In the Ketchum article, they mentioned the killing blow was a strike down or repeal of some law related to short term rentals and occupancy rates overall. Once that was done away with, it was all systems go for insanity because it opened up more short term home rentals and Air BnBs. I've actually talked with Sean about how such could be avoided through governance, such as only X % of properties could be rentals or what have you, but seeing what happened with Ketchum...money will sway the government even when it's obvious what a blunder such change would cause.
I also recall something about there's only so much one can do to protect a home against things like being demolished to make way for a McMansion or such. It's up to the law to uphold the few places that allow for such protections, and it's not very often when money skirts that law that the damage can be or is undone. I know here, we have houses and other buildings that have been falling down for ages. So much so that's it become a burden on the town to reclaim some properties. As I've mentioned before, although we have a historical society, it has nothing to do with the houses at all. The property owners don't really suffer for not fixing up the homes. The most work the town has managed is the downtown area stuff which is mostly controlled by one older many who is a total slumlord. It's been very costly for them to try to get him to step up, and it's already cost the town three buildings that the city simply did not have funds to save after they legally took it from him after each became a hazard.
I'm curious to see how long it will take for these "shortages" to level out, and how far back to norm the prices might go or not.
I'm totally in agreement about what's going on not being sustainable. Time will tell when the bottom falls out.
