Letter: Vacancy tax doesn't go far enough!

If the purported goal of the Vacancy Tax initiative is in fact to honestly increase the number of affordable housing units in the City of South Lake Tahoe, a noble goal indeed, and one that I do not believe anyone finds objectionable, I cannot help but see a potential issue with that expectation.

If in fact, the exorbitant $6000 yearly penalty on second homeowners does in fact motivate, either by financial hardship or just the altruistic sensibility of the homeowners, to offer their homes to the public for rental housing purposes, those homes would be anything but affordable. The costs associated with renting an entire home would be in fact quite substantial and out of the reach of many seeking affordable housing in the area, especially single local workers. The energy cost and winter upkeep alone would be extreme. I might suggest another more effective contribution to that eventuality.

A far better solution might be to require that anyone residing in the area in a home with more bedrooms than occupants to rent out their spare rooms to those in need of housing. A single room would be far more affordable than an entire home and would in fact be much more plentiful in the City. The sharing of expenses and maintenance would provide a financial benefit to the original occupants as well as the new tenants.

Perhaps those members of the City council, and in fact any local resident that signed the petition to place this issue on the ballot, that are so strongly in favor of this vacancy tax measure might step forward and show by good example, their strong belief in this measure, by being the first to open their homes to those in need of inexpensive housing. I cannot see any disadvantage to this approach and hope that it is somehow incorporated into the vacancy tax regulations.

Of course, anyone with a spare bedroom or two that does not comply and willingly offer their unused rooms to the public should certainly be given the gentle incentive to do so by assessing a yearly tax in the amount of say, $2500 a year. These fees can be collected and used for the purposes of affordable local housing in a manner similar to which the vacancy tax revenues would also be used.

I believe that this approach is much more sensible and would in fact result in many more opportunities for housing solutions in the area that are both local and affordable.

- Doug Pentair
South Lake Tahoe