Santa Rosa City Council imposes immediate regulations on short-term rental properties

The Santa Rosa City Council voted early Wednesday to impose emergency regulations on vacation rental properties in a harried first step toward governing a growing, disruptive industry in Sonoma County’s largest city.

The council’s vote, at the end of a meeting that lasted more than seven hours, provided an immediate but temporary set of rules over hundreds of short-term rentals — defined as properties rented for less than 30 days — while officials craft more permanent regulations. The urgency ordinance is likely to be in place for at least six months, officials said.

In the meantime, even proponents of regulations worried about the city’s ability to enforce a quickly written but wide-ranging policy that sets capacity and noise limits, fire safety rules and party restrictions while also establishing a $1,200 annual operating permit and rules on who can own such properties and how many.

The council stopped short of ordering a moratorium on short-term rental proliferation while City Hall crafts a permanent ordinance, in part on the advice of City Attorney Sue Gallagher, who said the council had not given sufficient public notice of such a step.

It did add a restriction on new properties opening within 1,000 feet of existing ones.

The lack of a firmer pause on new vacation rentals in the city worried some council members, who feared an influx of rental properties from investors seeking to get into the market ahead of permanent regulations.

“I just want to make sure we craft a policy while we still have housing stock to craft it with,” said Councilwoman Victoria Fleming, whose district holds a large share of the existing registered short-term rentals.

Vacation rental property owners who until now have not paid up lodging taxes to the city have a two-week grace period to do so and register; otherwise they will not be eligible to operate under the new rules.

Santa Rosa has lagged behind other Sonoma County cities, and county government, in regulating the properties.

The City Council labored over details of the ordinance during a meeting that began at 5 p.m. Tuesday and lasted long enough — past midnight — that city staff had to change the date on the proposed resolution from Oct. 12 to 13 before the vote.

Vice Mayor Natalie Rogers was absent. The other six council members backed the ordinance.

The meeting brought out a large number of rental property owners, some of whom accused city staff of excluding them from the accelerated policy-making process, despite public meetings and a citywide survey.

One rental property owner and opponent of the regulations has taken steps toward a lawsuit, Gallagher told council members before they took up the item.

City residents, particularly in the upscale, wooded enclaves of eastern Santa Rosa, report a marked increase in properties converting to short-term rentals in recent years. Those reports have sparked fears of diminishing housing stock and fallout on neighborhood character.

“It is an industry that is exploiting and profiting from the conversion of single-family homes into small hotels,” David Long, who lives next to a rental he said is an investment property often used for loud parties.

“Industries require regulation,” Long said.

Officials have not thoroughly studied how many homes have become short-term rentals. The city, as of mid September, had around 197 registered short-term rental properties, according to officials. But an outside firm provided an analysis to the city that found as many as 358 short-term rental properties advertising on various websites dedicated to the industry.

The council stopped short of issuing a moratorium on short-term rental proliferation while City Hall wrote permanent ordinances but did add a restriction on new properties opening within 1,000 feet of existing ones.

Rental owners described themselves as responsible managers of the properties who support Sonoma County’s tourism industry and workers in the area for short periods of time — some referenced health care workers in town during COVID-19 surges. Much of the public comment and council debate centered on the distinction between hosted and non-hosted rental properties, with owners of the former in particular objecting to a possible loss of income under too-strict an ordinance.

“I’ve had no problems,” said Kay Ward, who lived in a detached unit behind her home, which she rents. “I like the extra income and I pay my (lodging taxes) on time.”

Residents who have seen properties on their streets snapped up by investors and converted to rental properties expressed the deepest concern.

“Every time a house comes up for sale on our street, we brace ourselves for who may be buying it,” said Bernadette Burrell. Five large, non-hosted short-term rental properties exist in Burrell’s immediate vicinity near Montecito Court and Los Olivos Road.

On her street, the sounds of drinking games and partying have replaced the old sounds of families next door, she told the council.

City staff will embark on further research and seek more public comment as they craft a more permanent set of regulations for short-term rentals, officials said. It remained unclear as of Tuesday night what the next opportunity for public input would be.

You can reach Staff Writer Andrew Graham at 707-526-8667 or andrew.graham@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @AndrewGraham88.