...And in June, the Little Rock Board of Directors overwhelmingly adopted common-sense regulations for short-term rental properties, including requiring annual inspection fees, the installation of smoke alarms and carbon monoxide detectors, and proof of insurance. Other cities, including Hot Springs, also have put in place rules to protect local residents and guests at short-term rental properties. State lawmakers should not stand in the way of local leaders doing what’s right for their communities.

 

There is no dispute that property owners should have the right to legally rent their homes to earn extra income. But there need to be safeguards in place to ensure safety standards and prevent artificial inflation of housing costs. State Rep. Brit McKenzie, R-Rogers, the sponsor of the bill that ultimately failed to advance in the House committee, claimed to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette that “short-term rentals are a way for your neighbor, your auntie, or your cousin to generate some income.”

 

...Without proper oversight, online vacation rental behemoths like Airbnb and Vrbo are effectively allowed to operate lodging businesses in the form of short-term rentals without being required to pay the same taxes and follow the same regulations as hotels. That’s why all lodging businesses should be subject to the same rules to ensure a level playing field where competition can thrive.

"I am absolutely thrilled to share the incredible impact of our recent Zoom meeting with Taran Patel, Managing Principal of A-1 Hospitality Group and ATFA Academy sponsor!" Ashwin Joshi, founder and CEO of AFTA, said in a LinkedIn post.

 

"Taran's wisdom and experiences were nothing short of exceptional, leaving our youth entrepreneurs motivated and ready to take on the world! 🌍✨ His generosity went beyond words as he extended an open invitation to visit their corporate office on Okanogan Avenue, Kennewick, and tour their fantastic properties."

An arbitrator ruled that Choice Hotels International Inc. is liable to a Franchisee hotel owner for three breach-of-contract claims by finding that Choice Hotels violated terms of its own franchise agreements, including promising volume discounts for products and services for the benefit of Franchisees that Choice Hotels never negotiated or delivered.

 

In a rare public decision, an arbitrator faulted Choice Hotels for three separate breaches of contract regarding its franchising agreement with Highmark Lodging, LLC, a North Dakota company, owned by a member of AAHOA, the Asian American Hotel Owners Association. The arbitrator concluded that Choice Hotels had failed to negotiate and deliver volume discounts from vendors that supply products to Franchisees; redirected funds earmarked for the benefit of Franchisees to instead solicit new buyers of a franchise; and failed to pass along a volume discount for cybersecurity services.

 

Choice Hotels is one of the largest hotel companies in the world, with more than 7,000 hotels operating under brands such as Quality Inn, Econo Lodge, and Comfort Inn & Suites. In June 2020, a group of Franchisees sued Choice Hotels in federal court alleging numerous complaints against the company’s operations and programs. The Franchisees asserted that Choice Hotels failed to fulfill promises regarding financial benefits and the costs of the franchise relationship for Franchisee hotel owners. The following year, the court ordered that the claims must be arbitrated separately by each Franchisee. The Highmark Lodging case is one of four “test” arbitrations arising from the federal action.

 

Following an eight-day arbitration, the arbitrator ruled in favor of Highmark Lodging on three grounds: Choice Hotels breached the franchise agreement by 1) failing to negotiate and deliver volume discounts from vendors that supply products to Franchisees, despite statements in Choice Hotels’ procurement services and marketing materials, in its Franchise Disclosure Document (FDD), and made at CHOC (Choice Hotels Owners Council) committee meetings and conferences that Choice Hotels was obtaining volume discounts by leveraging its size, scale, and distribution to reduce Franchisees’ costs for goods and services; 2) utilizing funds earmarked for the benefit of current Franchisees to instead pay “Key Money” to solicit new buyers of a franchise; and C) not passing along a volume discount for Crowdstrike cybersecurity services to Franchisees.