Sonoma vacation rental revisions get public hearing

After a year-long process of taking stock of current regulations – and receiving input from an often-aggrieved Sonoma resident population – the Sonoma County Planning Commission will consider a series of revisions to the county's Vacation Rental Ordinance that were put forth Thursday, Nov. 19, at its monthly meeting in Santa Rosa.

Update: At the end of the evening, the Planning Commission voted 4-1 to endorse the ordinances as presented by staff, with two minor changes. It goes to the Board of Supervisors in December. See the accompanyng article for the discussion.

The staff recommendations, outlined in a 22-page packet released prior to last night's meeting, include new 'Combining Zones' that would potentially limit areas where vacation rentals could be located in residential or commercial zones; revised definitions of bed-and-breakfasts and other hosted lodgings; expanded 'quiet time' hours for vacation rental guests; and increased enforcement and monitoring of vacation rental properties and permits, among other suggestions.

In both this controversy, and the parallel review process for winery event permitting, questions about enforcement and monitoring have become central to the discussion. As Supervisor Susan Gorin points out, 'The similarities between the winery events and the vacation rentals is that we have the power to enforce, we simply don't provide enough enforcement.'

Countering that perception, however, was Permit and Resource Management Department Director Tennis Wick. 'You're seeing a record reponse in enforcement,' he said, prior to the meeting. 'Folks who have committed multiple violations are being dealt with. There is an issue, of course, with violations mostly occuring when staff are not working, and we'll be working on crafting a response to that through the overall legislation we're sending to the board.'

Wick noted that Ben Neuman, a county employee of 30 years, had left his job as chief county enforcement officer three weeks ago. The county is currently looking for a replacement.

Gorin said that she's in touch with both PRMD and County Counsel on the 'major issues associated with vacation rentals and (will) potentially identify policy options,' and pointed out that she was able to get funding from the county's Transient Occupancy Taxes (TOT) fund applied to personnel to track and tackle the issues.

TOT income is suggested in the vacation rental revisions report as a possible source of affordable and workforce housing 'to mitigate the loss of housing stock to vacation rental use.' This has been a key flash-point in the vacation rental controversy, especially in areas like Glen Ellen which has seen an actual decline in overall population in the past six years, due in part to a corresponding spike in vacation rental homes.

Debbie Nitasaka, of Glen Ellen, active in both Preserve Sonoma County Neighborhoods and the Sonoma County Housing Advocacy Group, made this point among others in a lengthy statement of disenchantment with the staff report.

'I do not oppose legitimate home sharing,' she wrote in the statement delivered to members of the Board of Supervisors this week. 'Rather, I am one of many concerned, ignored, evicted, and deceived community members who are ready to stop commercialized short-term rental abuse.'

Tom Jones of the Diamond A development also read the proposed revisions closely. His reaction is more muted. 'The recommended enhanced regulations appear to be a rational compromise between the opposing forces in the County,' he wrote to the Index-Tribune. 'While (the proposed regulations) will not fully satisfy county residents who are opposed to any vacation rentals in Rural and R1 zones, they will also not be enthusiastically embraced by current owners of vacation rental properties.'

Jones, however, felt the report is 'disappointingly silent' about several issues, including the commercial nature of vacation rentals in residential areas, lack of ADA compliance in these commercial properties, and any fines or penalties levied against organizations like AirBnB, Home Away or VRBO that might advertise properties without valid permits.

These are all topics Nitasaka, Jones and others have voiced during multiple public hearings.

Overall the proposals make the vacation rental process for hosted rentals – B&Bs of up to five guest rooms – both less stringent and less expensive. This was a repeated theme in the year-long public review process, which saw many residents who rented out a room in their house to weekend tenants lumped into the same category as property owners who rented an entire house – some but not all of them large and expensive, in rural residential neighborhoods – to vacationing groups.

AirBnB, the San Francisco-based 'sharing economy' company that makes available vacation rentals to customers, has sought to downplay its role in the vacation home market and emphasize the single-room rental as a way small families can stay in their home year round.

However, AirBnB and other similar 'disruptive' tools in the sharing economy have had an indisputable impact on more traditional businesses, such as the lodging industry. A request for comment from AirBnB about the proposed regulations was not received at press time.

Other recommended changes include reducing the number of permitted guests in a vacation rental to a maximum of 10, down from 12 (two per bedroom plus two extra); stricter parking requirements; reduced noise limits and expanded quiet hours, from 9 p.m. to 10 a.m. (reduced from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m.).

Some of the proposed regulations are more restrictive still, not just adjustments of numbers but outright banning of certain things formerly allowed – amplified sound, weddings or parties over the maximum daytime occupancy, outdoor fires and unattended pets.

Two other significant additions to vacation rental owners' requirements are a 'certified 24-hour property manager' who has undergone a county-administered training course and certification, located within a 30-mile radius but available and responsive at all times; and the posting of vacation rental conditions, occupancy, vehicles, quiet hours and TOT certificate number.

The Sonoma County Planning Commission will take additional public comment before it makes final recommendations; hearings at the Board of Supervisors will follow before any changes to the current code are adopted.

Email Christian at christian.kallen@sonomanews.com.