Editor,
Concerning the Independent’s article, “New B&Bs on suspension” (June 29), I lament the Eureka Springs City Council’s lack of basic fairness in banning future bed-and-breakfast establishments for a period of six months.
Who benefits directly from this decision to stop new competition? How about the already existing B&Bs and motels? Clearly, it is in the economic interest of those establishments to favor this moratorium at the expense of other establishments that may never see the light of day. But, is this decision morally acceptable in a free country that cherishes private property rights and free enterprise?
The Independent does not report much discussion of the fairness or morality of this issue at the Council meeting. As reported, the main argument in favor was alderman James DeVito’s: Too many B&Bs cause a lack of affordable housing.
Say what? I agree with alderman Mickey Schneider’s remark, as reported, “I don’t get it.” Do the aldermen now purport to dabble in the economic planning of Eureka Springs, with grandiose plans of “affordable housing,” ruling on private economic decisions in the best tradition of the old Soviet commissars? If so, we continue down the terrible, tyrannical slope where our government of laws sinks to the level of a government of men.
Ms. Schneider deserves our thanks for her reported spirited opposition to Mr. DeVito’s argument and the Council’s regrettable decision.
Alan Joseph Keck
I believe the moratorium on B&Bs in Eureka is the correct decision. This isn’t an issue about fair business practices, but more of survival and sustainable living in a residential community. As a former longtime resident, I personally applaud the decision and am happy for the residents and hard-working people. Thank you!