Dogs or no dogs - Auburn short term rentals

Editorial by Susan Bolt

Imagine if the City of Auburn passed an ordinance banning dog ownership—but only in certain neighborhoods. What if your neighbor across the street could legally own a dog, but you could not? You’d likely call it what it is: unfair, arbitrary, and a violation of your property rights.

Yet this is precisely the logic behind Ordinance #3288, which the Auburn City Council passed to ban short-term rentals (STRs) in some residential neighborhoods while allowing them in others. The reasons cited—noise, trash, and unpredictable visitors—are concerns that could just as easily be applied to dogs. But instead of addressing specific issues through existing ordinances, the city drew lines on a map and stripped some homeowners of their ability to use their property as they see fit.

This ordinance creates two classes of residents—those who are allowed to rent their homes short-term and those who are not—based solely on what side of an arbitrary boundary they live on. It’s a textbook example of government overreach and a direct violation of equal property rights.

Most STR owners are responsible, and most guests are peaceful visitors. Just like with dog ownership, when problems arise, the city already has tools in place: noise ordinances, littering laws, and nuisance enforcement. There was no need to override property rights with a sweeping ban.

The Council must reconsider this flawed ordinance. If we wouldn't tolerate banning pets in parts of the city, we shouldn’t tolerate banning STRs either.

Equal rights should mean just that—equal, for every homeowner in Auburn.

Sincerely,

Susan Bolt

Auburn, Alabama