Many rural places, especially those desired by second-home owners and retirees, are challenged to provide affordable and adequate housing for local working families, according to new research released by the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire.
“Though vacant housing is plentiful in rural areas – in New England 29 percent of rural housing units are vacant – it is not necessarily available,” the researchers said. “Three-quarters of New England’s rural vacant housing units are designated for seasonal, recreational or occasional use, while just 3.5 percent are available for rent.” | Read More at NHBR
The New Media Militia 
Boy did this hit a sore spot. Once again there’s that mantra again; tax dollars for subsidies fixes all problems.
Consider asking landowners and landlords why seasonal rents are preferred? May be that the state places the legal and financial burden on the owner to remove problem tenants who claim the rent their residence. Economics 101 in play here. Leave the place empty for 6 months, less $6,000 and have appreciative return guests. Or try for 3-4 months to evict a non paying tenant, one month to fix and pay for their damages plus the court expenses = $6K-$8k loss. And now start all over again? How about a complaint system where mandated weekly rent payments are escrowed until issue is settled, cost are paid 50/50 of tent/owner. Other wise we now have to talk about recouping in smallclaims, yeah right! How did I finally learn how to get and keep great tenants who are still friends 15 years later? By not following CT rental laws and made personal contracts which had nothing to do with renting a residence. State involved = trouble and abuse. Don’t even get me started on falling for HUD renters running daycare, and other cash business on my property even though I had decent single mothers who did not abuse HUD subsidies.