During a recent government meeting, significant discussions emerged regarding proposed residency requirements for short-term rentals (STRs) on Nantucket. The advisory committee of nonvoting taxpayers expressed strong opposition to Article 2, which seeks to impose these requirements, citing potential legal challenges and constitutional concerns.

The committee highlighted that the proposed law could be deemed per se illegal unless it serves a legitimate local purpose that cannot be met through reasonable, non-discriminatory alternatives. They argued that the stated goal of reducing the number of STRs could be achieved through measures such as capping the total number of rentals, rather than imposing residency restrictions.

Town counsel Georgiou pointed out that while some proponents of Article 2 referenced the Massachusetts Attorney General's approval of a similar bylaw in West Tisbury, this approval did not consider federal constitutional issues, particularly the dormant Commerce Clause. The committee emphasized that the Attorney General's review is limited to state law compliance and does not typically assess federal implications.

As the meeting progressed, the advisory committee urged a no vote on Article 2, warning that the proposed residency requirements could lead to costly legal disputes for the town, with a high likelihood of losing such cases. The discussions underscored the complexities surrounding local regulations on STRs and the potential ramifications of discriminatory practices.