Calling all lovers of, frequent travelers to, or inhabitants of Venice who feel called to to sign. It's a petition (created by a local group called 40xVenezia) to protest new, terribly irresponsible revisions in the lodging laws. For more details or to sign the petition, see the 40xVenezia English version, , the petition itself, , or the post on my blog.
Help sustain the "local culture" so many visitors want to experience!
(Mods: if this post isn't appropriate, please revise or remove accordingly. )
I've signed - I fully agree with what they (and you on your blog) say about it all.
(On a personal note: Philippa signed up last night for the marathon in Oct, so we'll be over for a few days then. I was getting worried: this had looked like being the first year since 2000 when I hadn't managed a short trip to Venice. But all is well now...)
Jonathan
Posts: 2780 | Location: Stroud, UK | Registered: 18 November 2001
I've signed - I fully agree with what they (and you on your blog) say about it all.
(On a personal note: Philippa signed up last night for the marathon in Oct, so we'll be over for a few days then. I was getting worried: this had looked like being the first year since 2000 when I hadn't managed a short trip to Venice. But all is well now...)
Jonathan
I also would like to sign but is there an english version, embarassing my italian is very rudimentary. Not sure which box to check and there is a box to fill in?
Hijack, the Marathon is fabulous! My favorite Urban race. Very well organized. We did it on our Honeymoon in 93. RR
Originally posted by Lou: I'm sorry for being so dumb, but I do not understand what this is all about......Could someone please explain it in simple terms?
I'll sign the petition because I broadly agree with it, but feel that the damage has already been done.
And here is the problem, for me (Apologies if slightly political): I tend to be quite left wing politically, but I realise that for a hotel to be able to buy an annex, or a B&B owner to buy a large property, some resident of Venice has to be willing to sell to them.
If it is a decision of Venetians not to sell, then so be it, but otherwise you are surely trying to impose how, when and to whom a property owner can sell.
I am slightly arguing against my own convictions here because I loved Venice, and would hate to see it deteriorate further into a giant theme park.
TimW
Posts: 800 | Location: Hampshire, UK | Registered: 28 March 2005
Originally posted by Robert Rainey: Yes there is an english version but when you click on sign it leads you to an Italian page which requires checking boxes filing in blanks etc. RR
Yes, it seems the "English version" is only an explanation of the situation. The "sign the petition" page seems to be only in Italian.
________________ When life gives you lemons, make limoncello.
It is very confusing. To sign it, go the the page as indicated at the bottom, then click on the banner that says Venezia non è un albergo which takes you to the Italian version of the original page. There you will see a button that says FIRMA. Click on it and it takes you to a sign up. First name, last name, email, then skip to CAP which is your postal code. Click that you live on solid earth, unless you do live in Venice, in which case you ought not to be reading me. Click on the button Firma, then that you accept the terms and you are done. You do not have to fill out anything on the next page as it is all optional. Ignore or close the ensuing pages.
HERE is the link to sign directly. It is in Italian.
Required fields are name, last name, and e-mail (which will be divulged to no one), and postal/zip code. Cell phone is optional; as is whether that you reside in "terraferma" (as Judith noted). Feel free to add a comment in English.
You must check the last two boxes to submit your signature. These paragraphs (or some version of them) are pretty standard when signing Italian things online. The first says
that you have read the above, that you are not a minor, and that they can use your information provided for internal use and for whatever it takes to effectuate the signing of the petition. They will NOT be passing it around, however.
The second says this is your opinion (not that of firmiamo.it) and that you assume all responsibility for it.
I've seen so many cases where people had a good thing going, then ruined it by getting greedy, by trying to make things bigger, by trying to squeeze every possible dollar out of it. It's easy to make changes that spoil the balance that produced the "good thing" in the first place.
So it could be with Venice. By greatly increasing the available lodging you tend to lower the price of lodging, bringing in more tourists who can stay longer and spend more money. You end up losing what charm is left as floods of people crowd in to a limited space. And as was said, you lose the authentic locals who make Venice a true Italian city.
Terrible idea. Americans are famous for "killing the goose that laid the golden egg", living only for the present rather than looking to the long term. I had always though Europe, having learned lessons long ago, had moved beyond such shortsightedness.
________________ When life gives you lemons, make limoncello.
To address Tim's point in what I hope is a non-political manner, all zoning imposes restrictions on property development on property owners.
The petitioners here aren't asking to outlaw the sale of property, as far as I can see. They are saying that whoever buys (or owns) a residential property should not then be allowed to convert it to non-residential use. This is really no different than the covenants of almost all American suburbs (for one example), which forbid boarding houses, or conversions from single family dwellings into multi-family occupancy, etc.
What isn't clear from what I've looked at so far is what kind of financial compensation the petitioners can give the "over 40" elderly who currently own property that has a huge market value because of its potential for commercial development, but minimal value if put on the market as a family residential property. I suspect these elderly are income-poor but asset-rich and want to sell their one asset -- and the only or best buyers are hotels.
The other problem I see is that petitioners acknowledge that there are already hundreds of people illegally renting rooms in Venezia to short-term tourists. Eradicating the "black market" in illegal rentals is probably impossible. Bringing all these rooms into the regulatory system has real social benefits, including the ability to subject these rentals to taxes, as well as make sure they comply with safety and environmental regulations, etc.
In support of the petitioners, what's most disturbing to me is the apparent giveaway to existing hotels to annex new property as it comes on the market. In America, that would violate anti-trust laws, I'm guessing, and I wonder if it doesn't violate at least one of the 10 trillion EU regulations as well. It's so anti-competitive.
)
