davis_square | Ward 5 alderman Courtney O'Keefe wants to ban couch surfing? (ETA: or maybe not...)

Besides the explanations Courtney has already posted on Twitter (it would just be a suggestion to landlords, and has nothing to do with the Bromfield Road fire), there's also the distinction between hosting people for free from sites like Couchsurfing, and charging people from sites like Airbnb. The Somerville Times article mixes this up.

Charging could raise issues with a lease/condo rules and even zoning (not that I agree with restricting it, but that's the state of things). Hosting for free is nobody's business besides the host, guest, and host's roommates.

Hosting for free may also involve the landlord - some leases have restrictions on how long guests can stay.

Hi Ron,

My Board of Aldermen submission asked the Communications Department to warn landlords about "couch surfing" as the issue was brought to my attention by a property owner on Highland Avenue who experienced her tenant participating in this without her knowledge or consent. During my description, I encouraged landlords to include language about "cough surfing" in their leases, but never said prohibit. Furthermore, I mentioned fires, but never mentioned the Bromfield incident and don't know why it was included in the article.

Should you want to see the discussion on this, you can go to the City's Meeting Portal where the Board of Aldermen videos are stored and watch beginning at the 48:08 mark (http://somervillecityma.iqm2.com/Citizens/SplitView.aspx?Mode=Video&MeetingID=1705&AgendaID=1612&FileFormat=pdf&Format=Agenda&MediaFileFormat=wmv). In full disclosure, I do not agree with tenants who participate in this without the approval of their landlords or the other renters in the building.

Edited 2013-09-19 19:02 (UTC)

Looks like you were a victim of bad reporting by the newly sold and rechristened Somerville Times. Not a good way for the "new" paper to start off!

(Still, I'd rather see the city encourage this activity instead of discouraging it.)

Edited 2013-09-19 19:10 (UTC)

As someone who has participated (both as host and as the surfer) in couch surfing for years locally and around the globe, couch surfing is a wonderful activity and really brings people together in a fantastic way.

Yes, this! I've met and stayed with fabulous people across the US.

I guess my landlord can have a say as to if it is permitted for me to have guests spend the night (especially if it's in the lease), but I don't think that everyone else who lives in my building should get a vote!

Indeed, what the heck is that about? And what about this bit?

“To this woman’s horror, she realized that not only was her address on there, but photographs of the front of the home, photographs of the inside of the home,” Alderman O’Keefe said.

Horror at the fact that the person you rented to chose to post photos of *their* home? What if they had just done that to show the world what a great place they lived in? Does the lease also say something about not posting pictures? Is she going to get on Google Streetview's case about the pictures of the front of the house and address there, too?

Certainly paid sublets like Airbnb are one thing, but I don't see how there can be language in a lease that forbids couchsurfing that doesn't also forbid a tenant from hosting a friend visiting from out of town for the weekend. Or my girlfriend.

I think you may be confusing AirBnB (people pay -- sometimes even for a couch) and Couch Surfing (which is a free social network -- like Facebook for travelers). The benefit of couch surfing is that if you are traveling to a new city, then you have the opportunity to meet with new people and stay in their homes. Surfers are vetted and get recommendations based on their interactions and friend networks.

When I was in New Delhi, I met several women who work at the US embassy there, I've also stay with Smith students and a Mt Holyoke student. I've hosted in my home traveling poets. It is a wonderful network I'd recommend highly to anyone with an adventurous spirit, and as a landlord in Somerville I would have zero problem with my tenants having couch surfers in my home.

I'm with Ron Newman that "warning" landlords about couch surfing makes it seem like there is a problem that needs fixing. Couch surfing is no different than having your friends brother come sleep on your couch while he's visiting schools. Hardly something to get worked up about.

Maybe join the network and host a surfer to see for yourself?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CouchSurfing and https://www.couchsurfing.org/‎

"In full disclosure, I do not agree with tenants who participate in this without the approval of their landlords or the other renters in the building."

I'd like to understand your position on "this" better. I'm not sure which "this" it is you do not agree with. Can you explain: Is your disagreement against collecting money for hosting people? Is it against hosting strangers for free? What level of involvement with the tenants house-guests do you think is appropriate and at what point does the landlord cross the line into inappropriate interference?

Again, I don't mean to bait, I just want to understand. I imagine your district has a lot of both home-owners and renters, so this seems like a helpful discussion for everyone. Thanks!

That is a good point, however, the photographs were posted on a website that matches hosts with potential "couch renters." My constituent, the homeowner, did not authorize her home to be included on such a site.

Was this on couchsurfing.org , or airbnb.com , or some other website?

It's not the homeowner's decision whether or not to "authorize" such a thing -- if she's renting out a property, she has given up some rights. If you rent out a house to someone, you are allowing them to make it *their* home, to a large extent.

Standard rental agreement from the state actually says you can't sublease without permission. I think renting your couch for money actually qualifies as subleasing, at least it would in my mind. Having someone stay for free though would be a different issue. I don't think anything in the standard rental agreement says you can't do this, at least for a short period of time (extended visitors are usually prohibited by the agreement).

Oh sure, rental of space within the house is definitely a subleasing situation. I'm just talking about the notion that a homeowner could have any right to prohibit a tenant from posting pictures of the house. Short-term, unpaid couchsurfing is a middle ground, but that's not what I was referring to -- should have been more clear about that.

Oh, I agree with you on that. I've never seen a lease that prohibits taking or posting pictures. In case anyone is interested in what is in a typical lease, here is the one mass housing offers: http://www.masshousinginfo.org/resources/download/landlord/property_management/Lease%20form.pdf?item_id=98098

Nothing about posting photos, some stuff about having people stay for extended periods of time and subleasing.

I know you're not a mind reader and you probably didn't get much more info from your constituent than you're sharing here, but I'm still boggled at what horrible thing she imagined might happen as a result of these pictures being posted. Identity theft? Swarms of deadbeats showing up on her rented doorstep? The world knowing of her bad taste in interior design?

So what? Whether a renter displays pictures of his/her home is none of the landlord's business.

Does a homeowner have any actual legal right to restrict what photos a tenant posts of a house? This is a real question, not baiting. But I'm guessing the answer is No?

I own a two-family and live in one apartment of it. I can't stop anyone who walks down the street from taking a photo of my house and posting it with a caption saying "look at these tacky Somerville Christmas decorations." I can't stop Google from taking a picture of my house and listing its address. So how could I rightfully tell my tenants they couldn't also post a picture of the outside of the house? And I take pictures inside my apartment featuring (naturally) my cats, and I post these pictures on line. Can I rightfully tell my tenants they can't post pictures, or they need my permission?

I seriously think this is a case of one of your constituents being upset about something that it not really her place to cast judgment on.

The Somerville News famously messes up all kinds of facts, so I'm not surprised if they messed up in this case, too. But it sounds like someone got kicked out of an apartment for having more house-guests than the landlord was comfortable with, and that sounds like a tenants' rights issue to me (assuming the story was even vaguely accurately reported). You can't stand up for your constituents when they're in the wrong, just because they complained to you.

Can you share the URL of the site that she claimed her house was on? (Not the link to her specific house, just the site)? I'm dubious of the whole "renting" claim. I think it's a conflation of airBNB and Couchsurfing.

Edited 2013-09-20 05:43 (UTC)

One thing about your statement I find distressing is that, by your wording that you only seem to consider the homeowner "your constituent". Presumably, the tenant was also in your ward, and would also be your constituent. Heck, it's not even assured that the landlord lives in your ward - you don't specify where they live, but for all we know, this is an absentee owner who lives out in the 'burbs.

Ward 5 alderman Courtney O'Keefe wants to ban couch surfing? (ETA: or maybe not...)

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject