Sonoma County Board of Supervisors approves new regulations for vacation rentals, timeshares

The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors in a special meeting Monday approved a series of regulations governing thousands of vacation rentals and timeshares outside city limits.

The moves ushered in a business license program to establish standards for vacation rentals and a stronger enforcement tool, restrict where vacation rentals can be located and regulate fractional ownership of a property.

It is the latest evolution of the county’s attempt to regulate its controversial vacation rental industry, which has dominated local debate for several years.

Unincorporated Sonoma County has an average of between 2,300 and 2,400 such properties, including the coastal zone — a number that “is continuously varying,” according to a staff report prepared by Permit Sonoma, the county’s planning and permitting department.

Here’s a look at how the board voted and what it means:

Standardizing requirements

The board unanimously passed revisions to establish a business license program for vacation rental owners and further clarify operating standards

Monday’s discussion was a continuation of the board’s vote in August when it endorsed the countywide changes intended to address residents’ concerns about vacation rentals’ impact on noise, public safety and housing stock.

Under the program, vacation rentals must stick to quiet hours, limits on outdoor, amplified noise, parking caps, adhere to lighting requirements and maintain defensible space against wildfires, among other requirements.

The changes approved Monday also established escalating fines for violations that start at $1,500 for the first violation and increase to $5,000 for a third violation within one year. Other enforcement measures include increasing the period a license can be revoked from two years to five years.

Anyone who needs to report a property for a violation must call a 24-hour county hotline.

Asked if the changes give the ordinance “teeth,” Scott Orr, deputy director of the county’s planning division, said “absolutely.”

The rules are intended to eventually apply to properties along the Sonoma Coast, which have been exempt from many of the county's past bids to govern short-term rentals.

Many vacation rental owners objected to the county’s 10-day period in which a owner can appeal a penalty decision. Describing the time frame as too short, many asked the board to extend it to 30 days.

Orr explained the 10-day period is the county’s standard for other appeals.

Several vacation rental owners on Monday pushed back against reports that the industry amounts to a bad neighbor, one uninvolved in the community.

A vacation rental owner who identified himself only as Alex, said he owns a cabin in Rio Nido with his partner. Between “economic layoffs” and supporting a sick parent, Alex said the rental has “been an incredible lifeline.”

“There are no Porsches there,” Alex said. “Having this permit has been an incredible lifeline.”

Many residents, however, welcomed the changes, citing difficult property managers and neighborhood homes that have become party houses.

“We are generally very supportive of this,” said Joe Schneider from the North Bay Association of Realtors. “We think it strikes a very good balance between hospitality and the right to enjoy your neighborhood from the neighbors perspective.”

In a second vote, the board passed zoning amendments that either limit or block vacation rentals in specific neighborhoods. Supervisor David Rabbitt abstained in the 4-0 vote.

The move established either a 5% cap or an exclusionary zone for vacation rentals in specific neighborhoods considered either beset by a high concentration of rentals, or incompatible with vacation rental use for safety concerns such as inadequate road access.

Neighborhoods with the highest concentration of vacation rentals included: Falcon Lane to Theodor Lane in Sonoma with 41.2% concentration; and Palmer Avenue and Harrington Drive with 19.8% — both in Supervisor Susan Gorin’s 1st District; Chiquita Road north of Healdsburg in Supervisor James Gore’s 4th District with 17.5% concentration; and Neely Road along the lower Russian River in Supervisor Lynda Hopkins’ 5th District with 19.2% concentration.

“Falcon Lane is the worst road in the county,” said Gary Helfrich, a county planner. “Almost half the homes now have been converted to vacation rental use.”

Rabbitt said he abstained from the vote because his 2nd District, taking in south county, has a minimal amount of vacation rentals outside city limits and because none of the neighborhoods specified in the amendment Monday were in his district.

Tackling timeshares

In its last discussion of the day, the board voted to add fractional-use ownership to its timeshare definition, a move meant to cover the type of vacation rentals promoted by companies such as Pacaso and its competitors.

Fractional-use ownership is defined as “an entity, such as an LLC, which in turn has co-owners,” according to the county staff report.

Those properties will now be governed as timeshares, which are limited to regions of the county zoned for lodging and tourism — or visitor and recreation serving purposes.

The issue came to the board’s attention a few years ago, as residents sounded alarm bells when Pacaso began purchasing homes in Napa County and later in Sonoma County.

The company purchases homes under limited liability companies and allows up to eight buyers to take partial ownership in the properties to use as shared vacation homes.

There are three Pacaso homes in Sonoma County, according to county staff.

The company has maintained that is is not a timeshare, but makes second-home ownership accessible.

“If it walks like a duck and it squawks like a duck then it’s a duck,” said Supervisor Chris Coursey. “The duck being a timeshare, the walk and squawk being a commercial enterprise.”

The board voted 4-1 in favor, with Rabbitt as the lone “no” vote.

“We’re not supposed to be regulating ownership,” Rabbitt said of his vote. He added he would have welcomed a 90-day pause to study a path for any regulations.

You can reach Staff Writer Emma Murphy at 707-521-5228 or emma.murphy@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @MurphReports.