"You must be very popular."

This is what people most often say to me upon learning I represent short-term rental (STR) operators; referring to the mounting divide between anti-STR and pro-STR attitudes.

"Oh yes," I usually respond with a smirk. "When I walk into a room, I'm either getting bear-hugged or sucker-punched."*

I try to make light of the hate emails and ireful confrontations I have received since founding the Vermont Short Term Rental Alliance--a community referred to as "VTSTRA" (pronounced: VEE-strah)--in 2021. But in all honesty, angry and hateful messages scare me. When people yell at me, it makes me cry. (Am I just a big baby or do other people react the same way?)

Over the years, I have learned to be calmer and less emotional in my reactions to aggressive disagreement. And I have learned that there are "good" and "not so good" ways to talk about short-term rentals with someone who isn't part of the STR community.

These types of tough and complex conversations are happening somewhere everyday. Although difficult, they are essential. For us to get anywhere as a community, a society, a species, we have to be able to listen to one another and then make a choice to agree or disagree with respect. Key words: with respect.

I'm often asked how I handle these confrontations, so I'm sharing these approaches I've found to be effective when talking about short-term renting with those who passionately oppose it.

First, Understand Their Side of the Story

It's impossible to understand another person's perspective without knowing what they've been through. So first, ask. Instead of starting with your own assumptions, dig into the reasons behind the other person's position. Ask why. Then listen. Really listen. And keep digging into the 'why's until you understand the source of all the pain points, motivations, and intentions. Chances are you may find commonalty in some underlying struggles, fears, or desires.

Once you build a foundation made of a shared understanding of the problem, only then can you have a productive discussion.

A Vermont realtor once accused me of creating the "bear problem" in Stowe. (By "me" she really meant a neighbor of hers). She came in hot and insistent that I wasn't doing anything to prevent this so shutting down STRs was the only solution. I listened to her for a long time, before asking a simple question: will you help me?

I admitted that our organization (run entirely by volunteers at the time) hadn't been able to do enough pro-active education yet, and that we needed help.

Then her ideas began flowing and we parted ways with a plan, not pain.

During our discussion, I never told her she was wrong. I never told her she was right. I listened and then offered a way for us to address the issue by working together.

Confirm You're Speaking the Same Language

The STR realm is chock-full of terms and names with multiple meanings and various interpretations--some legal, some not. It's critical to get on the same page when using terms like Short-Term Rental, Long-Term Rental, Lodging, Airbnb, Vrbo, Vacasa, Affordable Housing, Off-site/On-site Host, etc.

I've often found that some people hold anti-STR sentiment because they've misunderstood what Vacasa does (thinking they buy & own properties, when they actually only provide management services) or because they weren't aware of the existing regulations that already apply to an STR versus a Lodging Establishment.

I've been told by an elected official in Vermont, "I don't mind the short-term rentals, it's the Airbnbs I don't like." ... [insert scratching head emoji]....Clearly, this person didn't understand Airbnb, as this statement makes no sense in reality.

If someone uses an industry term or a colloquialism, stop and confirm everyone is aligned on its meaning and contextual use.

Be Inquisitive, Not Accusatory

Providing information and data from an unbiased source is essential for supporting a statement of "fact". If a person is claiming something to be a "fact" that you know not to be true, ask for their source instead of offering a rebuttal. This invites a discussion about information sources, contextual implications, and anecdotal versus empirical evidence.

"You people. You're the problem." A Vermont Senator said to me with her finger inches from my face upon our first introduction.

(Hi, it's nice to meet you, too).

It's hard to have a conversation that starts with an accusation.

No one should ever presume their side of an argument is "right" or flawless. We all need to start acknowledging that multiple realities can be true at once. There are outliers in every dataset and exceptions to every rule. Everything has an impact on something. Nothing is ever perfect. Rule-breakers and freeloaders exist.

To quote economist, Thomas Sowell: "There are no solutions, only trade-offs."

We can, however, work to align on a few fundamental facts and then agree to compromise on what the future should look like. That will lead to productive conversations that produce reasonable outcomes that do the least amount of harm possible to all parties.

In closing, no one wants to feel like they're going to get sucker-punched when they walk into a room. No one likes being yelled at or accused of something they didn't do. No one likes having their feelings or opinions discounted or ignored.

Let's bring the volume down a notch so we can actually hear each other.

Footnote: *I have never actually been physically assaulted over STRs (at least not yet).