I’m writing about L.D. 436 (“Maine bill seeks restrictions on popular short-term home rentals,” April 2).

I’m a hardworking son, grandson and great-grandson of Aroostook potato pickers. Thanks to garnered inspiration and an amazing in-state education from the University of Southern Maine, I knew I wanted to pursue a graduate education.

However, being yet another Mainer lacking funds, I had to muster resourcefulness: I opened my self-constructed tiny house in Oxford County to travelers. Because of the success of my nontraditional home on Airbnb, I’m now enrolled at the University of New England, with reservations covering my property’s mortgage, insurance and taxes.

People don’t reserve my modest house for anything more than a weekend getaway, and when they do, they arrive willing to explore Maine’s western foothills with money to support local business.

They don’t want carpeting and wallpaper, nor electricity and plumbing. They want the rustic Maine experience that they’re leaving Boston or Barcelona to enjoy. In one year, I’ve met 93 guests from 22 states and nine countries; five are returning for repeat stays.

We are a state touting an “open for business” spirit, yet L.D. 436 prevents alternative, short-stay businesses from operating. Successful Airbnb yurts, bedrooms and backyard shanties are providing affordable retreats to meet the growing demand for inspiration and indulgence through others’ creativity – Maine creativity.

Having short-stay hosts comply with impractical, unaffordable rules will eliminate necessary, reliable income while ignoring visitor desires. What about paying a single licensing fee based on square footage and/or amenities?

What about making the inn regulations more inclusive? What about inns asking themselves “What can I do to change” rather than “What can I do to cut out the competition”?

I don’t have one right answer, but L.D. 436 is not one. C’mon, Vacationland. Surely you can do better than this.

Lon Cameron

Portland

Copy the Story Link