A short-term rental regulation was deemed unconstitutional in Austin. What does that mean for Albuquerque’s?

Last week, a federal judge ruled that a short-term rental regulation in Austin, Texas, was unconstitutional.

Austin is one of the many cities around the country — including Albuquerque — that has planned or is planning to regulate the industry, which includes vacation rentals like Airbnbs. The City of Albuquerque is currently drafting additional short-term rental regulations, which the City Council is set to discuss Aug. 21.

But what does the Texas ruling imply about the constitutionality of Albuquerque’s proposed regulations?

The answer may be: not much.

The Austin law at the center of the case required that in certain areas, the operator of a short-term rental must also use that property as a primary residence. According to court documents, a Houston couple took issue with the ordinance after they were unable to list their Austin home — which was not their primary residence — as a short term rental.

Albuquerque’s proposed amendment to the short-term rental ordinance does include a provision that all short-term rental properties in the city need a local manager who lives or is based within 20 miles of city limits.

The Texas ordinance was ruled unconstitutional on two grounds: that it discriminated against interstate commerce and was unfairly applied retroactively. The couple bought their house in 2014, before Austin’s 2016 ordinance was applied, but were still unable to license their rental.

As far as the Albuquerque regulation, owners outside city limits can still rent out their properties — so long as they employ a local manager. Also, the regulation has no “homestead” provision, which would require that a rental owner use the property as a primary residence.

And, each state has its own constitution. Denver currently enforces a similar regulation to the Austin ordinance.

The proposed Albuquerque regulation would also cap the number of short-term rentals at 1,800 and limit the number of properties per person to three. The legislation, which is aimed at protecting housing stock, could be modified before Aug. 21.

“We are working with the City Council on a solution that works best for our community and helps us make progress on our housing goals,” said Planning Department spokesperson Tim Walsh in an email. “This process includes considering what has or hasn’t (been) working in other cities similar to ours.”