Well for me, I don’t care whether short term or long term lessors are a nuisance. I merely indicate that by purchasing a property in SD (after any zoning is in place), a buyer has given up rights by choice for the city to enforce it’s municipal code. In this particular case, we are talking about short term rentals – but why limit the discussion there. By your line of thinking, anyone should be able to build anything anywhere. I could just build a 30 story apartment complex next to a cottage home. A buyer could have just bought in Houston where there is no zoning.
If they want to change it, then get a campaign to change the municipal code or sue the city and have the Supreme Court determine if the 5th Amendment or 14th Amendment is more important.
Technically the Constitution 5th Amendment doesn’t rule on acceptable use of the property, just that government cant take property without compensation.
Personally I’m not for/against because I see arguments both ways – haven’t done the tradeoff analysis.
But, I think the city is unfairly punishing owners that followed the city regulations to operate a short term rental.
