Key Messages for Advocating Against STR Overregulation

• The proposed ordinance unfairly penalizes responsible STR operators while failing to address the root causes of complaints (e.g., noise, parking, and tax compliance).
• Existing regulations already require STRs to maintain business licenses and adhere to tax laws—additional permitting and oversight are redundant and bureaucratic.
• Most complaints come from unregistered STRs or those violating existing rules, not responsible hosts.
• Additional permits, fees, and regulations will mostly affect compliant operators rather than solving the real problems.
• Instead of blanket restrictions, enforcement should focus on identifying and penalizing bad actors.

• Homeowners should have the right to manage their property as they see fit, including renting it out short-term.
• STR owners prefer managing their own properties largely due to dissatisfaction with large rental companies.
• The ordinance creates unnecessary hurdles for owners, making it more difficult for them to generate income and maintain their properties.
• Requiring a licensed property manager discriminates against self-managing owners who already handle rentals responsibly.
• Requiring a licensed property manager will not improve service quality or enforcement 

• Requiring a property manager within a 30-mile radius unfairly excludes out-of-town property owners from managing their own investments.
• The mandate that non-owner local agents must be licensed by the SC Real Estate Commission benefits large management companies while pushing out independent operators.
• Small-scale, local entrepreneurs offering co-hosting services without traditional licenses will be forced out of business.

• Requiring an in-person response to STR-related issues within one hour is unrealistic given traffic conditions, emergency availability, and the fact that most issues can be handled remotely.
• Most STRs already have teams in place (cleaners, maintenance staff, security systems) to resolve problems efficiently.
• Hotels and long-term landlords are not held to similar response standards—this is an unfair burden on STR owners.

• Violations do not actually address the root causes of complaints (e.g., noise, parking, and tax compliance).
• Fines escalate aggressively, from $500 to $2,000 per violation, potentially forcing STR owners out of business for minor infractions.
• Meanwhile, illegal and non-compliant STRs may continue to operate under the radar without enforcement.

• Tourism significantly contributes to North Myrtle Beach's tax revenue through various streams. 
• In the fiscal year ending June 30, 2023, the city budgeted approximately $5.1 million in Accommodations Tax receipts.
• There are more than 2,400 active STR listings in North Myrtle Beach.
• Restrictive regulations could reduce STR availability, leading to fewer visitors and less revenue for small businesses.
• If STRs become too difficult to operate, investors may pull out, reducing local property values and tax revenue.
• Large management firms often prioritize profit over guest experience, which hurts the tourism industry’s reputation.

• Hiring a civilian enforcement team to manage STR complaints is an unnecessary expense and creates potential safety risks.
• Complaints involving noise or safety should be handled by law enforcement, not city-hired inspectors.
• STR operators who follow all rules could still be punished due to false complaints.

Rather than heavy-handed restrictions, the city could:

• Improve education and outreach to ensure STR owners and guests comply with current laws.
• Enforce existing licensing and tax rules rather than adding unnecessary permits.
• Use technology solutions (e.g., noise-monitoring devices, digital permits on rental platforms) to address complaints.
• Target non-compliant operators directly rather than imposing blanket regulations that hurt responsible hosts.

• The proposal that was workshopped was written by and favors large property management firms, creating a conflict of interest for city officials and local real estate firms.
• The city may face legal challenges from property owners arguing that the ordinance violates their rights to manage their own investments.
• Other cities that have imposed aggressive STR restrictions have faced backlash and economic downturns in their tourism sectors.