“For existing rooms in existing houses” was the common refrain at the Sag Harbor Village Board meeting Tuesday night, when a resolution allowing short-term room rentals in owner-occupied residences was unanimously approved.
The resolution calls for a cap of 50 housing units in the village that can qualify for this new policy. It also stipulates that the rental period must be no longer than 14 days and that the homeowner must also be on the premises during that time.
The village’s existing rental registry requirements still apply, but the code will now be updated to include “transient rentals” of 14 days or less that had previously been prohibited.
Before its adoption, John Ellsworth, a senior partner at the Nelson, Pope & Voorhis engineering and consulting firm, presented an environmental review of the resolution. This assessment took the potential environmental impacts of local laws into consideration, resulting in either a “negative declaration,” indicating no significant effects on the natural surroundings, or a “positive declaration,” indicating the opposite.
Mr. Ellsworth’s report concluded that the new short-term rental law will have little to no major impact on the environment, as there will be no new construction needed. Within the 18 parameters that the form considers, however, he said there may be a few aspects that have a slight effect, such as additional sewage, additional car trips and the need for parking, a small increase in energy and noise, and the potential for increased activity on residential properties.
“The main basis of the conclusion,” Mr. Ellsworth said, “is that there will be no significant impact, as this is primarily geared toward existing houses with existing rooms.”
When it came time for public comments, Lisa Stenson Desamours, president of the Sag Harbor Hills Improvement Association, raised a question concerning a map in the presentation. “It was indicated that the cap of 50 reflects 2.5 percent of the 2,000 housing units within the village, which includes our district,” one of the village’s historically Black beachfront communities, Ms. Stenson Desamours said. “Yet the map of the village did not.”
She added that she “saw our district on the map, but the outline had excluded it.”
Mr. Ellsworth clarified the outlined portion of the map, which had been taken from the village’s own website, indicated just the historic district. He explained the new resolution would be implemented village-wide.
“The red outline is not the limitations of this,” Deputy Mayor Ed Haye added.
After Ms. Stenson Desamours spoke — she was the only one, as many had shared comments during the initial hearing — the village board closed the public hearing and voted in favor of the resolution.
It will go into effect in 30 to 60 days, according to Elizabeth Vail, the village attorney, “when it comes back from the Secretary of State.”
A Slight Budget Modification
Tuesday’s village board meeting began with Charles Bruschi, the village treasurer, clarifying the details of a budget modification resolution for the 2022-23 fiscal year.
During an audit of that year, which is still in progress, Mr. Bruschi was notified that the village had overspent its approved general-fund budget by more than $2.9 million. This was because certain expenditures had been approved by the village board after the budget was adopted that spring, he said.
An additional $50,000 was also approved specifically for the sewer budget, though the audit for this area is also not yet complete. Mr. Bruschi said he expects the additional cost to be between $20,000 and 30,000.
The village did have money available in its accounts to cover the changes.
“Both the concept as well as the expenditure have been approved, but we haven’t created the paperwork to actually adjust our budget,” Mr. Bruschi said in explaining that the modification is necessary as the budget must reflect what was spent during that fiscal year. He fielded many questions from the board and assured them that “it’s a formality, but it’s a very important formality.”
The board ultimately voted unanimously in favor of the budget update, thanking Mr. Bruschi for his clarifications.
