Vote - 16 in Favor of Supporting the Resolution, 3 Opposed

The Mission Beach Town Council supports Save San Diego Neighborhoods in its efforts to prohibit short-term vacation rentals based on the current municipal code in regard to visitor accommodations. Furthermore, the Mission Beach Town Council requests that the City of San Diego ordinance regarding visitor accommodations be fully and wholly enforced, that per the existing ordinance visitor accommodations be prohibited in residential zones. The Mission Beach Town Council will continue to to do all it can to promote and support the cultivation and preservation of a safe community. Discussion followed: John Thickstun of “Save San Diego Neighborhoods” led the discussion and answered questions. In summary, based on John Thickstun’s presentation at March’s Executive Board meeting (an excerpt of the Executive Board minutes is presented below). The discussion that preceded the vote touched on many of the topics in John Thickstun’s presentation to the Board including the fact that according to the San Diego Municipal Code, the current minimum rental period in residential areas is 30 days. There is no 7-day minimum rental period in residential areas. The idea here is to hold the City accountable to enforce its municipal code as a starting point for negotiations for amending the Code to reflect a minimal rental period of less than 30 days if needed.

Vote - 16 in favor of supporting the resolution, 3 opposed

Commercial businesses are buying up real estate and forming mini hotels sometimes called Short Term Vacation Rentals (STVRs) in neighborhoods that are zoned non-commercial, single family home use only. STVRs bring noise, reduced availability and more costly housing for San Diegans, overflowing trash cans, strangers in neighborhoods, drunken parties and other nuisances. • STVRs are “Visitor Accommodations" and are prohibited in residential zones. The definition of “ Visitor Accommodations” is found in the Commercial Use Category of the SDMC section 131.0112(a)(6)(K) and is defined as “ Uses that provide lodging, or a combination of lodging, food, and entertainment, primarily to visitors and tourists.” This section provides descriptions of each use category and subcategory found in the Use Regulations Tables of each base zone but does not determine in which zone a particular use is permitted. • Short Term Vacation Rental is not a listed use in the San Diego Municipal Code and is therefore not permitted. Like other California cities: Santa Monica, Santa Barbara, Coronado, Huntington Beach, and Hermosa Beach, San Diego has what is called “permissive zoning” or “categorical use zoning” scheme. This means that if a particular use is not listed in the category of uses found in the municipal code, it is not permitted. San Diego’s Municipal Code has over 23 pages of listed uses. Neither Short Term Vacation Rentals nor Short Term Rentals is listed. The listed uses in the San Diego Municipal Code that most closely resemble short term rentals are hotels, motels and bed and breakfast establishments. None of these uses is permitted in residential zones, except for Bed and Breakfasts that require a Neighborhood Use Permit or a Conditional Use Permit. • The city is not estopped from enforcing the ordinance prohibiting STVRs in San Diego residential zones. City Attorney Jan Goldsmith has said on occasions that because of the length of time that has passed without enforcement, the City is now precluded or “estopped” from enforcing the San Diego Municipal Code ordinances that prohibit STVRs in residential zones. This is unequivocally not supported by the California Courts. All of the land use attorneys with whom SSDN has consulted, including City Attorneys in other California Municipalities, have said that City Attorney Goldsmith’s “estoppel argument” is legally wrong. That the City would be estopped from enforcing its ordinances prohibiting STVR in residential zones, merely because the city has failed to enforce and “not shut anybody down for that whole 30-year ordinance”, is incorrect and unsupported in California Courts. • The City Attorney’s opinion that the definition of “Visitor Accommodation” is vague and therefore unenforceable is incorrect. The City Attorney, like the Mayor and the Council members is an elected official and the City Attorney’s role is to provide advice to the Mayor and the City Council. He is the attorney for the Mayor and the City Council Members. He is not a judge and he is not the arbiter as to whether an ordinance is vague or ambiguous. It is not his role to make policy. A number of years ago San Diego City Officials, including the then Mayor and council members after legal review and approval of the then City Attorney as well as the Development Services Department - determined to define visitor accommodations as, “Uses that provide lodging, or a combination of lodging,food and entertainment, primarily to visitors and tourists.” These officials determined to prohibit visitor accommodations from residential zones and they did not believe their definition to be vague or unenforceable. • Save San Diego Neighborhoods closed with the following quote below from the California Supreme Court in the case, Miller v Board of Public Works(1925), 195 Cal.477 cited in Ewing v City of Carmel -bythe -Sea (1991). Whether or not transient rentals have the other “unmitigatable, adverse impacts” cited by the council, such rentals undoubtably affect the essential character of a neighborhood and the stability of a community. Short-term tenants have little interest in public agencies or in the welfare of the citizenry. They do not participate in local government, coach little league,or join the hospital guild. They do not lead a scout troop, volunteer at the library or keep an eye on an elderly neighbor. Literally, they are here today and gone tomorrow, with out engaging the sort of activities that weld and strengthen a community. Other points discussed: • data indicate the number of whole-house mini-hotels from Airbnb in San Diego is more than 5,900. Since Airbnb is just one of about 90 vacation rental websites, it is safe to say the number of STVRs in San Diego is more that 6,000 • The Mission Beach community has the most STVRs, then Pacific Beach followed by the Bird Rock community. • Developers are buying up whole houses and building out to maximize square footage, installing rooftop decks, jacuzzis etc. There are no safety regulations regarding fire etc. Packing people into housing - a four bedroom house that sleeps 10. These are investors who own multiple places and are making money at a community’s expense. • This situation causes rents and costs of homes to go up pricing out individuals and families who leave while scofflaw investors commercialize areas. • Mission Beach is in an “overlay zone” Rm-4 and Rm-5. The only exception to the prohibition of “Visitor Accommodation” in residential zones is that they are permitted in RM-4 and RM-5 pursuant to footnote 6 in the Municipal Code which reads: Two guest rooms (defined to provide sleeping accommodations for one or more guests in hotels, motels, bed and breakfasts facilities, private clubs, lodges, and fraternity and sorority houses) are permitted for visitor accommodations per the specified square footage of lot area required per dwelling unit (maximum permitted density) as indicated on Table 131-04G. The bottom line is if you have a hotel, motel, B&B, private club, etc. in a RM-4 or RM-5 you can have 2 guest rooms that is a leased or rented room used or designed to provide sleeping accommodations for one or more guests and no more. • Regarding enforcement - Santa Barbara, Santa Monica, Hermosa Beach, Coronado, and Huntington Beach all had the same problem that San Diego has regarding STVRs. They enforce their codes that prohibit STVRs in residential zones. Their enforcement effort is ongoing. It used to be reactive - someone would call and complain and then they would go through the process. What the City Manager in Coronado is doing for enforcement is pulling off Airbnb those rentals and sending letters to people who are advertising. They have to provide documentation that they are not STVRs. If they don’t provide the information then the city follows up and if they don’t provide documentation that they are not not running a STVR( less that 30 days) they are told they will be sued. Santa Barbara’s City Attorney is sending out letters insisting on certain things and sending out subpoenas to known operators of STVRs and filing lawsuits against some of them. What effect does this have? Once the city decides that they are going to enforce the law it has a “chilling effect” on any investors. Enforcing the Municipal Code by sending a letter out to people who are advertising on Airbnb etc. and tell them if they don’t shut it down they will be prosecuted (like they did with the marijuana dispensaries which were also not on “listed Use” in the Municipal Code). People do not want to get involved in a lawsuit from the city. • STVRs are happening all over the country. • The key is to stop the proliferation and stop the acquiescence. • Solution is simple - enforce the Municipal Code. • PBTC is using the letter in the packet as a template to show their support for the enforcement of the Municipal Codes for STVRs. John suggested that we do something similar and send a letter (use the template) to the Mayor. The Community Planning Committee voted u - nanimously to enforce the Municipal Code