Opinion: Banning Investor-Owned Airbnbs Is A Good Start. It’s Not Enough

By Lindsey (Eichler) Tengatenga

When my family moved to Ward 24 (aka Edgewood) in 2014, we were renters. Like most neighbors, we were drawn to a community defined by diversity, affordability, and a deep commitment to making room for people.

Today, that commitment is being tested. With more outside developers and absentee landlords, there are not enough affordable units or clear pathways to homeownership for longtime tenants. That is why I support the push to ban investor-owned short-term rentals through the proposed Airbnb bill. It is a good start, but we need a comprehensive approach to affordability.

Compared to HUD Fair Market Rent and what people actually earn, housing is a severe and growing burden. Connecticut faces a shortage of more than 93,000 affordable and available homes for extremely low-income households, and 73 percent of those renters are severely cost-burdened. Statewide, 50 percent of renters are cost-burdened compared to 26 percent of homeowners, with 119,000 households paying more than half their income on housing.

That burden is rising fast. Average rents increased $450 per month from 2020 to 2025, rising 3 percent from 2024 to 2025 while the national average declined. In New Haven-Meriden, HUD’s 2-bedroom Fair Market Rent rose from $1,407 in 2020 to $1,869 in 2025. To afford it, a worker needs $35.42 per hour, yet the average renter earns $22.69, and a full-time minimum-wage worker can afford only $944 per month.

In Edgewood, that math hits hard. Eighty-five percent of residents are renters, consistent with DataHaven’s finding that New Haven has only 28 percent homeownership (72 percent renter-occupied) and low-income neighborhoods as low as 21 percent homeownership, with citywide estimates at 72.0 percent renter-occupied. Compounding the burden is a dismal reality that nearly one in four city residents lives in poverty.

My family navigated the path to homeownership because we had stable employment, public homeownership programs, and friends who helped us understand the process. We also rented in an owner-occupied home with affordable, fixed rent for five years that allowed us to save. Those advantages are not available to everyone. Recognizing both vulnerability and privilege, we chose a single-family home large enough for our family and for others. Over six years, students, artists, organizers, faith leaders, and neighbors in transition have stayed with us — some a few nights, others for nearly a year. Home-sharing for us has not been a business, but a way to create community. The exchange has been less about money than sharing daily upkeep, sometimes as simple as baking cookies together.

This small example of home-sharing reflects a long tradition in Ward 24, and indeed many other examples existing in our city’s history. In the 1800s, Trinity on the Green, where I worship with my family, helped establish transitional housing on Norton Street. Today it continues that legacy as a recovery transition home under new management. When I have spoken with longtime residents, they remember commune homes along Edgewood Avenue that provided affordability while fostering connection. From the vantage point of today, these were not departures from our neighborhood’s character. They were expressions of it.

The legislation recognizes an important distinction between investor-owned vacation rentals that remove housing from the residential market and owner-occupied home-sharing that allows residents to remain in their homes while preserving neighborhood character. The ordinance wisely prohibits vacation rentals while protecting responsible home-sharing. But passing this ordinance alone will not solve our housing challenges. The larger conversation we need to have in neighborhoods like Edgewood is how to make housing choices accessible and affordable while balancing a housing stock shortage. 

We must confront the reality that rising rents are forcing families to make impossible choices. We should be willing to discuss stronger tenant protections, rental stabilization strategies, and policies that help long-term residents remain in the neighborhoods they helped build.

We also need to strengthen the housing continuum for individuals in recovery and those emerging from housing instability. Recovery houses provide an essential service, but recovery cannot be the final destination. Residents deserve a clear pathway into permanent, stable housing. That means stronger partnerships with the Coordinated Access Network (CAN), greater investment in diversion programs that prevent homelessness before it occurs, and more effective coordination between housing providers, recovery programs, and community organizations. It also means limiting opportunity for out-of-state developers, who are taking advantage of financial benefits available to those operating recovery houses, in turn letting these homes fall into disrepair and leading to unsafe living environments.

Too often, I have watched families with housing vouchers move from apartment to apartment because of discrimination, while others cycle between temporary arrangements and homelessness because there is no bridge to long-term stability. We can do better. Housing policy should not simply prevent homelessness. It should create belonging. That means making room for the intermediate solutions that help people remain connected to community, including conversations about how we use shared public spaces like Edgewood Park and how we reclaim blighted properties as pathways to stability, opportunity, and housing.

Ward 24 has always been a neighborhood that made room for people. From transitional housing to cooperative living arrangements to responsible home-sharing, our history teaches us that strong communities are built when we expand opportunity rather than close doors. 

If you’ve lived in Edgewood over the past decade, you’ve likely seen the increase in nice cars with out-of-state plates pull up to house showings making cash offers — dreams deferred for our own neighbors ready to establish roots and contribute to the vitality of our neighborhood. The proposed ordinance is a positive step because it protects housing from speculation while preserving community-based home-sharing. But it should also be the beginning of a broader conversation about affordability, housing stability, and pathways to permanent housing for our most vulnerable neighbors.

The question before us is larger than short-term rentals. It is whether the people who make New Haven what it is can continue to afford to call it home.

Lindsey (Eichler) Tengatenga is running to represent Ward 24 on the Board of Alders in the Nov. 10 special election.