this

discussion with City Council, because anything that we say, if it's not exactly like the

lobbyists wanted, they're going to kick it up and they're going to -- no, they're not going to

like this, they're going to go against what we just said, they're going to push their eight,

they're going to push the 365, they're going to push all of that. Let them go to City

Council. They can have that fight there.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner Loe?

MS. LOE: I concur with Commissioner Stanton. I do not feel comfortable making

that decision on the dais tonight.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner MacMann?

MR. MACMANN: I second what those two folks just said. Because we're -- we're

not -- we're doing a motion and not -- you know what I'm saying? We’re putting it all --

MS. GEUEA JONES: Right. We have to do some -- I guess we don't have to do

something tonight. Let me -- let me ask this. The consensus of the Commission to send

what we've got to Council and let them make the substantive amendments, or to delay

and have us make the substantive amendments on January 4th. All right. Let's -- do we

want to do thumbs up? Do we want to go round-robin? How do we want to do this?

Okay. Commissioner MacMann, what have you got?

MR. MACMANN: I have thoughts -- I have thoughts on that very thing.

MS. GEUEA JONES: I’m sure. Yeah.

MR. MACMANN: I want to send it up. I really, really want to send it up, and I think

I've counted to five, and once I think I counted to six.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Okay. Anybody want to do anything? Commissioner

Stanton?

MR. STANTON: Let's go.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Go for it.

MR. STANTON: As it relates to Case 45-2023, I move we adopt the ordinance

subject to specific amendments already specified --

MS. GEUEA JONES: Corrections.

MR. STANTON: -- to City Council, and any technical corrections, as well.

MR. MACMANN: Second.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Motion by Commissioner Stanton, second by Commissioner

MacMann. Any discussion on the motion? I think we discussed out. Commissioner

Carroll, when you're ready.

Roll Call Vote (Voting "yes" is to recommend approval.) Voting Yes: Ms. Loe,

Mr. Stanton, Mr. Dunn, Mr. MacMann, Ms. Carroll, Ms. Geuea Jones, Ms. Placier,

Ms. Wilson. Voting No: Mr. Ford. Motion carries 8-1.

MS CARROLL: We have eight yeses and one no.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you. That recommendation will be sent to City Council.

MR. ZENNER: It will be. It will be January 16th is the public -- the introduction for

the public hearing on it. It will also be placed under -- just given the topic, it will be

placed under old business. And to ensure that it's second reading, public comment will

be able to be held and received on it. Any public correspondence that is received

following this Commission meeting needs to be sent to Planning@como.org.

<mailto:Planning@como.org.> That will come to our staff administrative general email. It

will be collected --

MS. GEUEA JONES: Folks, we've got some business. If you can take your

conversations outside, I would appreciate it.

MR. ZENNER: -- be collected and distributed to the Council prior to submission of

the final report, which will be a week and a half prior to the January 16th meeting. So the

public still has an opportunity to provide written comment associated with this. They will

have opportunity after we have submitted the final report to Council to also submit public

comment, but that will then be sent to the City Clerk, not our offices. With that, that is

action taken on this. I appreciate the Commission's diligence this evening and wrapping

this project up. We will sit by and wait to find out if Council will ask for your assistance

to potentially review a remanded ordinance that may be amended. If so, we'll schedule

that in as necessary.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Yeah.

Motion One - As it relates to short-term rental tiers one, two, and three, that we

revised days to nights, so it would be 30 nights, respectively, for tier one, 120

nights for tier two, and 120 nights for tier three.VOTING YES: Loe, Stanton, Dunn,

MacMann, Carroll, Geuea Jones, Placier, Ford, Wilson. VOTING NO: None.

Motion approved (9-0)

Motion Two - The individual or management company located within -- strike the

City of Columbia -- add the County of Boone that is available 24 hours a day, and

then goes on from there. VOTING YES: Loe, Stanton, Dunn, MacMann, Carroll,

Geuea Jones, Placier, Wilson. VOTING NO: Ford. Motion approved (8-1)

Motion Three - As it relates to Case 45-2023, move we adopt the ordinance

subject to specific amendments and any technical corrections, as well. VOTING

YES: Loe, Stanton, Dunn, MacMann, Carroll, Geuea Jones, Placier, Wilson.

VOTING NO: Ford. Motion approved (8-1)

VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any general public comments for the evening? Seeing none.

VII. STAFF COMMENTS

MS. GEUEA JONES: Mr. Zenner?

MR. ZENNER: So we do have a staff meeting -- we do have a meeting on the 16th or

the 21st of December. It's late. Typically, our work session is normally reserved to a

minimal amount of business items. We will potentially adhere to that. There may be

some just general housekeeping. Given the conversation this evening in our work

session, we will make an effort -- I will not guarantee given the work volume for the 21st's

meeting, that we will be able to substantively pull together anything in regards to our

small lot zoning district amendment, formerly referred to as the RC lot development,

which -- or district. We are eliminating cottage from any conversation moving forward.

And your cases for the regular agenda, we will again have coffee for you, not that they will

be as tantalizing as tonight, but they will be lengthy. So we have these six items on the

agenda. At this point, we believe all items will be moving forward. We have a preliminary

plat off of Gibbs Road. This is the project that was proposed to be annexed into the City

of Columbia at Gibbs and Barberry. This is the multi-zoned parcel of property that had R-

1, R-2, and R-MF associated with it. We also have two -- we have a combo, a public

hearing and a subdivision. These are both located on North Fairview across from the

mall. These are west of the Target end of the mall. A rezoning request of agriculture and

R-1 zoned property, and the R-1 piece of this is along Worley. The remaining bulk of the

property is ag. It is proposed to go to M-C. That is our corridor commercial zoning

district. The preliminary plat proposes a multi-lot preliminary plat, ostensibly, based on

concept reviews that we have had, which are a precursor to future development. One of

the lots proposed is a self-storage facility, which requires the M-C zoning. And then we

have three public hearings that will be scheduled. A request at the corner of Rollins and

Russell, which is addressed 709 Russell. This is preliminary plat. We'll have multiple

design adjustments associated with it in order to propose an eight-lot replatting of about

three-plus acre parcel of land utilizing a common ingress-egress driveway, and no

sidewalks internally to the six lots. This is a -- six development lots. The other lots in

the project are actually ones existing with a home on it, the other is a common lot. This

is a project that is proposed by Kay Wax. Many of you are familiar with Kay's work off of

Ash Street. Kay is attempting to take this acreage, save the existing larger home that's

on Russell, and then create five smaller compliant R-1 lots. The design adjustments are

to facilitate being able to be -- have that development plugged into this parcel, making it

appear as though it has been there for quite some time without putting in a public street,

a full 50-foot-wide public street. We're still doing the analysis at this point. We have

another -- we have a conditional-use permit for a self-storage facility off of I-70 Drive

Southeast. This is behind the existing Storage Mart. It is on the backside of the

property. The building that is proposed will be over 14 feet in height, hence, the reason

for the CUP. And then we have a major amendment down at Discovery Park. This is the

property that is incorporative of The Kitchen, where our commercial development along

with residential development was proposed. This particular major amendment is

proposing to eliminate a building, add an ATM drive-through to service the commercial

environment, and then add multiple stories to several of the buildings for additional

residential development where the original plan only had single-story construction. There

is an accompanying amendment of a parcel to the northwest -- or, yes -- to the northwest

of this that will be on the January meeting adjacent to Father Tolton Catholic High

School, so we do have some more activity going on at Discovery to change up some of

the land uses. Just so we know where we're at, here's the Gibbs Road property, which

many of you may recall coming in about a month and a half ago. There was a hang-up

with the annexation on this. Therefore, the annexation approval and zoning will be

running approximately concurrently with the Planning Commission's review of this

preliminary plat. Our properties off of North Fairview, they're obviously the same map.

One is a preliminary, one is the rezoning. And then the three public hearing items that

we have on this upcoming agenda, the Russell Boulevard, our conditional-use permit off of

I-70 Drive Southeast, and then the parcel that incorporates The Kitchen down at

Discovery Park there at Endeavor and Discovery Park Drive. That is all I have to offer for

this evening. We will have our traditional holiday meal on the 21st of December, light

hors d'oeuvres, as well as a meal package associated with that. Please come, enjoy.

We will ask that our court reporter show up. She has been a trooper with us this year,

and we graciously invite you to come along at 5:30, get yourself some food, socialize

with some of our Commissioners. I thank you for your attention this evening during our

work session and I believe we've made some significant progress in straightening out, I

think, the direction that we're heading with this small lot proposal. With that, that's all.

Thank you.

MS. GEUEA JONES: Thank you.

VIII. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

MS. GEUEA JONES: Any Commissioner general comments? Commissioner

Dunn?

MR. DUNN: Can I make a motion?

MS. GEUEA JONES: Commissioner MacMann?