In Talbot County, short-term housing rentals are a hot topic, to say the least. Are they a boon for fueling a $300 million tourism economy, or a bust for compromising the charm and character of its small towns?
New regulations proposed by Councilmember Lynn Mielke aim to tighten rules on STRs, but opponents argue they’re the solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. With a critical Planning Commission meeting looming on July 2, residents and officials are divided, even amongst themselves.
The debate and proposed revisions
Since 2018, Talbot County’s Short Term Rental Review Board, the only one of its kind in Maryland, has overseen STRs with strict rules: owners must notify neighbors within 1,000 feet by certified letter, provide 24/7 contact information, and address complaints via a hotline.
Last year, 164 licenses were issued, up only slightly from 157 in 2018 after a temporary rise during the pandemic years. Yet Mielke, joined by Council Vice President Peter Lesher, introduced amendments in April to strengthen oversight, citing concerns about neighborhood integrity.
The proposals, publicly debated at a crowded May 7 public hearing and again at a June 24 work session, include:
- Extending the minimum stay for non-primary residences from three to seven days, potentially forcing weekend renters to pay for a full week;
- Requiring a working landline for emergency and complaint responses, despite their near-obsolescence;
- Dividing licenses into two categories, one for primary residences, and another for investment properties, and limiting density to one STR per 500 or 1,000 feet, depending on zoning; and
- Mandating owners log all visitors, including themselves, in rental properties.
The July 2 meeting promises to be a showdown, as dozens of property owners, residents, and business advocates are expected to weigh in.
Preserving neighborhoods or stifling tourism?
Mielke argues the changes protect Talbot’s small, historic neighborhoods. “We’re trying to preserve the integrity of residential areas, especially older ones,” she told The Spy. “The existing regulations aren’t working.”
Tilghman resident Leslie Steen, a retiree from Washington, D.C., agrees. “I love knowing my neighbors, talking over the fence, relying on them,” she said with a pinch of concern about living close to strangers. “Over the last few years, we have been losing our neighborhoods to short-termers. I have four within a thousand feet of my house.”
But is this fear grounded? Cindy Reichart, vice chair of the review board, says the data doesn’t jibe with claims of rampant STR growth. With only a tiny net increase over six years and just 10 unresolved complaints during the same period, she argues, “Folks are working together, and the current rules are effective.”
Opponents: Regulations already suffice to say the least
STR owners and business leaders call the proposals an overreach. Review board chairman Keith Watts, owner of two licensed STRs, dismisses worries about rowdy renters and unmitigated noise.
“We invest heavily in licenses, and the last thing we want is loud music or bad behavior,” Watts said. The fact that few complaints reach the board suggests neighbors and owners have had success to resolve any issues informally. In cooperation and sometimes competition with one another, owners work hard to provide the best possible experience for their guests.
The proposed visitor log requirement drew particular incredulity from owners. At the last meeting, STR owner Kevin Hartmann called it “excessive and intrusive,” questioning what possible benefit it might have. The landline mandate also puzzles critics, as an Easton Emergency Services dispatcher confirmed responders can locate calls from cell phones without issue.
Even Lesher, a co-sponsor of the bill, questions the seven-day minimum stay. “STRs are mostly a weekend business, which means 52 rentals a year at most,” he said. “This rule doesn’t do anything to minimize their impact.”
Lesher said he supports tighter oversight and called out the review board’s leniency, noting it approves nearly all applications, often dismissing “neighbor concerns.”
Still, opponents argue the existing system, with its notification letters, hotline, and rigorous code compliance, already strikes the proverbial balance between community concerns and tourism benefits.
Tourism’s big impact vs. local concerns
There is no question the county thrives on tourism, with the Waterfowl Festival alone drawing 20,000 visitors. The industry contributes an estimated $300 million in annual revenue to the county.
The availability of STRs plays a big role in boosting tourism, says Chamber of Commerce President Amy Kreiner. “They attract visitors who shop locally, dine out, and support small businesses,” she said. The Talbot Vacation Advocates agree, calling the proposals a real threat to the lodging industry and its economic benefits.
Yet some residents, many late-in-life arrivals themselves, yearn to preserve Talbot’s rural charm of their neighborhoods. Susie Hayward, Director of Government Affairs at the Mid Shore Board of Realtors, sees the regulations as a second attempt to discourage STRs after 2018’s rules failed to curb them.
“Homeowners have a right to rent, just as neighbors have a right to peace,” Hayward said. “But they don’t have the right to choose who lives next door.”
Where do we go from here?
The debate reflects a deeper, intractable tension: how do officials balance Talbot’s tourism-driven economy with its small-town character? Are STRs a genie let out of the bottle, or a natural part of a hospitality-friendly county?
Data suggesting minimal disruption hasn’t mitigated heartfelt fears of change. At the upcoming meeting, the Planning Commission must weigh these concerns against the economic benefits of STRs; it has its work cut out for it. Advocates on both sides of the issue will undoubtedly come out en masse to make their case as the Commission formulates its recommendations for the full Council.
It should be an interesting meeting on Wednesday morning.
Write a Letter to the Editor on this Article
We encourage readers to offer their point of view on this article by submitting the following form. Editing is sometimes necessary and is done at the discretion of the editorial staff.