April 7, 2010 :: LPCC, Legislative

LPCC Responds to Proposed Vacation Rental Ordinance

For Immediate Release

Lincoln Park Chamber of Commerce Statement: Proposed Vacation Rental Ordinance
Vacation Rental Properties Serve Wide Population, Help Market Chicago

CHICAGO (April 7, 2010) – Chicago is a diverse city with international charm and visitors.  Helping welcome thousands of tourists each year from across the globe is the city’s equally diverse stock of hotels, motels, guest houses and other accommodations for visitors.  With this in mind, the Lincoln Park Chamber of Commerce (LPCC) is against the proposed Vacation Rental Ordinance and $500 per unit fee associated with it.

“The Lincoln Park Chamber of Commerce supports the provision of quality, unique options for Chicago’s visitors to maintain the city’s reputation as a shopping, dining and cultural destination on the international stage,” said Kim Schilf, LPCC President and CEO.  “The Vacation Rental operators of Chicago are active members of the community and offer a service like any other small business.

“High-quality, vacation rental-style homes are a respected and often sought after component of Chicago’s tourism business and lodging portfolio that draws a unique visitor to our City,” Schilf said.  “The Chicago Vacation Rental Owners Association (CVROA) is a key element of the tourism industry in the City and a respected business organization dedicated to providing quality, safe and legal establishments.  Businesses operating these unique rental units to tourists are both an asset to, and a marketing tool of, Chicago’s vibrant neighborhoods that are often lacking in adequate hotel rooms.”

CVROA has a record of operations extending back 25 years without an insurance claim, health and safety issue or complaint to the City of Chicago from guests or neighbors.  The LPCC does not see the need for regulation or licensing by the City beyond that already provided by the Landlords and Tenants ordinance and Chicago’s building codes.  A proposed $500 per unit fee to operate these facilities would lead to further businesses closing and more jobless claims.

“While we recognize that safety is a potential issue, and that enhanced city regulation may bolster the condition of many of these properties both inside and out,” Schilf continued.  “Unfortunately, this ordinance looks like another attempt at boosting revenue generation at the expense of our small business owners.”

# # #