Dedham Holds An Unconventional Town Meeting

DEDHAM, MA - Dedham had a healthy debate about the lack of a codified town Airbnb policy at the four-hour Fall Town Meeting Monday night, held at the Dedham Health & Athletic Complex.

A unique site for a Town Meeting

This was the first indoor Town Meeting held since the beginning of the pandemic, and it was the latest one where Dedham residents had to adapt to a different setting.

Town Moderator Dan Driscoll thanked the Town Meeting Members for remaining committed to civic engagement despite the challenges of COVID-19.

"You've been asked twice to meet outside, once in August in the heat," he said. "Another time, we experienced a 300-person virtual town meeting despite power outages in the town. And now, for undoubtedly the first time in Dedham's history, we're meeting in a building that's big enough to park airplanes in."

A series of tennis courts was blocked off to become the floor for debate, lined with white chairs. Seating was arranged to accommodate people with different comfort levels due to the coronavirus rather than by precinct. Vaccinated Town Meeting members sat at the front on the right-hand side, while a general area for those who did not want to disclose their status could sit to the left. Unvaccinated members sat in a section toward the middle, while those who wanted to remain unmasked were asked to sit in the back.

Select Board member Jim MacDonald, who has extensive experience in planning events from the Fourth of July Esplanade concert to the Boston Marathon, reached out to the owners of the facility, Lloyd and Roberta Gainsboro, to request its use. The Gainsboros were honored with a plaque at the meeting's start for their donation.

"I had approached Lloyd and asked him if we could use the space," MacDonald said. "And he said he would be more than happy to. It was a big gesture on his part."

He noted the gigantic fans oscillating overhead, providing a safe indoor alternative to Town Hall for a gathering of this size.

The plaque partially read, "Your kindness provided a safe alternative to gather to conduct the important business of the town during these uncertain times."

Airbnb policy codification voted on - twice.

The article that sparked the most debate was Article 12, which asked Town Meeting to codify the current town policy of not allowing short-term rental housing such as Airbnbs. But there was confusion among Town Meeting members about what was being asked of them, even during the voting process. After clarifying it twice, a member called for a roll call vote, allowing the measure to be defeated by four votes.

John Bethany, chair of the Planning Board, explained that Airbnbs currently are not allowed in Dedham. However, Dedham has a permissive zoning policy, which lists all of the allowed uses. Because short-term rental units are not listed in the zoning code, they are prohibited by default. These rentals occur for less than 31 days in buildings that are not hotels, motels, bed and breakfasts or lodging house.

He explained that the article sought to add language to the zoning code that would specifically state what an Airbnb was and that its use is prohibited. Several Airbnbs exist in Dedham, but it is difficult to enforce the policy as it stands because owners ask to see where in the code they are strictly prohibited.

"Article 12 is not intended to promote debate or to discuss regulation of short-term rentals," Bethany stressed. "Article 12 proposes to simply put in writing the current status of short-term rentals here in Dedham."

However, there was a lengthy debate about why short-term rental policy has not been discussed previously.

The bylaw was requested by the town's Building Department, the zoning enforcement agency, in response to resident complaints, he continued.

"When asked by residents, 'Show me where it says I can't do an Airbnb?' the Building Department then has to explain permissive zoning," Bethany said, "and how if the bylaw doesn't say that you can do it, you can't. Property owners want to see it in writing, and who could blame them?"

He said that the town is "committed to holding public input forums gathering broad community sentiment," but he urged members to vote for Article 12's passage to make current policy enforcement easier. This could lead to a future non-binding ballot question.

Bob Loporto said that he has used Airbnbs around the country. He said he spoke with several current Airbnb owners in Dedham, who told him that they "wanted strict regulation."

"There's a middle ground here where we can find that all property owners end up happy," he said.

Michael Warren has lived in Dedham for 73 years, 52 years at his current address. Now he said he is thinking of moving because of the Airbnb operating next door.

He said he was never told by his neighbor that an Airbnb would be operating next door and called for regulations.

"The most pertinent thing for me is that I have a lot of neighbors that I don't know," he said of the short-term renters, 359 of whom left references over a five-year period. "There haven't been a lot of problems, but there have been some aggravations."

Jim Sullivan, the code enforcement inspector, said that Airbnb sites tell people to "check with your local city or town for further regulations."

"How many people working Airbnbs in Dedham have done that?" he asked. "If they had, they would have been given the answer that they are not allowed."

He feared that the next step would be for people who do not live in town to purchase homes to rent out rooms.

Lacey Mallett said she operates an Airbnb from her home and is Warren's neighbor.

"I've hosted over 350 reservations," she said. "And not once have I had to speak to any of my guests about anything disorderly."

"A little bit of this feels like I have to defend myself," she continued. "I don't think that the people operating Airbnbs are the problem."

The article required a two-thirds vote to pass. This could not be determined by a voice vote, so a standing vote was requested. However, twice during the standing vote, Driscoll was asked to explain the motion. The results were 121-89. There were 134 votes required for a two-thirds vote.

There was a call for a roll call vote because people were standing and sitting during the vote count. It was then determined that the motion failed by four votes. The final tally was 131-71,

"What's clear tonight is that we don't have two thirds on either side of the issue," Driscoll said.

Similarly, Article 13 called for the same codification regarding the rental of residential swimming pools. This passed by a two-thirds vote.