Board Assertions

Claims by the DMMA management have evolved since rent restrictions were first proposed in July of 2017. At first, the Board claimed restrictions were needed to replace the repealed Scottsdale ordinance, which had set a 30-day minimum on rentals. The Scottsdale ordinance was never enforced and was ignored by the Desert Mountain Club. Later, claims about Scottsdale’s ordinance were dropped and replaced by allegations that “frat parties” at rented Desert Mountain Homes were disturbing the community. A comprehensive survey of 7,021 calls to Desert Mountain security could find no evidence of significant disturbances at rented homes. In fact, the rate of calls to security for homes offered on public sites such as Airbnb or VRBO is about half the rate of calls to security on homes never offered for rent. More recently the Board downplayed the tenant disturbance argument and shifted to warnings about problems that admittedly don’t exist but that might in the future. So we have to act now!

What follows is a comprehensive catalog of claims that have been made by DMMA, and a handful of community supporters, in an effort to garner support for the restriction and our responses to those claims.

What Are You Doing About DMHOC Part I What if Rent Restrictions Are Approved? We Have a Security Problem The Sherman Video Privacy Versus Exclusivity What’s Wrong At DM? Dennis Legere Home Exchanges Versus Rentals The Original 687 Objections We Must be Exclusive to Preserve the Brand

What Are You Doing About DMHOC Part II The Survey Put in Perspective DMMA’s Fundamental Responsibility Impact of Use Restrictions Our Villages and Rental Restrictions VRBO & Airbnb: Strangers Among Us The Cost of Enforcing Rent Restrictions The Scottsdale Ordinance No Longer Protects Us Can DMMA Solve the DM Club’s Problem