HB 3848
Prohibits the use of assessed historic property as a vacation occupancy unless the property is the owner's primary residence.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
40%
Oppose
60%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill prohibits short-term rentals on properties designated as historic under Oregon law, unless the property is the owner’s primary residence. It specifically targets assessed historic properties, aiming to preserve their historical character. The bill amends existing Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) related to historic property classification and taxation. It also clarifies how taxes are assessed on properties that lose their historic designation.
Key provisions
- Short-term rentals are prohibited on assessed historic properties unless they are the owner’s primary residence.
- The bill amends ORS 358.487, 358.515, and 358.525 to implement these restrictions.
- Property owners of historic properties must include a preservation plan committing to specific expenditures in their application for historic designation.
- The State Historic Preservation Officer will determine if a property qualifies as historic and if it has lost its historic designation.
- Owners of historic properties must maintain property insurance equal to the replacement value of the property.
- Properties disqualified for historic designation will be subject to additional property taxes.
- The bill applies to properties classified as historic before, on, or after the effective date of the Act.
Who is affected
- Property Owners
- Short-term Rental Businesses
- Historic Property Owners
- Oregon Residents
- Local Governments (through property tax revenue)
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of the proposed legislation emphasize the need to protect historic neighborhoods and their community fabric from the negative impacts of short-term rentals. They argue that these rentals disrupt neighborhood dynamics, contribute to housing problems by reducing available housing stock, and increase costs for owner-occupied and traditional rentals. Additionally, they highlight concerns about safety risks, such as increased traffic and potential accidents, particularly in areas like Gaiety Hill Historic District where the density of short-term rentals poses a significant threat. By regulating or prohibiting short-term rentals in these sensitive areas, supporters believe it is possible to preserve historical significance and reduce damage risk while also addressing pressing housing concerns.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of HB 3848 express concerns that the legislation may infringe on individual rights and overstep government authority. They argue that the bill's language is vague, leaving room for abuse of power by government agencies, and that there is no clear evidence it will effectively address homelessness or housing issues. Many that the government should focus on providing resources and support rather than imposing new regulations, and that the bill adds unnecessary restrictions on homeowners' property rights. Additionally, some express concerns about taxes, government overreach, and potential unintended negative consequences for property owners, local economies, and historic preservation.