 Chair weeks, we're good to start on time whenever you're ready. Thank you so with that, I'd like to call to order the What day is this? I'd like to call to order the April 27th, 2023 meeting of the Planning Commission and If you could please take roll Commissioner Carter your Commissioner Cisco your Commissioner Holton is absent And just an FYI he was supposed to remote in but he can no longer no longer Participate in this meeting so the information at the top of the agenda is not needed Commissioner Duggan here Commissioner Sanders present Vice Chair Peterson here Chair weeks here Thank you, and as the recording secretary indicated a commissioner Holton will not be here tonight So with that We go on to approval of minutes, and we don't have any minutes tonight So we'll go to a public comment on non-agended items This is the time when any person may address the Commission on matters that are not listed on this agenda But which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission and if you are in person and want to make a public comment, please go to one of the podiums at the top and You will be unmuted And please state your name for the record But you know the drill don't you mr. Dewitt are you ready? Hello, my name is Dwayne Dewitt. I'm from the Sonoma County Housing Advocacy Group Earlier this week. We put forward a flyer that we sent in to you folks So we hope you've had a chance to read it about seniors and veterans extended-stay suites Hopefully you looked at the idea and the proposal. It's something that's a successful business model throughout the United States It's been going on for at least a quarter of a century where they build these extended-stay suites holiday and extended-stay suites Extended-stay America things of that nature here locally. We've had two housing Short-term rental type of things what are known as hotels in the past that were built very quickly One is the AC hotel over here in railroad square and the other is la quinta down on Santa Rosa Avenue The reason this was put forward to you is to point out that if you were to build housing on a commercial model You could get it in much faster than if you tried to do it under your typical approach of affordable housing sometimes taking up to a Decade to a dozen years for the Lantana project in Southwest Santa Rosa and in other areas they've taken that long So you'll say well, we don't have a project before us Well part of the idea is you have a department that's paid for with taxpayers money called the advanced planning department And you folks could give them direction to say how could we work with the commercial community? To get these types of housing projects in quickly Here closer to the center of town and have them be multi-story just down the street Now you've got mr. Futrell's projects seven stories You can get these taller projects in with prefabricated modular building techniques and they can be done within my lifetime Affordable housing is taking far so long for so many of these people Seniors and veterans are losing out on the chance some of them are actually having to lose their house And then they end out on the street. It may be going homeless So there's a multi-million dollar homeless industry obviously to help those folks get something going Caritas over here is recently being built Tens of millions of dollars going forward on land that was formerly owned by the city of Santa Rosa redevelopment agency Downtown here. We have a project area that was called the White House when I was younger You did a study on it over 15 years ago pointing out that housing could be built there multi-story That's the way to go perhaps the unfortunate dilemma is that we're not having a Coordinated and collaborative approach to get these things done It has to start with I believe you the appointed bureaucrats the paid bureaucrats and then our elected officials saying yes We're actually going to put in good Efficient affordable housing downtown Santa Rosa. Thank you for your time Thank you, mr. DeWitt anybody else who would like to speak on items that are not on the agenda see no one in The chambers do we have anybody on zoom with their hand raised? Just a reminder if you're participating via zoom and if you'd like to make a public comment You can raise your hand by selecting the raised hand feature at the bottom of your zoom screen if you're calling in please press start Chair weeks. We don't have any hands raised in zoom Thank you. So with that I'll go ahead and close this public comment period and We'll move on So as we do at every meeting I'll state this our statement of purpose The planning commission is charged with carrying out the California planning and zoning laws in the city of Santa Rosa duties include implementing of Plans ordinances and policies relating to land use matters assisting in writing and implementing the general plan and Area plans holding public hearings and acting on proposed changes to the zoning code zoning map general plan tentative map Kind of subdivision maps and undertaking special planning studies as needed and then we'll move on to commissioner reports item 4.2. Are there any? reports Okay, then we'll move on to Item 5 Department report Yes, thank you chair weeks and members of the Commission Jessica Jones deputy director for planning The only thing I have for you tonight is just to let everybody know that at the last city council meeting the mayor did Identify that she will be reappointing chair weeks to continue with her position as chair of the planning commission And so we will be adding an item to our agenda for the next meeting, which is May 11th For appointment of a vice chair. That's it Thank you So are there any abstentions tonight? See none We have no consent items, so we'll move on to our first scheduled item tonight And it is item 8.1. It's a public hearing lasini's market type 21 off sale ABC license It is an exempt project for conditional use permit at 3 4 4 9 Bennett Valley Road CUP 22-074 and this is an exparte item So we'll go ahead and start with commissioner Cisco I visited the site and I have no new information to disclose Thank you Vice chair Peterson. I Also visited the site and have no new information to disclose you Commissioner Duggan I visited the site and have no new information to disclose Commissioner Carter I have no information to disclose. Thank you commissioner Sanders visit the site and have nothing to disclose Thank you, and I also visited the site and have nothing further to disclose so with that our planner tonight on this is Mike Geniusack and He via zoom he is via zoom. Yes. Thank you. Thank you chair weeks. May I go ahead and start presenting? Yes, go ahead Mike Okay, can you all see my title slide? Yes, we can Okay, excellent Good evening commissioners. We'll good afternoon. My name is Mike Janney stock I'm a contract planner with M group and I'll be presenting the conditional use permit Steph report for a lasini's market. This is for alcohol sales At 34 49 Bennett Valley Road, and it is file number CP 22-074 Before I jump into my presentation I'd like to summarize An update to my slides that all commissioners should have received earlier this afternoon And that includes slide 2 I Edited the project description to clarify that the the project description includes a change of license slide 5 I removed placeholder text And updated the project history to reflect the staff report slide 7 I changed out the map to provide more current crime data as reflected in the staff report slide 9 I removed placeholder text and Consistent with the staff report I showed that no public comments were received And lastly slide 10 I added a slide where I will go into staff's analysis of the findings. So That's That's most of my slides. So hopefully that also serves to give you an overview of my presentation for for this afternoon the project description is a Conditional use permit to change the existing ABC license To include the additional sale of distilled spirits for offset consumption at the existing market There you see lasinis in the picture And a conditional use permit is required by zoning code section 20-42034 For markets with a floor area of less than 10,000 square feet that proposes alcohol And this is essentially a change from a type 20 to a type 21 which and what that means is the type 20 is beer and wine offset consumption and a type 21 is general offset consumption and so That would include distilled spirits The applicants narrative provided an attachment three gives some owner and operator history the applicant currently has operated there since 2021 and staff Communicated with ABC to verify that a valid type 20 license has been at this location since 1992 That original type 20 license isn't was in existence from 92 to 98 and after which Any subsequent change in ownership there was a transfer person-to-person transfer And so all that is to say there's no record of the CEP for that type 20 type 20 license in in the city of Santa Rosa And We did a bit more digging as staff and there's an annexation map that shows this site was annexed in 1996 And so with a good amount of certainty we can say that The store has sold alcohol Legally predating annexation and also predating the the CEP process Required by Santa Rosa Here you see a vicinity map. It's a corner lot in an existing residential neighborhood to the south the city limit is shown in pink and beyond that our low density hillside Residences that are an unincorporated Sonoma County the zoning and land use the zoning is a neighborhood commercial Which allows small-scale Commercial within residential neighborhoods to serve nearby residences and then you'll notice there is some designation outside of the city limits and that's because it's showing the land use that the areas the county areas within the The planning area for the general plan, but it does not have city zoning and then Butting the directly budding we've got our one six on the west and rule residential 40 To the north and then there's a Plan district to the east all of it is low density residential within the city Project history it was the application was submitted in November of last year The application was deemed complete in December of last year and the notice for this hearing was distributed 10 days prior to the day on April 27th. I do want to point out that there's there wasn't noticing the defect Not for this the hearing itself, but as part of the review timeline section 20 That's 50. Oh 50 e requires a notice of application is sent about 45 days after projects middle is received That did not occur however, pursuant to zoning code section 20 dash 66 020 a 3 a Defect and the notice procedure does not affect the review authorities ability to take action on a matter unless otherwise provided by law Because the notice application was not state mandated and because staff has not identified any major concerns That would necessitate additional noticing Staff is comfortable bringing this item forward to the commission this afternoon Here's the floor plan. There are no physical improvements proposed interior or exterior however they are showing and Within the existing storage Area where they would have the addition of the still spirit store and then There'll be Sort of you can see my cursor. This is where the storage area will be Rearranged and then there'll be some new shelving behind the checkout counter that will include Distilled spirits, but there's nothing that's requiring permitting from a physical standpoint Here is crime density map that shows it's in a low crime area The application was referred to the police department who had no Comments or concerns on the application We planning staff reviewed crime data over the past two years and There were two DUI related arrests made at the property Here is a map showing a thousand foot buffer from the site And the lupa elementary is about 1500 feet away. There's no schools daycares or parks Within a thousand feet and I won't show you the other maps from the staff report that include daycares and parks. So those are farther beyond the school No public comments were received Staff is able to make the applicable findings. You'll see them in the staff report. I've noted Where those are located With respect to each applicable Set of criteria I try to incorporate the more pertinent aspects of the findings in the previous slides, but I'll summarize Here the general plan policies Can be met The application is consistent with the general plan, particularly where Neighborhood grocery stores can be supported within walking areas of residential areas Per abc the the change in abc license will not result in an increase in abc licenses And the census tract does not currently exhibit an undue number of licenses A pc or n is not required The applicant has indicated surveillance cameras are located at the business And the applicant is also Is not requesting a waiver of any operational Standard pursuant to section 20 42034 b condition number condition number four in your draft resolution also Requires the applicant to comply with the applicable operating standards The proposed use is an Existing commercial building and no physical improvements are proposed The market has been in operation within the existing residential neighborhood Including the sale of beer and wine for approximately 31 years staff is not aware of Any issues related to offsite wine and beer sales at this location and In addition the centers of police department Has expressed no comments or conditions Regarding the proposed use of this location The project is Has been reviewed and is eligible for a class one Existing facilities exemption under sequel Which allows for Interior and exterior alterations involving such things as partitions plumbing electrical conveyances With no or negligible expansion of the use as previously stated. There's no Interior exterior improvements that would require permitting and there will be a negligible expansion of alcohol sales The planning and economic development department recommends that the planning commission by resolution approve a conditional use permit to allow the sale of alcohol for offsite consumption From the existing commercial building located at 34 49 Bennett alley road That concludes my presentation and we're happy to Answer any questions that commissioners may have thank you Thank you. Um, does the applicant have a presentation or are they available if there are questions? I believe there are an attendance in person Yes, they are Um, do you know if they have a presentation or just to answer a questions? I don't believe they have a formal presentation, but um They may want wish to speak or be available for questions Okay, um, do you wish to make any comments at this point as the applicant? Okay, thank you. So are there any questions? Um of staff before I open the public hearing on this commissioner sanders does In either case the license abc license 20 or 21 does that allow people to drink at the little cool tables that you guys got outside? No Either way Thanks. Thank you uh, so with that I will go ahead and um Open the public hearing on this item and if you wish to make a comment, please go to the podium at the top you'll have three minutes And you will be given a countdown timer and be unmuted Okay, I don't see anybody going So is there anybody on zoom with their hands raised? As a reminder if you're on zoom you can raise your hand by selecting the Raised hand icon at the bottom of your zoom screen and if you're calling in press star 9 Two weeks. I don't see any hands raised. Thank you. So with that, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing on this and bring it back to the commission Um, would somebody like to make a motion on this resolution? Commissioner dug in I will move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of santa rosa making findings and determinations And approving a conditional use permit to allow the sale of alcohol for off-site consumption At the existing commercial building located at 3449 then at valley road apn number 049-260-013 File number c up 22-074 and wait for the reading Thank you. Is there a second? Second Sanders seconded So with that, we'll go ahead and start with comments. Um, let's go ahead and start with commissioner dug in I am in support of the request I visited the market today. It's very tidy and nice and they have beer and wine for sale already and I think this just Um, we'll add a little bit to that. Obviously. It's just changing it for distilled spirits and I am fully supportive I can make all the required findings Thank you. Commissioner carter I'm also familiar with the site and its operations. Um, I see no reason to object to this slight expansion in their Offerings and I can make all the required findings and we'll be supporting the project Thank you Commissioner sanders. I can also make all the required findings and I'll support the project. Thank you commissioner sisco Yes, I can also make all the required findings. Um I think one of the benefits to the city and this application is that there will be a conditional use permit Approved for this and just as a piece of history Many years ago when my casey city attorney was here with the neighborhood revitalization program He put forward a deemed approved ordinance To give neighborhoods a mechanism Uh, if there were issues with alcohol sales on these sites that did not, you know, that pre predated A conditional use permit and so that's been a place for many years But I think it's also it's just better to have the more Common and familiar thing not that you'd ever have a complaint. You obviously run a very well run operation But just want to I'm glad we're getting a conditional use permit Thank you Vice chair Peterson Uh, I can also make all the required findings and in support of this change Thank you And I also can make all the required findings. Um, I think it is a good addition to what you already have there And I can make all the required findings. Uh, so with that, um, that was moved by commissioner duggin Seconded by commissioner sanders if we could go ahead and have the vote, please Commissioner carter I Commissioner sisco. Hi Commissioner duggin. Hi Commissioner sanders. Hi Vice chair peterson. Hi Chair weeks I So that passes with six eyes one, uh absent. Um, that being commissioner holton And I do want to note that this action is final unless an appeal is filed with The city clerk's office within 10 calendar days of today's decision pursuant to zoning code section 20 dash 62 Dot zero three zero And with that that includes that item We're gonna pause for just a few minutes while we get some technical assistance up here Okay, thank you all. Um for that Days of modern technologies Um, so with that I will go ahead and uh introduce item 8.2 It's a public hearing on short term rentals ordinance amendments and uh deputy director jones Thank you chair weeks members of the commission. Um, yes, uh, jessica We're having some feedback here. Uh, jessica jones deputy director for planning. Um, I just wanted to quickly Introduce this item before miss meads Gives you a formal presentation As you know, this is the first time that the planning commission has heard this item so Sherry is going to be going over all the details of the project giving you history Going over the existing ordinance And the proposed changes as well as the outreach that has been done Since the original ordinance was adopted. Um, but just wanted to Uh, make sure the commission and the public is aware that this has been a very collaborative Team approach to putting this recommendation together amongst city staff We've been working with all of the divisions and departments within the city To bring forward what's in front of you today And as well as meeting with community members community groups as well as individuals both in support of and Uh, in opposition of short-term rentals Um, so sherry again is going to be going over all this in detail But I just wanted to give that quick intro. Um, and I'm going to hand it over to sherry for the full presentation Thank you Good evening chair weeks And members of the commission i'm going to share my screen. Can you put the microphone a little closer to you if possible? Probably I don't know if it's Hope I don't break anything. No, that's perfect right there. Okay, great. Thank you. There we go Excuse the technical difficulties, please There we go. I'm used to doing this from home. I apologize. It's been a while since I've been in the chambers with y'all So good afternoon. I'm sherry meads. I'm a senior planner with the long range planning team and as jessica So kindly kicked off. We're here to talk about short-term rental ordinance amendments And I'm happy to be before you this evening Um, just a brief project description. We didn't do A lot of what this is focused on are technical changes and when we say technical changes that's reorganizing that's changing grammar Just anything to try to make the ordinance more convenient for our constituents for our staff and to Just help the project the short-term rental program run smoothly enforcement and Permitting and the whole shebang We did add some new definitions and policies which I'll detail later and we I'll also discuss the community engagement that we've done Before the initial ordinance and since august 20 august of last year What is a short-term rental? Most of us know by now, but just in case a short-term rental is a Rental of a private residence for less than 30 days If somebody were to rent their house for 30 days or more, they don't need a permit from the city That is not something that the city regulates. These are strictly talking about Rentals of less than 30 days, whether it's the whole house or just part of the house They're sometimes known as airbnb's or vrbo's And as a regulatory background before october of 2021 we didn't have any regulation specific to short-term rentals except that our adu ordinance which was adopted in well An amendment to the adu ordinance added in january of 2018 Included a provision that adus could not be used as short-term rentals at all Back before we introduced the short-term rental ordinance Short-term rental operators were still required to register and pay TOT transient occupancy taxes and bia business improvement area assessments Other than that we were you know, we didn't regulate we were in a wait and watch and see what would happen It never rose to a situation in terms of complaints or interest for us to move forward with an ordinance But as things started becoming more of an issue in terms of getting complaints Um, we started a working group in house talking about it We went to the economic task force when that was back when we were in the beginning stages of covet. They're now called the economic development subcommittee And during that time between august of 2021 And september of 2021 the economic development subcommittee we visited them two times We went over what had been happening with Violations and gave them a slew of options of what they might want to see in a short-term rental ordinance And they said we want to see it all um, which wasn't possible with the with a time frame that we were on So we did do a community engagement survey before acting on this we did a Industry focused if you will community meeting and did as much outreach as we could In such a short period of time in october of 2021 we brought forward to the commission on an urgency basis Which means as jessa convention. We did not go through the planning commission a ordinance which added chapter 2048 short-term rentals to the zoning code and that chapter was laid out to provide a Approval mechanism and regulations and operating standards so that short-term rentals would hopefully not be a threat to The community in terms of public health safety and welfare and to reduce nuisance behaviors Also, we were looking at it as we need to look at this in terms of how is this affecting our housing stock So that's what the original ordinance did in october of 2021 Despite the regulations we were finding that certain short-term rental Non-hosted short-term rental activities primarily we're still causing a few issues and we also Despite our best efforts as education on how to create a perfect package to submit for short-term rental permits We found that the onslaught of people that applied for short-term rental permits. We ended up with a permitting backlog We were very behind So we went back to uh, the city council in august of 2022 And at that point we set a cap on the number of non-hosted short-term rentals at 198 and people are like why 198? that was the number of Issued non-hosted short-term rental permits as well as all of the non-hosted short-term rental permits that were still in the Pipeline that we were hoping all would be approved if all of them had been approved We would have been at that cap of 198. We also clarified some code enforcement policies in that amendment in august and we also by resolution established a Permit renewal fee So from there As soon as we did that initial august amendment We knew that we were going to do more community outreach and find out From the community what they really wanted to hear. We had done an abbreviated version of it like I mentioned before the initial Ordinance, but now we were really trying to get a feel for what the community was going to say So The standards and requirements that were approved between the first ordinance And then also including the august amendments. You can see them up here It established the permit requirement as I mentioned the august amendment Capped the non-hosted short-term rental permits at 198 trying to Prevent over concentration The council enacted a 1 000 foot separation between new non-hosted short-term rentals We established occupancy guidelines parking requirements quiet hours fire and life safety requirements prohibited Events and required neighborhood neighbor notification so that if neighbors were Finding an issue with the short-term rental. They could contact a low a required local contact who could hopefully address any of the issues So let's move on from there We established code enforcement penalties Which originally were 500 for a first violation a second violation of a thousand and then as you can see here A third violation of two thousand dollars with the permit revocation And for those people who hadn't received a permit yet But they were in the pipeline and system trying to get their permits the permitting system to get their permit approved They would lose what was called their operator and good standing status And that was an original term in the ordinance which allowed for folks who had been paying their t.o.t. And their b.i.a And who also were Uh, they complied with the requirements to apply for a short-term rental by december 3rd 2021 Um, those were called operators and good standing and they didn't have to Comply with the 1 000 foot between them So if somebody were to have gotten to that third violation with one year, they would have lost that operator and good standing status so Now we're going to talk about Did I miss my map? I went too far. How do I go back? There and I just wanted to show the uh commissioners and anyone in the audience that's participating This is a map that was um, the data Is from probably two weeks ago because we have to have everything submitted at a certain time before our meetings And so that shows you Where non-hosted short-term rentals are throughout the city and there are certainly as you can see some areas where they're Um closer together and that type of thing the circles around the dots indicate the 1 000 foot separation requirement And you can see this information if anybody can visit the site if you go to srcity.org slash pw maps slash permit search or you can also just go to srcity.org Forward slash str and select search str permits We actually have a a a newer Vanity email, I'm sorry, uh website for that. So I'm not sure why it's not in there. I apologize So if anybody wants to write this down If you don't want to go to the general srcity.org slash str website and select s search str permits You can go to srcity.org Forward slash str search and that'll take you there It will default to the non-hosted short-term rental locations as you see here on the map Or you can click on hosted only or you can click on all of them. So now let's talk about Um what it is that we're looking at in terms of the new amendments And we'll just quickly go through um I need to pause this because This isn't the right presentation So can we take a break? I apologize No problem. So we're gonna take a short break Okay, um, we're gonna Go ahead and get restarted Okay, uh chair weeks members of the commission our apologies The presentation that was being shown was the one from the last urgency ordinance that went to the council. So it was a Mistake and we apologize for the technical difficulties But the powerpoint version that we had uploaded is the correct one. So we're gonna go ahead and get started I'm sure he's gonna start with some background that did not get identified when she was first going through it Great. Thank you Thank you, and I apologize for that. I'm not sure how the mix-up happened But anyways, so I missed some of the background because I was looking at my notes But then I was looking at this and I'm like something's not right here. So I don't want to Um Not include the information about the online community survey that we did probably most people in the audience took it Is my guess But that was open from september to december, which is you know, quite a long time We wanted to reach as many folks as we could And to reach folks that are not, you know, comfortable necessarily attending public meetings and community meetings We did some pop-up events out in the community where we would just show up And talk to people about short-term rentals and we did that at matote food park Had some delicious food while we were there We did one at the central library community lighthouse church And also at the farmers market on farmers lane. So that was fun And we got a lot of interesting feedback from folks that, you know, are not already engaged in the Short-term rental discussion normally We did hold two virtual community meetings. Both of them had spanish translation available. We're very well attended We tried to do breakout rooms that were just anonymously, you know They were not we didn't choose who sat with who it was just a thing where the admin pushed a button and said your room eight seven six five four We were hoping to get people that maybe had differing opinions together as sort of a consensus building situation Um, we also went before the santa rosa tourism business improvement area advisory board meeting It was held on november 16th. Their normal meeting would have been held The week of thanksgiving however every year when that's the case in november They reschedule it typically for the week before which is exactly what they did And so we just went before them and gave them, you know Similar thing that what we did to start out with the background where we're at to see if they had any questions or feedback And they did Just ask about the timeline other than that. There was no additional feedback. There were no additional questions So I just wanted to um to point that out We already went through the existing standards and requirements. That's the same nothing changed there. Um, so that Thankfully slide was okay Same thing with the code enforcement penalties that were originally approved with the ordinance adoption in october of 2021 And this is why I noticed I'm like I I've got to do something here. So this shows you the um the easier URL to find and do a search for non-hosted short-term rentals If you want to keep track of them every day if you want to see You could click on the in the dots on the inside and find out a lot more about that permit and It's really a great tool. We've worked really hard with our IT staff and and Are, you know, everybody code enforcement to try to put out the tool so that people are able to see what they need to see When making a decision about Applying for a short-term rental So this was another slide that that wasn't in the other Presentation and this is the current permit status when we say currents that was two weeks ago again Like I said, we have to have our packets ready awfully early So I will add that we've approved or issued 168 non-hosted now Um, so that pinning in plan review is down to 18 And that means we have 186 approved or issued total non-hosted short-term rental permits Um And you can see here the denied and some folks have asked why was an hosted one ever denied? And that was a situation where the application was for a Non-permitted building and we tried to work with the applicant However, they they just did not respond to that so and the with the most of the denied with the non-hosted Have been related to over concentration So we are also receiving applications for renewals now that we've been in this Had this program open for a while and at that point we had 60 renewal We probably had a few more since then so we're working through those as well And one of the things these the the two last stats don't really have anything to do with the permitting status But I know a lot of people have said They would like to see these removed from residential neighborhoods And so we wanted to point out that so far The applications that we've received for non-hosted short-term rentals Only four of them are in a non-residential zoning district and we have one hosted That's in a non-residential zoning district And then we've heard a lot of people say well these don't you know, there's not a lot of them We have so many, you know X number of housing units. How many are short-term rentals? So Um as of 2021 we did have 69,495 residential units So that does indicate that less than 1% are short-term rentals Um, so that's just data for For you guys to consider Next we're gonna i'm just briefly gonna glaze over the current code enforcement status We have luke irk and jesse oswald in the audience. They are the experts on this so any questions I will absolutely defer to them. That's what these chairs are for But you can see here you can get a little bit of an idea of How many, you know str related complaints have been received since the beginning of the program and that's 281 A lot of those have been closed, which is excellent. Um, there are still some open And you can see that 119 administrative citations have been issued and the assessed penalties Uh add up to 85 000. So Again, like I said, luke and jesse, you will have any Detail to that or other questions you may have and and we'll get to them after i'm after i'm done talking at you So now we're going to talk about the proposed amendments and i'm not going to go into super detail here Everything's in the packet and the staff report, but I do want to um Give it, you know a high level overview and again can answer any specific questions I have my red line copy in front of me um And again, I will I will say that technical changes in in the way We're using that here and and always do when we talk about this is When we first did the urgency ordinance, we had things organized a certain way that we thought was, you know You know, maybe the right thing to do at the time but through Implementation and enforcement. We've realized wait these things go to Go together better here or here and and so we did quite a bit of that type of thing in this Amendment package before you and so the purpose that hasn't changed. I took out some Passive language that drove me nuts after I wrote it and read it again And same thing with the application of this chapter part. We do uh specified now an additional Thing that was added That these requirements apply to the owners the agents the contacts people there and the daytime guests So we really want um To try to do the best we can to to keep these compatible with their with their neighbors So then the next section is the definitions and Again technical changes there, uh, you know I'm sure many of us can Say I read something that I wrote at one time and then I wish I could have changed it Well, this was an opportunity for us to be able to go back and do some of those types of changes So we did that There were some terms in there that we realized we didn't mention again in the chapter So we got rid of those and then we added new definitions to clarify that the renoticing fee is different from the initial application fee Um, which that's that's a big deal. We tried to have a renewal process and application fee that is Less impactful because most of the review has been done already that first initial review is Is is a lot of work we've found um and the renewals. Hopefully we're just checking a few things and and making sure things are good Okay, so then um the permit requirements and the limits There are again just technical changes and the addition of unit type restrictions And what that means is we looked at certain types of housing that are particularly Uh used for our vulnerable folks like senior housing Income restricted affordable housing Single residency occupancy single SROs um and some other types of housing that we really Want preserved for what they're what they were intended for so those are limited and then another change that we did do is As I mentioned at some point the adu ordinance that was amendments to the adu ordinance that were adopted in January of 2018 specified based on state law at the time too that um short term rentals could not be used for less than 34 I'm sorry adus could not be used for rentals of less than 30 days So in the ordinance that was approved october 2021 Staff referenced that section of the adu ordinance. Well that left a bit of a gray area about okay Well, what about adus before 2018? Prior to that being added to our ordinance. So what we've done is we've said No new permits for adus Which is what the council had intended originally and staff had intended originally But we are allowing adus that have received A permit or the recommendation is to allow them to continue To renew if they meet all the other requirements and you know are able to be renewed however, if That permit lapses is denied or whatever it would not be reissued for that adu So that is the the main difference in the location requirements and permit limits except for I'm sorry, not the not the permit limits. That's a new thing that you see in this packet We did not previously have a limit on how many short term rentals a person could own That is something that the council had expressed interest in Originally, but it wasn't factored in at that time as I mentioned We we were only able to to get a certain amount in that would qualify as an urgency ordinance And that didn't rise to that level We have heard from the community as well that they feel like people there should be a limit On how many short term rental permits someone can own and so some of the Reasoning behind This recommendation is that for those people that do own multiple short term rentals if we were to Go with this recommendation of allowing only one non-hosted short term rental permit It would allow the opportunity for other people who have written and said well, we can't It's not fair to us. We can't even get one non-hosted short term rental permit, but this person has six Or five or three or two. So that's the the rationale behind that The initial application section again We just did some technical changes to try to make it easier for folks to know exactly what they need to do And have ready when they apply We removed most of the language related to operators and good standing and new operators because Thankfully, we are just about done with all of the original permits that could have been operators and good standing or new operators Now everybody is a new operator. So That that doesn't sound like much to y'all but for planning staff. We're really excited about being able to make that change Duration of short term rental permit. They've always been valid for one year And they've always expired upon You know, it automatically void upon expiration like other permits, but we wanted to make that very clear We want people to know that so they're on top of it. They they apply to Renew prior to The expiration of their existing permit and then again the annual requirement. We just clarify how to do it And what they need to do Neighbor notification, uh, we clarify that The notification and renofit notification requirements whenever and a new short terminal permit is issued We notify neighbors as I mentioned within 600 feet We would only do that upon renewal if there's a change to something that may You know be important for the neighbors to know if the And the local contact has changed for example because we don't want them having their old notification And calling a number that is no longer valid. So that's the only time that we would re notice Neighbors is if there's a change to that or number of bedrooms or anything like that Transferability we have always Mentioned that these are non transferable. We make it more explicit and explained in the amendments And then we included an entire section about loss of operator and good standing status And the reason that's important again as I mentioned is operators and good standing were offered certain allowances if they had been paying tot and bi a and if they were If they applied for their short terminal permit by december 3rd 2021 They were allowed to be within a thousand feet of any other non-hosted short-term rental If you and so we go more into detail about how you can lose your operator and good standing status and clarify That that means you are now a new operator and you would have to comply with all the new requirements including that 1000 foot separation requirement We add more information about reasons for denial And we clarify the appeals process There's a lot it's a big chapter So registration requirements Technical changes trying to make it easier to understand occupancy and parking we don't change any of the occupancy or parking requirements we just tried to make it easier to understand And we clarify that parking size requirements have to be consistent with city standards, which They always have been but we wanted to just bring that to the ordinance. So there's no question that it's very Very clear and explicit And then we reorganized chapter. Sorry section 2048 dash 070 used to call it operational standards Went with more what we usually call things which is operating requirements Rearranged a whole bunch of stuff to try to make it one big section Before it had been separated out into different areas And now it's still broken out by life safety in general within that same operational standard operating requirements section But we try to keep things flowing that somebody could read through that and know exactly how to remain compliant And what they need to do we do add something prohibiting bonfires in short in short terminals That is something we heard loud and clear from the community Um, and I'm sure I don't need to explain why that is a staff recommendation at this point We add language for outdoor lighting again. These are things that are in our city code already, but If you are not familiar with that and you're just interested in short-term rentals, you may not know these things. So we Um, we add it right into the short-term rental chapter There are some requirements related to trash and recycling. That was something we heard loud and clear from the community Um, and we're hoping that it's not a burden on folks. It's just it's just a Trying to avoid a nuisance of having stuff out on the street longer or just piled up. We're just asking folks. Hey You know keep your trash and recycling in the appropriate containers take it out when it needs to be, you know When recology is driving their truck through and then put them away That again that was something that constituents really wanted to see We add language about if we're in a drought again if this Hopefully never again, but let's be realistic that if the council has declared a water shortage or any other type of drought That short terminals will need to post information in the short-term rental unit so that folks know how to Comply and how you know water reduction tips that type of thing and what we're expecting of them And that's in line with all other lodging types in the city. So You know people coming from out of the area may not be familiar with with having to you know, watch their water I mean I If you go to other parts of the country sometimes they they don't have water issues So we just want to make sure that everyone is aware of what we are expecting and again That would only be if the council has declared a water shortage emergency or Is requiring Reduction of use We also are adding a requirement to have exit fire and emergency signage meaning Somebody that walks in just like in a hotel by the door. There's always There's always that one map that shows you how to get out and and that type of thing We're trying to make it so that folks will know where fire extinguishers are Where a gas shut off is anything like that so that in case they're At a short-term rental and an emergency happens. They're going to know what to do and where to find it So it's just a real safety thing that we're that we're hoping Folks that'll benefit folks Enforcement again, I'm going to go very high level on this the experts are sitting behind me And they'll be able to explain far better than I could or even want to attempt to Basically the code enforcement section was Was it was an overhaul the Person that wrote the original section is no longer with the city And so our new assistant chief building officer Building official luke irk wanted to have his hand at it and he did so It's been rewritten to explain when certain types of Penalties would be enforced and others would be enforced depending on the type of infraction It talks about local contact failure to respond Pursuant to the requirements of the chapter and We've heard a lot from folks about wow these permit. I'm sorry these penalties seem pretty high But what the city is doing with the proposed penalty structure is is Just being in line with the california government Code for Specific for short terminals they have a specific carve out for penalties for short terminals And we're going to align with that and again luke and luke and jesse can can give more information on that if you're interested talks about when revocation would happen and what How something is considered a verified verified violation for consideration towards revocation Oh, I almost hit it twice that would have been awful because i'm not positive how to go backwards I think the arrows anyways, so in order to approve zoning code text amendments You have to make the following findings Which staff is able to do the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and any specific applicable specific plan The proposed amendment is not detrimental to the public interest health safety convenience or Welfare of the city and in fact is trying to improve all of those all of the above It is internally consistent with other applicable provisions of the zoning code except there is one difference And that is that quiet hours are extended for short terminals That is something both we've heard from the community and council members that they wanted to see And so they instead of being 10 to 6 Quiet hours are from 9 p.m. To 7 a.m Um the proposed amendment has been reviewed in compliance with the california environmental quality act Which there's a whole slide about that later on? And is exempt So next We're going to talk about all the time That we've talked to the community and tried to get feedback This slide is referring to stuff that happened before that original Ordinance was adopted in october of 2021 Again as mentioned we were in a very quick time frame the economic development subcommittee Wanted us to bring something forward. It was we were worried about fire evacuation all of that and related to the Complaints that were coming in and just we had had A third party vendor do a Presentation for us where they could scrape all of the different websites and they had estimated that there were approximately 350 Short terminals that were operating with no regulations So it was just determined we needed to we needed to act and make sure everybody was able to Have these regulations so anyways before we did that we actually put out a survey that ended up with over 2000 responses Which was one of the biggest survey responses we've ever had And what that survey indicated was that you know folks were Strongly in favor of having a permit requirement and occupancy limit. They wanted those extended quiet hours They wanted the neighbors to know if you know If how to get a hold of somebody if there was something happening They asked then for requiring a limit on the number of strs. We did not include that in the first round Advertising requirements annual renewal requirements. Yes They there was a strong preference for a limit on the number of rental nights allowed per year We did not include that And then again, obviously they wanted to see some enforcement policies Which we included So now that that was then this is now after last august when we went back to the council and Incorporated that 198 cap And explained the code enforcement situation the policies a bit better Council was like, okay now you've got time go out to the community see what the community tells you And then come back with what you hear. So We've done a very robust community engagement process From that time forward. I've mentioned already some of these things We started immediately meeting with industry representatives and neighborhood individuals and groups We did another public survey, which there's a whole bunch that's going to come to you about that in a bit And it's also in your packet. We did those pop-up events like I mentioned to meet people where they're at We had those two city-wide meetings that were virtual And had Spanish translation available. We did that srt bia meeting We also did a met with the roseland community building initiative the rosin cbi folks and Chatted with them about what they would like to see and then we actually did a live radio broadcast on the first bilingual Radio station in america. So that was a lot of fun Now we're going to dive into the survey a little bit I tried to group things and and just add information here There's a full survey report was attached to this Staff report if somebody wants to dive deep It has graphics pie charts and that time that type that might be a little bit easier But if I would have put each one of those we would have been here forever and I've already talked a lot so Most of the people that responded to the survey Identified as full-time Santa Rosa residents many of them own residential property Or some own commercial property 15 live in rental property. We tried very hard to reach out to our renters because What we've heard is that they're concerned A lot of folks are concerned about how short terminals impact rental communities and So we got 15 percent which we would have liked to see in hire But I reached out to different rental Agencies and and there was no response anyways So 87 percent of the respondents said they don't own a short-term rental And 13 percent own Short-term rental in the city or somewhere else And as you can see here Quite a few well more respondents live near a non-hosted str than any other answer But 36 also said they don't know if they do One of the main questions was how do you feel about the 198 non-hosted short-term rental city wide? And 63 percent said they felt that it should stay or that there should be even fewer 35 percent said there shouldn't be a cap at all or that there should be more 3 percent had no response to this And then the question about whether the city should limit how many short-term rentals an entity can own As you can see was a strong majority 68 percent said yes Then we got into the specific questions about the 1000 foot minimum distance Basically folks are saying they want to keep it as it is or make it bigger The majority I should say obviously you can see here that some 29 percent said that it should be smaller We asked specifically about downtown whether, you know, if that's going to be should we look at that as more of a visitor Destination a tourist home hub, but most people still said no we think that it should be the same everywhere And then we talked about how about in multifamily units citywide in downtown and most people said it should be 1000 feet More than 1000 feet were not allowed in multifamily units at all And what we're talking about are shared walls like apartments and that type of thing We did not include anything Preventing that that is not part of our recommendation, but as you can see here that was something that the community Did respond More towards and then code enforcement felt that the penalties are adequate or not harsh enough And then 19 percent said they're too harsh 6 percent didn't answer And then here you can see where the respondents live within the city It's important to note that 10 percent of the respondents didn't live in the city at all and Admitted that and then 10 didn't respond to this question And that could be when we were out at pop-up events We would try to link to this council map, but then it would kick some folks out of the survey unfortunately So that's a glitch that we're going to try to figure out how to How to make better next time we're out and about with ipads trying to get folks to take a survey for us so The majority as you can see well the majority the highest number of respondents are in council district four four Excuse me followed by three and two, but we did get response from everywhere. So We did try okay, so from that outreach Some of that informs the actual Proposed amendments that you have before you tonight But it's important to note that what folks were saying to us That they see that the folks that are very interested in keeping short term rentals or even having more of them Site that they bring economic benefits to the city through tot and bia and potentially You know folks buying stuff going to a market that you know increases sales tax That they provide a lot of business opportunities whether that's property management house cleaners Concierge services that type of thing They folks site that they have a positive impact on tourism And that again that guests visit our local attractions Businesses and restaurants they offer alternative lodging for traveling families and professionals And I would like to add here folks with a dog maybe or a cat that couldn't stay in a hotel They a lot of folks have said they have allowed them to keep their home in challenging economic times That non-hosted short term rentals provide greater income and flexibility than having a long-term renter and that For some folks they want to be able to have a non-hosted short term rental when they live in a different place for part of the year They'd be able to use their house to make money while they air away Oh, I went too far. Let's go back So then we hear from Folks who feel um that short term rentals have more disadvantages and as you can see here the A very common thing that we hear is that short term rentals are really a hotel or a business and that they Otherwise would not be allowed in a residential neighborhood That that original 1000 foot non-hosted separation since it it didn't apply to those early Applicants there are certain areas of the city that are still Suffering from over concentration Folks feel that it's it's not quite fair that short term rentals don't have the same degree of inspections and restrictions that other lodging types have that We hear this one very frequently that short term rentals potentially remove a residential unit that could be used by someone Or a family that would like to live full time in the community The inflating real estate prices and or rental prices and that We've heard from people that are actual real tours Say that if they wanted to sell their house, they would have to disclose that a short terminal is nearby Which could negatively impact their home values And then obviously, you know folks have heard throughout the country and even some local incidents where there have been some You know awful things happen at short term rentals and that neighbors feel like it could happen any time that somebody is Renting out the house next door type of thing And i'm sure many of us can attest to the fact that sometimes it has gotten Unpleasant between neighbors who want to run a short terminal business and neighbors who live next door to them We've heard that short terminals can have a negative effect on neighborhood cohesiveness and character And you know, I i'm reading these things, but you're going to hear all that from the people in the audience So I really don't think we need to get into that. I I think you'll hear a lot from folks that are actually experiencing these things And you have a chance to to read that in your packet, but you can see that overall it's it's um Yeah Okay, so based on community response the The things that came out strongly that we are not including in our proposed amendments here are that Folks would like to see some folks would like to see short term rentals prohibited in non hosted short terminals prohibited in residential zones period Some folks want to see the str cap decreased Or eliminated and some people want to see it increased so that there would be more or less Allowed non-hosted short term rentals same thing with the setback And then for multifamily units should they be the same thing where it's 1000 foot between property line to property line so that if there is more than one In an apartment complex, but they're on the same parcel that would be allowed the way the ordinance is now um Staff doesn't have any of that in this proposed packet Um, obviously planning commission and city council can add anything or change anything that we are proposing tonight um, one of the considerations is that Folks that have gone through the process and received their permit Is it is Is it right for staff without having been given that direction from a review authority to make that uh recommendation so As it says here, we have not been given Any direction to make fundamental changes to the ordinance Okay, we're we're getting near the end. Um, so as I mentioned in the earlier part This is not uh subject to the california environmental quality act It is uh the uh adoption of this ordinance will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment And then we cite a couple of other reasons that it is exempt So with with all that it is recommended by the planning and economic development department that the planning commission by resolution Recommend to city council adoption of zoning code text amendments to title 20 of the santa rosa city code chapter 20 Dash 48 short-term rentals to revise and add new definitions and policies and to incorporate technical changes Including reorganization and clarifying language to improve functionality and aid in implementation and enforcement So that is finally the end of my presentation and i'm sherry meads We've got jessica jones here that y'all know and like I said, we've got folks either on zoom or With us. I missed ryan corcoran who is One of our police captains who has been working with us on this effort He is also here to answer any questions that you may have Thank you. Um, so now, uh, are there questions of staff at this moment? commissioner sisco Yeah, I have a couple that are Uh specific to sherry and then um some from code enforcement And and maybe one for um the fire marshal so I'll start with sherry and I guess if other people want to do sherry they can do that I'm just going to start with sherry, but there'll be other questions when and then we'll when you call them down. Yeah, yeah, okay. Thank you um sherry could you uh, one of the findings we have to make is that uh, This is consistent with the general plan the short-term rentals and we've gotten a lot of letters saying that they aren't consistent with the general plan so could you just say a bit more about how How you're determining that short-term rentals are consistent with the general plan in residential areas Well, I'll give a quick answer and then i'm going to defer to jessica who is better at this than I am. Um They're definitely consistent with the economic development part of the general plan and goals and policies And I will defer to jess for the rest of the answer Sure. Thank you and thanks for that question. Um, so one of the things that we're hearing is that this is the short-term rentals are a business Locating in a residential area And so you know staff has looked very closely into this. Um, we do have other Businesses that are allowed to locate in residential areas and you know in our review of this This falls in line with that some examples are Home occupations there is a list of various types of home occupations that are allowed in residential districts Some of which do include home occupations that allow both customers and clients and You know deliveries and that type of thing coming to the home A small and large family daycares are another example of that where you have Customers and and such coming to the home in a residential area We also do allow some small retail establishments in residential areas that provide services To residents. So those are just some examples. Um, and based on staff's analysis We found that The short-term rentals would fit in Along the side those those types of uses and is consistent with the general plan Great. Thank you. And then again, um Miss Meads if there's a duplex Owner Would that be considered one unit or if they wanted both halves of their duplex would that be considered two units? So anything that has an address has to have its own permit So the duplex would likely have two addresses. So it would need two permits. Okay, great Yeah, and just just to quickly clarify as it relates to concentration Um, the concentration requirements in the code Have a distance requirement of a thousand feet and that distance requirement is between property property lines Not between units. So if you have a duplex that is on one unit on one lot Then both of those units could have a non-hosted Uh permit Okay, but then that owner would have their maximum of The it would be one permit per unit per unit. Okay, correct. And then um You listed um for the the non-hosted those are allowed in any Any zoning district and then for the hosted I mean for the hosted you did that and then for non-hosted you listed All the zoning districts like you'd ever think of I'm just curious what zoning district would they not be allowed in? So at this point, I believe public institutional and open space related districts are the only ones where they're oh and mobile home park and then Ooh, I'd have to double check, but I think we carved out um where the motor vehicle district too that they wouldn't be allowed there Okay, great That's all I have for sherry Okay, does anybody else have questions for sherry at this time? Okay, commissioner sanders. I think I have questions for you, but I'm not 100 sure if they're for you So I'm going to try my best um When we were talking about if I wanted to get information about the violations that were recorded Prior to the urgency ordinance versus post urgency ordinance. Is that a question for you? Is that someone? That could be jesse because loom may not have been here during that time But knowing lou he's probably brushed up on all of it, but it's definitely not me It's one of these two gentlemen to my right. So should I wait to ask that or should I just yeah? Why don't we try and get all the questions for sherry and then we'll go to jesse and lou. So um, do you have other questions? That you think might Okay, I've got a bunch. I'm not sure if they're just for sure. So I'll I'll I'll hold for now suggestions from Attorney as to how we should do this just go back and forth That would be at your discretion chair. I don't have any particular order. You may want to group things and um in By by person or you want to group them by category of proposed amendments? That would be it as you wish Okay, so um, let's go ahead and Since they are sitting there, we'll go ahead and go ahead and ask Your questions and then we'll go back to commissioner sisco and sorry for the convoluted. Thank you. Leave it to the new guy to Make it all weird Thanks So violations we'll go back to that first question violations prior to the ordinance and Compared to violations after the urgency ordinance numbers Well, good evening chair weeks vice chair peterson and members of the commission. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you tonight Um, I I have that information. I do not have it at hand, but I can certainly make it available to the commission okay, so in Hmm Would you say that things have gotten better with noise and nuisance complaints? post Urgency ordinance I would say so. Yes, uh with the adoption of the amended urgency ordinance We saw a very high level of activity And we've been on what I like to call a glide path down towards a maintenance level And uh, yeah, we're definitely moving in the right direction. Okay. Okay good um Do we know how many? host non-hosted STRs are owned by people who reside in Santa Rosa I believe that information was in the staff report Did I miss it? Yes, as of As of april 13th, we had 58 hosted and 167 non-hosted And do we know how many live outside of Santa Rosa? I'm sure that's probably the line right below that, right? I missed it That is not included because staff does not have I can get that information, but staff does not have the discretion to Approve or not approve based on where someone lives I can tell you that I I did pull that information Just out of my own curiosity for the folks that own multiple short-term rental permits just I was just curious if It was mainly People that live here or not Um I just got to flip through all my all my paper here The majority were Santa Rosa residents for that group, but not all there were like five of the 25 That were out of We're not city of Santa Rosa folks okay And along that those lines do we know How many non-hosted because I guess what we're talking about primarily is non-hosted Considering that hosted Have free ring except in open space mobile home parks possibly Some of the other Things that you talked about do we know how many are owned by corporate interest? None Zero that is something at least they're not supposed to be That is something that was agreed or you know the council recommended and that we followed through with An LLC even cannot own a no business entity can be issued a short-term rental permit It has to be a natural person or a trust of natural persons Okay, so that brings me to a very next question is Are we potentially messing with someone's estate planning? Because oftentimes people will hold a property in trust And then that would be held under the umbrella of an LLC Which limits liability to that to the operatives of that LLC But for tax purposes it's passed through income. So it's kind of treated as You know ordinary income and there's no corporate veil On your LLC Is there is there any potential problems that we see by limiting LLC? ability to hold these properties That may end up messing with someone's retirement plans their estate planning I can defer to Ashley, but I I mean I will just say that That is never our intent However, we don't Have a mechanism at this point to be well, this type of LLC is okay. This type of LLC is not okay That's not I mean we're planners. We're not attorneys. And so we don't look at that level. We just per council direction Limited liability corporation is a corporation And we don't require any specific insurance for these particular things some jurisdictions do so I think that was also a consideration when Going you know deciding to follow just no business entities whatsoever and we would hope that somebody could you know Continue within their trust and that that could some that could still work within their plans Do you have anything to add to that? I don't have much to add to what planner means has said I'm not an estate planner, but I have not been made aware of any issues or problems as As far as I have heard since the enactment of the first ordinance In all of the permitting that we have completed to date Okay Um, I'm just going to keep talking. Is that okay? I'm sorry. Should I keep going or should I yes, let's just go ahead. All right. Thank you. I'm sorry. I've got a lot of questions What can I say? So when we were picking the 198 as the cap and you explained that that was the number of permits In process at that point Was there any consideration? And I guess this is going back to prior the urgency ordinance was there any consideration to doing a percentage as opposed to a number or maybe Establishing zones. I mean, we have a great freeway that a couple freeways at bisect our city You know so many in that zone so many in that zone northeast southeast northwest southwest y198 May I understand why but was there consideration to something else? So when we first did the urgency ordinance in october of 2021 We were We didn't bring any of those specific things to the council. Those were determined the evening of the meeting They were driven by council direction. What we had heard was the importance of protecting our housing stock and protecting our neighborhood cohesiveness and so we were looking for a way to um Limit the number of non-hosted short-term rental permits from day one and also Try to keep them from overrunning neighborhoods and and that was How we ended up with You know The urgency ordinance to begin with and then the cap was based on We were we had a slog of permits to get through and we were also thinking more in terms again of protecting housing stock and this was one mechanism to do that Um We did not look at percentages or districts. That was not something that was Directed for us to do Some jurisdictions do and some jurisdictions just eliminate them in residential zones or have a percentage like you said We have always we've been in a housing crisis for you know For a long time the tubs fire. We still haven't rebuilt everything there. I don't think jesse can probably tell me that So it was always one of the concerns was to Limit the number of of units that would be Potentially removed from long-term occupancy So at we're The 198 is You said something that we have close to 70,000 housing units 69 something something like that not not all of which would be able to be non-hosted short-term rentals That's just a general number that yeah, so we're at one less than one percent. That's correct At what percentage does one percent effect? Do we know the effect of one percent of strs that it has on our housing stock? Well, what we do know is that The 198 are potentially not being used for long-term housing That I mean that's just a common sense equation. It doesn't necessarily mean that's true But if those 198 homes were Coming in on a new subdivision project, we'd be really excited about that right. I mean you're right. I guess what I'm Wondering is is there a sweet spot? where there's a number of operable strs That does not impact Housing stock. I mean if it was up to y'all if it's four percent Would we see is there something that we could see? We're at less than one percent So I want to make sure that if when we're making you know decisions that We're making decisions based on especially if we're going to say we're protecting housing Right if we're less than one percent Is there some way to find out how that percentage actually affects the availability availability of housing in I'll say one thing and then I'm going to defer to Jess and that is I did receive emails from folks Especially from coffee park that were saying they lost their housing because of it being turned into a short-term rental But I'm going to let Jess answer that. Yeah, so if I may commissioner I think at this point we don't have an answer to that question It's something that we certainly can research and in particular reach out to our housing department To try to find an answer to that but we don't have an answer tonight. Okay. Thanks Uh, and I guess it's coming back to my guys here. I think um So We get noise and nuisance complaints Do we know that they are noise and nuisance complaints from people who are operators and good standing or new operators or are they outside or you know outside of our permitting process You know, and I guess maybe the question is how many Short-term rentals are being operated in Santa Rosa that are rogue operators And are those noise complaints being attributed to those who are operating good standing? There's a lot in that question. Let me let me let me try to unpack it With regard to our responding To a complaint on any given str on a noise issue If it's a permitted str We would address it as a noise issue If it's an uncommitted str We would go down a different path because they don't have a permit to operate to begin with Whether we were aware of them or not. So From a statistic standpoint, we'd probably record that as an unpermitted str What I can tell you is that um since September of last year, we've uh of all of the 281 code enforcement complaints We've received eight have pertained to noise Some of those have been for the same property And I apologize for not having that broken out Specifically, but it's a relatively small part of the total complaint load that we take in on strs I'm getting ahead of you on my questions. Thank you. Um the same property Do we know how many frequent flyers we have that's what we used to call them in the fire department They're frequent flyers. How many people how many str operators are or do they exist that? Garner the lion's share of complaints and then on the other side of that are their You know complaints coming in from one Or a few You know Am I making sense with that question? Yes, we we receive We receive a variety of complaints a variety of of sources And um my only concern is whether the complaint is valid I I don't really I don't look at where it came from. I don't look at what the motivations might be for it I just look at whether there's substance to it. Um, I uh much as your other question Um, I can give you a specific number of frequent flyers as you say But just as a general overview, I can say that of the approximately 290 cases Complaints, I should say that we've received it involves approximately 200 properties So so at least Um Substantial portion of the remaining properties have several I can tell you that Quite a few of them have two or three less have four or five. I don't think any has more than five And again, these are these are over time If if two complaints come in the same day for the same property we we would typically count that as one complaint. Okay Oh, I see so multiple people call because there's party going on over here. That's one complaint Yeah, we we don't want to overburden our system when we don't need to so we'll just make a notation In in the case file that we have a number of complainants, right? Okay. Thank you and um this my questions are all over the place So forgive me. This was freeform typing as I was getting prepared for today um About ad use now I was reading and and I thought it said that ad use constructed prior to january 11th 2018 were exempt, but then I think you said that that's no longer the case. They're all unable to Be used as short-term rental. Is that correct? So yes and no, um originally when we wrote the ordinance the october 2021 ordinance staff cited back to our adu ordinance which had an amendment that became effective on january 11th 2018 that stated Um ad use cannot be used for short-term rentals Essentially rentals of less than 30 days So some ad us That were built before that time have received permits because of that That is Something that the council council wanted them to not be in ad use at all to protect that housing stock as what can what is intended to be lower rental rate Availability for folks so what this amendment package does says From now on we are not going to look at that 2018 date We're going to say if you come in with an application a new application For an adu It's going to be denied because they're not allowed in ad use If you received a permit already for your adu Based on the original ordinance if you stay in good standing and you renew before it's expired and that type of thing We're not trying to take that away from anyone Does that make sense? Yes. Absolutely. Thank you. And so if that Person that that would be an operator in good standing. That's correct. They we're trying to get away from that terminology. Thank you It's very confusing. It's very confusing. So it's just somebody that's compliant. Got it. So In a sense, could I say grandfathered? If they had if they try not to say that too There's somebody that has a permit now and they remain compliant. They're able to keep it. Okay. So that person That person that person They decide that they want to renovate their adu and they have to pull permits For that renovation Do do the new permits that are being pulled become the new date of consideration? Or are they still That person i'll have just confirmed my thing, but it should not be related whatsoever The str permit is the str permit and the building permits would be the building permits Almost done almost done You had mentioned That the the concept behind Reducing the number of strs owned by an individual Was the goal is to create more equity like why can you have two I can have one kind of thing Was there any other considerations made on how to achieve that equity? For example, you could have okay, you can have two we're going to raise the cap to this You can have five and we'll raise the cap to or get rid of the cap all together That is something that is totally within your purview as a review authority But that would be a substantial change to what council has given us direction for Which you can see in the current ordinance So we we haven't received direction for that and that is not something that staff would just Determine on their own Just give me a second When we're talking about the outreach and There was a lot of outreach Was I didn't notice any out or Let me let me rephrase that Was their outreach to st r owner groups specifically to ask their opinion about nuisance complaints and Things like that and who were they if there were so we met with Some of my favorite people that are in the audience now representatives from the Sonoma county coalition of hosts um a anybody that I mean, I don't know if i'm supposed to say names of people Gary letts and a few of his his cohort came and met with us We were willing to meet with anyone And we did we met with you know people that are very pro short-term rental and we met with people in neighborhoods that that feel like they Affect their lives in a very negative way So we definitely tried to make ourselves available to anyone And I I specifically even reached out to a person that has written many emails and offered to meet and That didn't happen, but we've you know, we've tried to reach out to I'm sure there's more. I'm sure there are more people we could talk to but we also Just put out an open invitation to anybody that wanted to talk to us I mean, that's the fun part of the job. I was talking to the folks I guess the reason I ask that is I would love to hear Their take on how they police their business You know, I think you will hear some of that tonight. Yes. Thank you My last one. Yay For now I've been talking to or reading a lot of emails from people who are Um owner occupant That's their primary residence And they want to be able to you know rent out their house to go visit this one family in particular To visit their daughter who lives like in pakistan And they are able to you know Say, hey, we're we're leaving they go to their neighbors and knock on the door and And say hey, can you keep an eye on the place? We've got some renders that are coming in and everybody's good and then they go and do the thing They also have a actual non-hosted short-term rental Is there any consideration of should Was there any consideration I guess made to what I call part-time short-term renters So that you know, they're not You know sort of swept out from being able to you know, take advantage of Rending out their primary residence. They're not necessarily out buying you know properties for the sole purpose of You know making a profit. They're you know able to do it because you know Bottle rock comes and they can rent their place out Should be any consideration of that so we putting language in there We looked at a lot of things as a staff working group and and you see a few of us here, but at um Prior to the adoption of the October ordinance. We met with people from every department almost And we looked at at at different options and that type of thing and One of the things that was a concern was Actually, well, it doesn't matter it was the enforcement of something like that How would we know if somebody really is only gone a certain period of the year? Where do you cut that off? It's okay if it's three months or it has to be less than six months How would we how would we keep track of that? And so that person would be able to apply for a non-hosted short-term rental permit absolutely they would For that type of use and or they could rent their property out To something to someone or a group for longer than 30 days But what you're describing of someone Leaving and leaving it as a as a non-hosted short-term rental essentially they would be required to obtain a permit for that Thank you. Um That's it for now. Thank you We're still here so Okay, so let's go back to commissioner sisco and her questions for code enforcement um Just for education purposes. Could you describe? How complaints are addressed what would the actual code enforcement process is if somebody, you know issues some kind of a complaint Certainly that would uh, it would depend upon the nature of the complaint. First of all If it was a noise complaint, which we call a point in time complaint Our goal would be to be on site to witness it ourselves To that end we established a hotline That allows an officer to be reached at any time of the day or night And we're we've been pretty good at responding within about half an hour So again documenting the violation is key for any enforcement action Other types if a complaint comes in regarding an unpermitted STR the first thing I'm going to do is look at air bnb and see if I can find their advertisement There's my proof that they're operating. I know they don't have an str And then we enter into that that dialogue with the owner to try to bring them into compliance If it's an approved str that has a An error in their advertisement which happens frequently Again, we reach out and we contact them and and work to gain compliance There's a variety of other types of violations. We get lighting complaints where it's a glare. So um, that's fairly Repeatable so it doesn't have the same urgency that a noise complaint would but we would go out after hours And look at it in the dark from the neighbor's property And and try to come up with some solutions to again mitigate mitigate that violation That covers most of the scenarios there's always going to be different Things but but I think the common the commonality here is that we want to document it We want to see it ourselves And and then we'll reach out to the responsible party and work towards compliance And if I may thank you if I may Sorry, I turned it off when I moved it Jesse Oswald chief building official One thing I want to point out in this ordinance is this is a ministerial ordinance and that's that's significantly different than most ordinances that are enforced Normally ordinances that Address code enforcement or any type of violations are discretionary or have a lot of discretion built into them This ordinance is very specifically non discretionary. It is 100 percent ministerial. So When lu talks about a verified violation meaning we have verified that noise complaint or a lighting complaint We are mandated by the ordinance to cite For that violation. So that is a big change To to the typical code enforcement Actions where we can give people a few chances to come into compliance for the weeds and rubbish in their yard In anything that is specifically in these ordinance that is is Potentially a violation we are required by this local law to provide that citation Which we talked about with the one two and three with a certain fine amount. So I wanted to point that out for for the commission okay, and If I have a noise complaint in my neighborhood That doesn't have an str doesn't involve an str. I I call the police What happens if somebody has a noise complaint? Don't know about your hotline and they call the police kind of what's the avenue of how they end up getting to you We've worked very closely with the police department and in you know working that out and the the dispatchers are all aware of the code enforcement response number And so if it turns out during the course of the conversation that it's related to an str They would find their way to us and then we would continue on that process I know there's also a scenario where a police police officer might respond to a noise complaint Where not even the complainant knows it's str related and the officer might realize once he's there That it's an str at that point in time again It would find its way to us to my knowledge that has not happened yet Okay, great excuse captain corcoran. Do you have anything you want to add and you can Just go right there if you want. I just didn't know if you had anything you wanted to add sure just live So we programmed our CAD system with all of the str locations and when Someone calls about an address it pops up on the screen to notify code enforcement with the phone number So the dispatcher doesn't put a call for service in They direct the person to contact code enforcement on their 24 7 hotline and then that person goes out If for example The code enforcement officer decides that this is something that's beyond their control They'll contact us and we'll send an officer out to assist them Since november when we've been working together with code enforcement We haven't had that happen code enforcement has done a great job handling all of the complaints that have come up Great. Thanks for that. Thank you. And then just one last kind of big picture question Do we know kind of the cost benefit analysis here of The income to the city or benefit to the city tax wise toot wise from the short-term rentals versus the cost of Your team and enforcement. Do we have any idea about that? This is going to be a two-part answer, I think So on the code enforcement side Up until now again since approximately august or september of last year We've had a full-time officer dedicated full time to this task And again, as I mentioned earlier, we are approaching a little bit more of a maintenance mode That being said i'm also cognizant of the fact that we're going into summer And i'm expecting that to come back up a little bit So we've only been doing this for you know less than a year. So we still have to kind of Work through the seasons and in the process to get a better idea of what kind of activity we're going to see year-round In terms of Well, I'll leave it there and then I'll defer to sherry on the on the question of uh of the costs So I I can't really do a cost benefit analysis, but I can refer to Page 16 in the staff report that indicates the t o t remitted And the bi assesments collected in 21 and 2022 And I can Also if if any if the commission needs I can explain where those funds go Um, I will also say that total application fees including renewals and re noticing Where that was required Since the inception of the the permit process is 339,775 I will also say that when we designed the Cost of the permit based on the standard temporary use permit We anticipated that being basically the same level of staff review And I think that We found in many cases it actually exceeds that considerably and it was strictly to be a cost recovery basis It was not intended to you know, it was just to cover staff cost I don't know if that helps at all it does and and you are expecting that with renewals the staff time would be Reduced because you would already have information. Exactly. Okay, great. Thanks. That's it. Thank you Um commissioner dug in Yeah, thank you. I've got a couple of questions. The first one is kind of theoretical like miss mutes has made Reference to the the cap. It could be up to us like we could just change it and you know just pulling from commissioner sanders questioning What if we said let's do four percent of all the housing stock Like how would that impact staff at the planning and the code enforcement level? Again, I think this will be a two-part answer on on a code enforcement level If I think it stands to reason that if we see more permitted units will receive more complaints At least for a while That being said It probably wouldn't exceed the the Level of activity we saw right at the very beginning of this process when we we literally had 100 cases open at a time Um, and then as far as the planning side, I'll I'll defer to sherry I think I'm going to let jesse answer that one So yeah, I can speak to that. Um at this point. I mean part of it. It's going to would depend on if the commission recommends and the council adopts An increase in the cap or removes it completely If if it is an increase You know staff is going to and even with the current cap We're going to need to figure out how we're going to accept new applications and the process for that whenever we have You know, uh, if we've got less permits out there than what the cap currently is Um, if the cap is removed completely, um, you know, I would anticipate that we would get In influx in new applications for those folks that have not been able to apply for a non-hosted permit But not to the extent that we saw when the process was first put into place So at this point, I wouldn't expect to need additional staffing to make the process work Thank you And then I've got some sort of more nitty gritty, um technical questions I think for the building official and a code enforcement, but I assume that when somebody applies For a permit that there has to be some sort of on-site inspection And that you look for things like, um, you know smoke and fire detectors carbon monoxide detectors fire extinguishers And that they have to meet certain requirements So that has that has actually been discussed about, uh, on-site inspections or not With the initialization of the very first urgency ordinance There was a desire but not the means And it was discussed again And uh, we are essentially in the same situation is that we are not proposing any on-site inspections if I am correct Simply due to what that What we would have to include in this ordinance going forward staffing and complete costing for additional staff to facilitate on-site inspections So it's all Verification through self-certification meaning their presented application materials have to meet those very specific standards Shown on literally a plan doesn't have to be a great plan, but it does have to show those full full compliance with all those measures so we're just, um Leaving it to host to represent that they have a code compliant structure That has all these things, you know all these Requirements in it, but we're not going out and actually looking for them to make sure that the building is safe That is correct. And if I may during the review process, we do What would essentially be a background Investigation so to speak for a property anyway To to verify that it doesn't have any violations and that they are Applying for a short-term rental in a structure that is known At least by record to be In compliance with all codes and regulations as it is Thank you And if I could real quick commissioner Just to add on to the question about you know, if we were to raise or eliminate the cap impact on planning Staffing and processing permits the other thing to keep in mind is that if that were to happen We still have the Concentration requirement for non-hosted permits, which is a thousand feet And so that would limit the total number of permits overall that could come in I believe sherry has a potential estimate on that Yeah, so I actually asked our GIS team to Take the map of where Short-term non-hosted terminal permits are currently And then determine if we totally saturated the city With them still following that 1,000 foot separation How many could there be and so it was 648 additional Non-hosted short-term rental permits if they were placed exactly as needed to be To meet that 1,000 foot separation Are there I'm gonna try and keep this quick. I think this is this is building on a comment So this is probably for sherry or maybe uh miss jones So what what kind of businesses are restricted in residential zoning? What businesses are not allowed? We heard the ones that were allowed So we'd have to pull up the zoning code, but basically what what is allowed is again Home occupations that meet certain criteria. There's listed out in our code And Daycares of varying sizes type uses so any we have a list in our code of allowed uses and any use that is not Included in that list is basically not allowed. So, um, you know heavy commercial or you know More major commercial type uses other than a neighborhood serving type retail use would not be allowed Um our bed and breakfast is permitted in every residential zoning districts. Yes, they are with the use with Yeah, excuse me with a minor use permit, but not as not by right not by right. That is correct Um, are there any home occupations that are in that list that Are allowed in these residential zoning districts districts where the owner is not home So we don't specify that the the property owner needs to be home. Um, and in fact, you know with a Property owner signature if there was, you know, somebody who was renting the property and living there as a tenant They could get a home occupation permit for that For you know, whatever business they happen to be running As long as we get signature from the property owner Uh put a finer point out where the resident isn't at home So again, there's no restrictions against the the code does not specify that the resident living in the property Needs to be there at all times when the home occupation is there The home occupation is for the person living there. So I think theoretically it's you know when it's an operation That person would be there, but there's no Regulations that require that inner code I'll leave that for now and um Are there any restrictions on residential zoning for long-term rentals? I mean can I if I in any residential zoning district, can I long-term rent my property? Yes, and that would not require any permit Thank you. That's all I've got Any other questions before I I do my questions? Oh Come mr. Sanders You again me again Are the fees that we're charging Now have gone up right from 15 from 500 to $1500 for the first events and are you speaking of the fees or the fines? I'm sorry fines. Excuse me. Yes Are all fines the same so the fine for The wild party that got busted up is the same first $1500 fine for missing signage If it's related to an str. Yes, it would all be on the same schedule One last one. Are there any ADA requirements The short answer is no The the discussion throughout the entire state through all levels of regulatory bodies Has landed that these are still Residentially based occupancies meaning It still lives and breathes like a a dwelling so there are no ADA so to speak requirements Thank you Okay, so I have a few questions And they're kind of they're more technical questions. I think uh, how do you build t o t and the bia assessment? Sorry, sherry. I apologize. I was looking at something else. Could you please repeat that chair? How how do you build the t o t and the bia? Is that through the finance department? Yes, so the revenue folks send out a Letter or something that says okay. It's time again. Can you send us your receipts and The the amount due So that is a completely separate process than planning um, and then in the proposed text amendment changes it talks about permit posting And is that would that be inside or outside? Yes, it's inside. Um, and the idea behind that is so that the Short-term renters have access to what the standard requirements are for their occupancy and parking and that type of thing And uh, how would you maintain a list for new str? So It's say we stay with a cap of 198 Somebody sells or doesn't renew and so there'd be an opening Um, would you like throughout the year maintain a list or how would you do that? That's something we're working on. Okay So I would add that through our permitting system. We have a dashboard and it's actually Public dashboard that's on our website that provides the number of permits that are in process The the number that have been issued denied withdrawn So anybody can go and see how many both non-hosted and hosted permits are currently available So if um, I had a piece of property that I was interested in turning into an str I could go on and kind of sign up for any updates or whatever Yes, our website has a section on the main website for Signing up for notifications, but we do have that online tool that anybody can go to I will say since that Uh cap of 198 was put into place Staff has not been accepting any new applications and at this point we're waiting to see the outcome of this process And are keeping an eye on how many permits are currently Again in process as well as issued. Um, and then we will figure out a process Once you know, we determine if the cap is going to remain or be altered in some way How we want to start accepting new applications Um On the the fees and I'm following up on commissioner sanders question about the defeat the I'm sorry fines for the For different things. Was there any thought about having say a parking fine A fine around parking be different than a fine around noise or a fine around fire pit or garbage or whatever The way the government code is set up it establishes that fine schedule For s for violations of an str ordinance So the way we interpret that as we look at our ordinance and anything that's specifically identified within it as being a violation of that ordinance would apply Now let's look at something that wouldn't apply say An inoperative vehicle in the driveway for months Uh, and it happens to be an str that's still a code violation But it would not be fined at That schedule it would be fined using the normal schedule Which would be a hundred dollars for a first violation um, and The way that it's the way the uh, amendments are written is that uh, you would your permit would be revoked if you have three violations in a year Why in a year why not just three violations period even if they span three years? um So i'm sure there's a reason for that but i'd like to hear it So that's built off of again the government code provisions that have to do with those fine amounts Those fine amounts escalate based upon being within a certain amount of time of each other So if for example a first, uh, citation was issued for 1500 dollars as proposed under the new ordinance and then a year went by with no violations And then there was a new violation and actually correct me if i'm wrong I think it would again start at that lowest level But when when the violations occur within a 12 month period then they escalate So because the citation structure is set up that way that necessarily follows into the ordinance So was there when you met with people or talked among the staff group? Did you talk about um, you know increasing that to be you know Three violations over any period of time or was that never discussed? I'm going to defer to sherry. I don't believe we discussed it So I did mention in some of our staff groups that certain jurisdictions The the the longest I've seen is a 24 month period Um, that doesn't mean that somewhere out there. There's not something longer than that But things change all the time but based on my original research there were some Jurisdictions that would say three strikes within 24 months would have that same effect But um We we ended up with 12 months Thank you. And one last question Um, I know that we've talked about the number of violations and the type of violations Um, I would like to see some kind of a chart that shows, you know, the number of noise violations the number of whatever Um at some point and if not for us, um, I think that'd be great to have for council So just we can certainly make that available. Okay Um, any other questions? Vice chair peterson. Yeah, your question triggered another one for me on the on the transient occupancy tax issue so Is this all self reported? How does the city know what the correct amount is? Yes, it's self reported. Is there an audit power? I mean I'm sorry. I say that again. Is there an audit power? I mean, do you get to look at the books ever? Is it it's truly just hey, here's how many nights I rented here's the rate and here's the calculation There is a provision that they have to keep their receipts for three years But as far as I know, we have never done an audit. What's the penalty for not keeping them for three years? And how would you know Fines is my guess Finances really who would need to answer that and unfortunately Uh, mr. Allen Alton was not able to be here tonight. Okay. Thank you Any other questions from the commission And commissioner sysco Yeah, I was hoping to ask a question of our fire marshal If he's here, I think he is on zoom. Yes. Okay ready Mr. Lowenthal I noted that the bonfire Possibility was eliminated Could you let me know if there were other conversations about these other? Like fire pits recreational fires like what the conversation was about that and why you have them available to the strs Yeah, thank you for the question All along the whole division chief fire marshal so the the goal was obviously to help reduce the risk associated with the occupants using The facilities we clearly defined the different types of open burning They can do with that type of material that readily burns so we tried to break it into Making it clear that there's permissible burning when you're using propane or natural gas and then What the potential is when you're using? Wood or something that can spark So we broke it down and put rules in place that separates The fire pits the recreational fires from flammable vegetation way from structures so that there's clear Measures in place to again reduce the risk the reason that we eliminated the bonfires It's because they are technically something that can be permitted But with the size of a bonfire being over three feet in diameter and two feet in height That puts it out of a recreational fire into bonfire We just felt it was easier than really no reason for something of that size to take place and again just to To do our part to make the use safer We Did have discussions that ultimately led to us putting the restriction on all open flame burning Utilizing wood and and whatnot Once the fire season is declared and that would go in line with some of our other burning Bands that go into effect during fire season in the wildland over interface And so hopefully it all just kind of ties in a lot easier But no discussion about just eliminating all of those items as amenities for an str Just because of the fire danger No, we fell with the measures that are in place You know, obviously we're open to any guidance or recommendations from From the commission and or counsel, but with the verbiage and the wording that we put in place Try to make it as safe as possible during the winter months But essentially once fire season is declared those activities cease anyways, so it becomes a off season Risk mitigation Okay, great. Thank you Yes Hello, mr. Fire marshal I wanted to ask Do you regard Short-term rentals as a target hazard That needs special consideration in evacuation Scenarios during a large-scale event We do and that's why we put some of those additional measures in place including the ability to utilize A landline at the facility for stoke alert There's equivalent of our verse 901 system as well as the educational materials that reflect the neighborhood travel routes the evacuation zones And most importantly the know your alerts Our goal is to make sure that the people that are using the short-term rentals Have the information that they need in the event that we need to get it to them The last thing we want is somebody to be utilizing One of the short-term rentals and not be aware of what's occurring and then potentially be delayed in Getting the notifications and or putting themselves or a neighbor in harm's way By either evacuating or not evacuating when we need them to So hopefully again with the measures that we have in place it will help Provide a higher level of protection for the people utilizing the short-term rentals and those living around them Thank you So any other questions at this point from the commission? So I think we'll we'll take a five-minute break Before we open the public hearing on this so if we could be back at 655. Thank you Okay, we're gonna get started again with the meeting if you could please take your seat Okay, we're gonna Continue the meeting now So at this time i'm going to open the public hearing on this item But before I do I want to make a couple comments We're using speaker cards the blue cards that were at the top So if you haven't filled one out and you wish to speak please do so and give it to The staff up there at the top Because we have so many speakers Present and on zoom we're going to limit this comments to two minutes rather than the customary three The comments from in person will occur first And then we'll take a break and then go to the zoom comments Let's see I will call people in groups of three so if you could make your way to the podiums at the top that would be great also If you if please try not to repeat Each other If somebody speaks and they have a comment that you agree with raise your hand or something like that but otherwise it Becomes very repetitive for everybody So with that I will as I said go ahead and open the public hearing on this And oh one thing I did want to mention for those of you who aren't familiar with public meetings and When you make a public comment, we don't do back and forth if you ask it's a question. We won't answer it We will be writing down your comments and your questions and when Public comment period is over. We bring it back to The commission will have those comments and questions that you've asked to be able to Ask staff and address those so So with that as I said I'll go ahead and open the public hearing on this The first speaker is chris clark Followed by scanda Visvanathan and I'm sorry. I'm but but your names Followed by sarah falkner and as you speak if you could Say your name for the record My name is chris henty clark. I'm just going to read an email to make it faster here I'm sorry it was chris clark was first I'm chris henty clark. I guess this guy So chris clark is first Okay Oh Thank you I'll keep this short My financial future is at stake here It will take me many years to recover the investments I've made to my home so that I can support short-term rentals How would any of you feel if that were you? And it's bigger than just me it's about our city I love our city. I love providing a place for families to stay when they visit I've had people send me photos of their family In my backyard all dressed in matching outfits taking a photo for their Christmas cards It warms my heart These are people that want the amenities of a home And if they can't stay in our city They'll just go somewhere else The impact is not titanic but in a small way my home helps local businesses Are my rest are my guests filling up all the restaurants? No, of course not, but they're there They buy gas in our gas stations souvenirs from our shops They buy food at our grocery stores and pay taxes that support our city's functioning I'm speaking for the many who aren't here today Those that work in our economy and depend on its future I would ask everyone here to make decisions that are good for the future of santa rosa And not allow the opinions of those Who would exclude the people working in our economy our economy from the growth of our city? Thank you Thank you skanda Good evening I'm skanda with swanathan You didn't butcher my name. So thank you My wife and I we uh retired citizens of santa rosa We moved here from santa rosa in 2021 We sold our house in santa rosa Because we had a huge mortgage And we came here knowing that We would be having $2,000 of expenses every month just property tax and fire insurance We are not grandfathered in like a lot of people here are and Have low property taxes But we took that because we were expecting to be able to do this short-term rental Looking at it We thought we could recover that and we could be able to do it in the time Where we usually For three or four months we do travel To outside of the country because we have to take care of parents And in that time frame we would recover this cost And unfortunately we fell right into that hole between august 21 and october or november 21 when these new regulations were put in place And we got just zoned out by multiple Permit holders who Who are allowed to apply before us? I was not allowed to apply until december 3rd by which time I was done. There was no chance of applying anymore. So what's happening now is that We put all of our projects on hold We've stopped at least i've i've i've went to lose my deposit on my solar energy system and I think that we will be Putting our house in the market And it's because I think that this is something which we Shouldn't be doing or it's it's not going to sustain our retirement So thank you for hearing me out And I think this thousand foot rule It's a violation of my rights as a homeowner Who has a right to do whatever I want. Thank you your time is up. All right. Thank you Sarah Faulkner I'm going to read two quotes We want to preserve the kind of neighborhoods where people know their neighbors Where children can play in the streets where there's stability and security It would be most unfair to take people who've acquired homes and invested their life savings and suddenly say to them He must now have people living next door who may be objectionable to you While these quotes may feel familiar to you based on the statements here They were made by those in the 1960s who opposed the fair housing act and act seeking to prevent discrimination in our neighborhoods At their core both of these issues are about who gets to live with where and with whom Opponents of short-term rentals often fear will lead to an influx of people with different lifestyles cultures or socioeconomic backgrounds The world is changing as it forever does and the concept of where someone lives is changing too People have many reasons to use short term furnished residences as homes This regulation tries to say that anyone living in a home for less than 30 days is a different group That can be regulated differently than the rest of us When we create an other group we're quickly able to dehumanize them Like in this ordinance the right Against unreasonable search and seizure in this regulation the enforcers actually wrote the legislation of enforcement Giving them the crazy power to enter any home at any time for any reason or for no reason at all How is this not a violation of the fourth amendment? How does it make sense to have one full-time dedicated code enforcement officer to target fewer than 169 citizens? If these regulations are for the safety and peace of the neighborhood, why is the code of conduct not expected of everyone? It's all too easy to carve out a group of others and take all of their whites away and it shouldn't be I purchased instead of a short-term rental a few months after the covid shutdowns in 2020 when my company closed I spent three full-time months and well over a hundred thousand in furnishings I a year later purchased a second home I've had zero complaints and zero lay violations for these properties And if I were to lose one of these homes it would forever destroy the financial future of my family Thank you Thank you The next three are marcia shot. Well Eric rail And gary length if you could make your way to the podium So we'll start with marcia shot. Well Good evening Um, I am the third generation of santa rosa in here my grandmother came here in the late 1800s I'm sorry. Could you speak a little closer to the microphone? Sure. Thank you. Is that better? Yes. Thank you I'm the third generation santa rosa in here My grandparents came here in the 1800s. So We've lived here all these years our whole family Um, and now we have an air b&b next door to us that has caused us nothing but grief the noise Thank goodness they made some rules before that there was 16 people in the backyard drunk Playing cornhole yelling screaming fighting with the neighbors So I thank you code enforcement for that But my other big concern is they've got a fire pit in the backyard underneath oak trees We live on manzanita. We haven't burned up yet Then there's another fire pit right down the street on this little short dodge lane My concern is what happens when these fire pits like the wind comes up at three o'clock every afternoon And the leaves from the oak trees tumble down fall into the fire pit and Say la vie. I I think that there should be no fire pits. We went to groveland for a wedding Down by yosemite. They don't allow fire pits. There's a stub there. They've taken all fire pits and barbecues out I think that is a really smart thing to do to keep from burning up neighborhoods. So I would really Appreciate it if you consider taking all the fire pits out at least in the wooded areas. It just makes sense Thank you Thank you, uh, eric rail Good evening My wife and I purchased our home in fountain grove in march of 2017 We lost it in the tubs fire. We rebuilt Now we're surrounded on three sides by short-term rentals Since we rebuilt the five bedroom house across the street from us was sold to a woman living out of state who converted it to a non-hosted str Shortly thereafter the five bedroom house next Next door to us was sold to a gentleman who owns two other houses in sonoma county Who immediately obtained a non-hosted str permit? Finally the five bedroom house that shares our back fence was recently sold for two million dollars And the buyers obtained a hosted str permit Asserting to the city that they will utilize the 4600 square foot main house as a hosted str Why they will live in the 500 square foot guest house The current ordinance allows these three strs to bring in a total of 30 renters each night And a total of 15 additional guests during the daytime For a grand total of 45 people with all the associated partying loud music and disturbances That create anxiety for my wife and me virtually every weekend These renters don't respect the peace and tranquility of our neighborhood Because they're just there for a good time for the weekend All of this comes with the steady stream of gardeners pool cleaners repairmen house cleaners property managers and the regular sound of beep beep beep At all hours of the day and night from the minibus used by the property management company to shuttle their guests around Some people talk about property rights Of str owners in good standing But what about the property rights of homeowners in good standing? This body in the city council has been made mistakes in the past However, no one could have anticipated the damage that unrestrained growth of strs will inflict upon our community I encourage you to take advantage of this opportunity To correct those past mistakes and begin the process of undoing some of the damages that have occurred Thank you. Your time is up Gary lent Hi, i'm going to talk to you about three things. One of them is a suggestion on grandfathering. Sorry sherry Of people who have multiple rentals Short-term rentals the other is the tripling of fines and the possibility of bifurcating those fines And the third thing is Unlicensed operators in our city, which i think are the real scourge so first of all Short-term rental basically saved my financial life eight years ago I was the the great recession hit me very hard I had young children still going through a bad divorce Underemployed for a number of years and somebody turns me on to air bnb and it was a lifesaver It enabled me to save my home Save for college education for my kids and i want to retire in the next few years And now I have a chance to do that Along comes this stink bomb in the middle of this revision that says one per owner Well, now i'm lucky enough to have two and that is a huge part of my retirement strategy In fact, I don't have a pension. That's it and somebody wants to make me give up one of them Good luck. I'm consulting every attorney. I can because this is huge So I want you to consider the people who've been operating in good faith not doing that to them Secondly the tripling of fines just yesterday or two days ago I was given a fine for some wording that was unclear in one of my ads By the way a permit which was reinforced and Re-given to me just last month And i'm told that the language is wrong and i'm getting fined 500 dollars. Well in a month if this passes It'll be 1500 there should be two schedules one for ministerial things like this Just like other code enforcement things noise is the big thing. That's what we're fighting It's you can hear from everybody noise and parties noise and parties that can be a million dollars I don't care good operators like me eight years hundreds and hundreds of guests thousands of guests No problems no question whatsoever. So you're fighting the wrong enemy if there's 350 as as miss mead said of unlicensed in the city That's who we should be going after people like me who are following the rules Don't badger us with 1500 dollars for miss wording ads. Thank you Thank you The next three are jennifer cog liando Charles no last name and shane hall Hi, i'm jennifer There's a button on the side So you can lower the I thought we had three minutes. So i'm gonna try and make this shorter I've been a property manager for seven years in the bay area And this allows me a lot of flexibility to help with my parents. So because i'm working at home In the past seven years I have only had two parties under my watch out of 8 000 stays And I have helped over a hundred hosts and manage Dozens of listings Most guests are respectful. I have hosted guests for many different reasons Everyone from grandparents coming to see their grandchild Patients coming to have a procedure done at one of our great hospitals People come in for funerals birthday parties family reunions To tour colleges to see a sick friend Or to simply carry out their dream by visiting this beautiful area Sometimes it's just good old relaxing girlfriend Weekends outside the city that really heals the soul Most guests are not coming here to party Sonoma county is Always has been and always will be a destination spot. I came up here for most of my growing years My mother had a cabin in casadero. My father had a place up in tibrecove and eventually we all moved up here to stay Don't ruin the dream for tourists who want to visit But don't want to stay in a motel room on santa rosa ave let them live like a local for a weekend Thank you Thank you charles Hi, my name is charles My feeling on the ordinance is those who already have a permit if they have more than one They should be able to keep it What I do like in the new ordinance is that the number of new permits Has a limitation and it has to be a real person or a trust And it would be nice if an llc could be included as well What is not fair is that my right to do this now takes away the right of my neighbor and everyone around me within a thousand feet And only 198 permits are allowed in santa rosa That hurts me because those two those two limitations Negatively affect average folk in their time of need Will a permit be available for them in august of 2013 my partner retired from cal fire with post traumatic stress disorder And decided to move to hawaii I was left to pay all the bills and support our son and my disabled nephew who lived with me Renting my home short term helped me make ends meet in my time of need Forward i'm now 59 years old My partner has moved back and we've never had an issue with our neighbors and my ability to rent my property short term Is a part of my retirement plan my dad's 96 years old and in a retirement community and those facilities are expensive Sometimes people have to sell their homes to afford the cost of living in a care facility But if people could rent their home or second home short term Because an elderly couple doesn't always need long term care at the same time That money could be used to help pay for their care And if it's their primary home that home will be theirs to return to in the event they get better Or they enter hospice and need to return home because the facility can't care for them anymore If they rented their home long term to earn income they would have to wait 30 to 60 days after giving notice And people who enter hospice rarely have that long to wait Limiting to the number of new hosted non rental permits that permit can have And it has to be a real person is enough don't create an ordinance where a neighbor My right to do this now takes away the rights of my neighbors around me. Thank you 198 lucky ones. Thank you. Thank you Shane hall It will come back to him in case The next three are priscilla bale Ed kinney and tim delugo So we'll start with priscilla My husband and I own a home in bennett valley I want to acknowledge the santa rosa code enforcement staff and thank them for being very helpful and responsible To us Before I begin my remarks Uh, there's an unhosted short-term rental house directly behind our home It's owned by a high net worth out of town couple Who fitted the house out as an entertainers paradise and it's advertised as that So last summer every weekend day every weekend evening. They were loud raucous Disruptive parties Right across the back fence from us One renter Shouted the f word over and over and over again So we don't feel safe inviting our granddaughters who are 13 and 8 over to our home on the weekends the management company Shut down the parties at 10 o'clock, but they keep renting the house over and over again to the same people And don't screen their tenants So we don't feel secure in our home And our neighbor doesn't either when I asked her she's an elderly widow Who lives by herself? I asked her to call the police at the last rowdy party and she said she was afraid she was afraid of repisals Also, I think short-term rentals are instead of bringing income and jobs to santa rosa Actually diminish our local economy They remove homes from our desperately limited housing market and they reduce the value of the neighboring houses surrounding the short-term rental Our realtor has told us that having a short-term rental has reduced the value of our house by at least 15 There's six houses around our house So that's 15 reduction times six if you multiply that by the 198 short-term rentals That's a multi-million dollar loss for santa rosa residents. Thank you Uh next speaker ed chinney Yeah, hi, my name is ed kinney. Uh, I have uh run successful airbnb's and vrbo's for over 20 years With no complaints other than uh seemed to be some broken Wine glasses and missing teaspoons But in the there's always going to be pros and cons here people are going to have bad situations The problem is the question is how big is the problem? And i'm going to go kind of reflect on some of uh, I'm sorry. Mr. Sanders on the on the right side down there. He was asking questions. I thought we're very poignant How big truly going like how big is the problem? Okay, so we've got a hundred and 98 airbnb or non-hosted airbnb's Approximately 280 noise complaints. That's less than one per night There was no data that was presented on how many Nights are out there So of those 280 noise complaints How many renter nights was that over? I mean it's less than one per night Uh per unit But when you even you factor it down to Renter nights that number is going to be even less significant Some gentleman over here with the he's surrounded by him. He's got a problem. I get that Where do we go with that code enforcement? All right, the lady that just spoke I talked with her before I feel her pain. I get it She's and she has said that she has called code enforcement numerous times And she doesn't get any reaction. Why can't we if i'm pro BRBOs okay i'm pro for this thing But I want to keep my business going and I want code enforcement to take control if there's a problem So that we can keep this system alive and not make people like her Suffer so that's all I have to say. Thank you very much Thank you, uh tim delugo Thank you Okay, uh some of the points that I had to make have been asked already. So I'll I'll make it really brief I'm hearing a lot of uh, you know with the new proposed Codes and ordinance There's a lot of one size fits all and I just kind of want to put some things on the table I have a nmu unit downtown. It could be a state farm Building tomorrow. It could be a restaurant. I've got a restaurant next to me. I've got Memorial hospital down the street. I've got uh, you know cpa across the street Two back neighbors are businesses and I do have a short-term rental right next door to me We help each other, you know, keep an eye on things. I've never had a complaint I've never had a party and I've operated this for three years but The fact that my neighbor is Less than a thousand feet away that could pose a problem in the future. I'm assuming And again, these are nmu mixed-juice You know properties So I think the one size fits all is not you know, it's not going to work very well We have to have some consideration into where It's located and and how we address this thousand feet I think that's oh and the other is The kind of guests that I've had and I'm sure this is a similar story for for many of us I've got people coming from Germany. I've got uh people coming from England You know, they're just visiting the area and uh, these aren't you know, I don't have the party tied Not to say it couldn't happen, but it hasn't happened And if I did My neighbor who's the restaurant next door probably wouldn't have such a problem as much as The ways that goes on in that restaurant as well. I don't have a problem with that either but uh the Memorial hospital I find that I'm I'm hosting To a lot of people that are here for triage Relatives that are right down the street. So that's a whole other thing. Thank you Thank you, uh next is Sheila Lawrence Followed by Marie Piazza Followed by Maureen Linde If you could state your name for the record when you get to the podium And you can go to either podium either side Okay, my name is Sheila Lawrence And uh, you're not really going to get an argument from me because I actually think both sides are right I think the problem lies With the system Uh, the the vacation rental owners have a right to expect that they can Go ahead and rent their property short term Along with the guidelines that Sonoma county set out What I see with these Amendments is they're clawing some things back and they're putting some things out there that are Next to impossible to uh to reach that those goals The homeowners themselves have an absolute right To the quiet enjoyment of their home So you have you have property rights on both sides are different And we don't need to create losers in order to have winners We can have both sides win These uh amendments show me a lack of sufficient understanding of the business of vacation rentals And um, how much time effort and money it takes to set one up and to run one and um, I think that the The the sound and the Fire hazards can be enforced and I think that code should be an enforceable one and people should Be able to call the police of the reasonable Expectation that they will come out and that Um, you know this will have an impact on the vacation rental at least a notice Or something so that they know that if they get three strikes they're out Thank you. Thank you Hi, I'm Marie Piazza And um, we have one right next door to us short term rental, which is a nightmare But I want to talk to you a little bit more with some data about existing short term rental supply And that it is adequate to meet perceived needs The what I'm hearing is that the short term rentals are necessary for visiting nurses temporary construction workers Fire evacuees actors and others and I say there's already enough. There's adequate transient accommodations to fulfill these perceived needs In fact, the Sonoma county coalition of host's website says that there's currently 1873 short term rental permits within the county Okay in his presentation to the board of supervisors at their july 20 21 meeting brian o of permit sonoma Estimated that there's nearly 3 000 short term or vacation rentals within the county I think it's fair to say that within the county there's already between two and three thousand short term rentals Of these many are located a short distance from the city limits of sienna rosa A quick search on erb and b and vrbo websites revealed that there's 200 plus listings of short term rentals Within a 15 minute drive of the city limits of sienna rosa And in addition to these there's numerous hotels and motels within the city limits This combination of short term rentals and existing commercial rentings is more than adequate And we don't need to put these in our residential neighborhoods Where basically we have a revolving door hotel With no supervision Behavior that would never be allowed in a motel or hotel parties loud noise excessive parking Is allowed to happen in our residential neighborhoods And the fact that I have to disclose when I go to sell that there's a short term rental next door That says that this is a negative impact on the neighborhood along with you'd have to Reveal that you had a violent episode in your house, right? Thank you. Thank you Maureen lind Followed by larry la pair Hi, my name is maureen lindy. I live right next door to a non-hosted short term rental The short term rental has four bedrooms and a pool It is very close to our side yard abutting our primary bedroom and office the current rules allow Up to eight overnight overnight guests and an additional four daytime guests rental rules Do not allow events but eight to 12 people in a yard using foul language screaming splashing drinking Loud music etc from 8 a.m. Until 9 p.m. Is just as disruptive as any event The groups that come to this house are not here to walk their dogs visit a park or go to the farmers market They are here to party and get the most bang for their buck. We have had fighting cars peeling out We've had uh uber's lift wine vans door dash use our driveway to turn around Guests have come to our door late at night looking for the air b&b They bring their dogs to leave them out barking all day long the list goes on and on It has become difficult for my husband to conduct business in his office when this home is occupied To try to refuse the noise we keep our windows and patio doors closed This is not a neighbor. This is a business. This is not a regular neighbor activity The couple that owns his home does not even live here They don't care that we are inconvenienced or woken up at 3 in the morning They don't care that the dogs are barking or lights are left on throughout the night glaring into our bedroom What they care about is their bottom line which is to make as much money off of this property as possible It is disappointing that the city is allowing a business to operate next to a home that once provided peace and solitude When you love when you live next to a short-term rental every guest is a bad actor Doesn't matter how many rules you implement or contact names and numbers you provide The bottom line is that my husband and I are the ones policing this business Would you want this next to you? Would you be a thank you? Darn, okay. Thank you Uh larry lapire Yeah, hi. My name is larry lapire. Uh, I owned a short-term rental on the north side of town Before the doors were open I Had a very gracious conversation with two ladies I'm sure could you could you speak into the microphone? Okay. I'm sorry. That's thank you. All right I had a gracious conversation with two ladies who were opposed to vacation rentals And their number one complaint is the loud nuisance parties I get it No, I totally understand. I'm on the same page with you As an host as an owner. I don't think there is a single owner in this room right now. It says, yeah rat parties That's where the money is now We hate the parties air b&b hates the parties They are aggressive. They have an algorithm that looks for anybody who could possibly have a party and they Totally reject their offer and their request to stay I Look at this Senate or council member sanders you asked what is our uh policing policy I don't know if I can talk about everybody but in 50 seconds. I can tell you kind of what I do It starts with me I set myself up on air b&b. I have uh, you cannot rent or you cannot Request booking if you have no Ratings you have to have at least a 4.0 rating or higher. Otherwise. I have to approve you Then I look at Who you are If you've gone through the algorithm, you're probably okay if you're there I've worked with all my neighbors. I've got Approval for my neighbors that they would Call me if there's any problems if they call me I'm over there. I knock on the door and I say hey knock it off And if they don't go with that I call air b&b. I let them know there's a resource line And if that doesn't work, then I get a hold of law enforcement and I would stop it But my primary goal is to stop the party. Thank you or whatever at that time. Thank you Eric Dietz Followed by Cynthia Hermosillo followed by Bernadette Burrell All right. Well commissioners, uh, you've heard testimony from str owners telling us that they need the income for their From their non-hosted short-term rentals to make ends meet and I empathize, you know that Some people need to generate extra income to afford living here. We all know this is an expensive place to live Though we're less sympathetic towards individuals who operate short-term rentals merely because they can generate a greater profit than renting on a long-term basis We believe that the number of owners who truly need the additional income is small compared to the number of owners Who are just operating short-term rentals on a purely commercial basis And there are alternatives The most obvious answer is to rent out The same property on the long-term lease You know, this would be much less disruptive for the neighbors that live around the property and more importantly If current 198 Non-hosted svrs were converted to long-term rentals It would instantly add to santa rosa's available housing stock I think you all heard from sherry meads that if a new subdivision came in with 198 units But that would be a big thing people would be excited about it Now I can speak from personal experience That this is a viable solution, you know, my wife and I own a rental home In santa rosa and it's been a win-win. It's provided income for us And it's provided a home for a family in santa rosa that lives and works here All right, so now suppose you live next to an str A non-hosted one like I do You know, what what are your options, you know, you can continue living next to a nuisance and Thank you, mr. Lou kirk. You've you've come out to help On the str of this next to us, so I appreciate your help But it requires us to act as partners in enforcing the code. So we actually have to Do this because we happen to live next to one Or we could move away, but you know, then we'd have to disclose To a potential buyer that we live next to an str and that's going to depress the property values Thank you Cynthia hermeseo Hello My name I wish to remain anonymous But it was already said and the reason why is because the city has decided to mail out 150 letters in my name and I already got Two hate phone calls for establishing my home as a short-term rental So I just wanted to let you know part of your coding enforcements is not working out perfectly The couple of families called to wish my family the worst of luck and Our bad. It's just bad luck on us and how horrible We are as people to have our home as a short-term rental anyways I'm here to Ast out. I'm here to tell you that the amount of short-term rentals are in santa rosa Is obviously less than 1 percent. It shows it on your records. It shows it on your slides And thank you for terry for pointing that out less than 1 percent is zero It's zero percent. And if i'm here at every city council meeting possible that i've been in the past I've heard i've heard four homes that probably need to be Um Not allowed to do short-term rentals anymore Out of zero percent. We're here all night long every time fighting for our rights I think the city should do a better Much better at using your so-called code enforcements and your city officials to Reduce the amount of parties Um, I don't know what you're doing with our tax dollars I don't know what you're doing with the so-called city Officials that have claimed to be there for party purposes I have never had a party at my house and I think that you should Decline people who have had parties Thank you Thank you Bernadette burl Followed by rick abbott I have two strs that border my property one is a hosted the other is a non-hosted they hosted has never been a problem This is a couple that built an apartment above their garage to host people and supplement Retirement next to me is an investor owned non-hosted for the sole purpose of maximum return on the investment Also known as a great place for a large group according to the website Lou Kirk with his best intentions But because of the lack of enforcement prior to him coming on board all the violations that were submitted for for nine months was dismissed For 16 months the str next to me advertised for six bedrooms. The assessor's record said it was a four bedroom During that time The city essentially coached the applicant to help them discover how to properly complete their application before it was finally issued a permit With the courtesy notice sent to neighbors Nothing done for false or misleading information on their Permit during the same 16 months 16 months period that that city was assisting the applicant And despite numerous complaints by neighbors for noise disruptions at all hours of the night and over occupancy by overnight guests This operator in good standing was allowed to do whatever they pleased with little to no penalty They were allowed to resubmit plans after 16 months This did not result in a violation but a fixed ticket The city of santa rosa needs to eliminate non-hosted strs from residential zoning We are not nimbies. We are residents that do not want non conforming transient housing next to us It is absolute insanity to live next to a non-hosted sure-term rental and call the hotline Call the managers and basically manage the hotel Why are we the members of the community send our kids to school here volunteer donate and vote here Forced to live next to transient occupancy hotels Thank you for your time Thank you rick abbott followed by chris hentley-clark Good evening rick abbott. My wife and i Sharon have lived in this town for 45 years Numerous signs in the gallery contend that strs are a boon to our economy I'd like to argue the opposite Surveys have shown that up to 98 percent of visitors Will still come to an area even if there were non-hosted strs within that area They would simply stay in other accommodations That means they would still eat at our restaurants visit our wineries shop in our stores And do all that visitors normally do So there would be minimal loss of tourism by eliminating all non-hosted strs from santa rosa's residential areas Those strs could then house permanent residents Who would add their own economic benefit to that of the tourists staying in our hotels This combination of permanent residents in our residences And visitors in our hotels would provide a greater economic benefit than transient occupants Staying part-time in our residents So non-hosted strs Are a drain on our economy and not a benefit Someone asked about a cost benefit analysis The city generates somewhere in the neighborhood of a million and a half dollars annually in t o t and b i a If you consider the loss of property value for all the surrounding homes on that non-hosted short-term rental The 198 homes Have a hundred and one thousand five hundred and eighty four surrounding homes If each one of those homes is devalued by ten thousand dollars That's a devaluation of fifteen million dollars The cost benefit of one point five million versus fifteen million dollars Is pretty clear Thank you Thank you chris henty clark followed by shan hermeseo Yes, uh, my wife and I own three properties in santa rosa with three of which are non-hosted permits We wanted to let you know how becoming short-term rental hosts has changed our lives And how significantly capping the number of non-hosted permits would affect the future we've planned for ourselves And our two children we're asking you to please not cap the number of non-hosted permits Or at least to allow flexibility to transfer each permit into someone else's name on the current title of the property We all know sonoma county has a very high cost of living And it can be hard to have a stable financial future here Even with two parents working full-time middle income jobs I've worked as a pts assistant for 12 years and my wife has worked as an occupational therapist for eight We've been sonoma county residents for many years. We purchased our homes in santa rosa In 2019 2021 and 22 we've invested much of our extra time Lots of money into preparing our units to be beautiful useful well organized places for people to stay We've also been able to keep long-term renters in one of our houses Well under market value. They live in a two-bed one-bath house At 1900 a month, which is well under the current market value We employ a local mom. She's our only our only cleaner and she also helps us with managing She puts her kids in daycare. We pay her $50 an hour, which is a very fair wage Um It's it's been a huge benefit for us. We're hoping to put our kids through college with this We're hoping to continue allowing me to work part-time so I can be home with my my youngest son there when he's off school Um, that was a big blessing this year. Uh, no aftercare at his school. So I would have had to quit my full-time job Um, luckily that worked out Thank you. Thank you Sean Hermosillo followed by dan gunino Followed by fairman Escusia Hello, my name is Sean Hermosillo I'm 48 years old native to Sonoma county born in santa rosa. My dad was a cop in san francisco My mom was born in hillsburg and we had a board and care home for the mentally ill for 45 years on cherry street I'm now a real estate agent for the past 18 years after going to the jc I have two little boys and my first house Um After I had a condo we turned into an air bnb slash four bedrooms Total two were rented out long term and then we had traveling individuals come and visit while I was Convincing my wife to marry me traveling back and forth between san amonica After that we bought another home moved into it after we moved out of it We turned it into a short-term rental non-hosted We now have three permits and I've been a member of the community Did ffa 4h left sonoma county came back and this is part of how We pay for our life, right? We've had over 800 visitors between the three homes that we do rent And the other 20 properties that my wife helps manage With me helping her In addition to the real estate market, I have not seen a single buyer say I'm not buying that house because it's next to a short-term rental Um, there needs to be regulation anybody who's a bad behaving individual Or owner They need to be penalized and from what I heard the council asked some great questions Eight complaints since this ordinance has been put in place That's really good And I don't even think there's enough data points to show how well this ordinance is working. So please Make it make sense Take away the people's rights that are misbehaving Because I want a quiet community. This is my community And everybody deserves that right to have quiet enjoyment of their home. Thank you Dan Gunino Can you hear me? Yes Good evening. I'm Dan Modino representing one country getaway And I would like to discuss the challenges of poorly managed short-term rentals and how to ensure that Some of those that can benefit from this industry As a certified professional vacation rental manager I will see several properties in sonoma county Well, I understand the concerns of neighbors who have high face disruptions due to short-term rentals It is important to differentiate between amateur and professional operators in this market With access to technical solutions such as cloud recording outdoor cameras indoor outdoors The noise sensors guest screening and security deposits We can prevent and address issues like noise parking parties and trash By implementing best practice management practices Short-term rentals can be conducted responsibly and respectfully while addressing neighborhood concerns The vacation rental industry has been disrupted by web enabled technologies And with the evolution of technology more solutions will emerge and new instances will decrease Therefore, I urge you to consider the following steps to ensure that sonoma can benefit from the great opportunity that vacation rentals can bring To start my first recommendation is to impose hefty fines on rogue operators In order to ensure that they are stripped of their permits We can now allow them to view a fine as a mere expense of running their business This approach will enable professional vacation rental managers and law-abiding homeowners to continue their operations While providing relief for those who have had to endure poorly banished properties Secondly, we shall ask major unlike trouble agencies to collect a to t-tox mandatory Moving on to the third point I propose that we decouple the requirement for parking spaces from the number of rooms on a property Particularly in downtown areas where off-street parking can be scarce Instead, I suggest that we limit the number of on-street parking spots to to one permit To one per actor as permit and leave the responsibility of parking arrangements to be managed between hosts and guests Finally, I recommend I propose a hybrid license that permits primary homeowners to rent their homes for a maximum of 90 nights This approach can be advantageous to homeowners who wish to preserve their homes in the event of job loss Produce additional income or retirees who travel in the summertime. Thank you. Thank you Uh fairman escutche Fairman Oh left. Okay. Thank you. Sorry Ted Ted anastat Followed by mike bryant Followed by daniel gill Hello, my name is ted anastad and I Co-own and co-manage a property management company that specializes in short-term rentals in sinema county Um, I think that it's important whenever we have two polar opposites opinions to look to form a compromise and not Point fingers at what things are are right or wrong on the other side, but come to an agreement together And I think that's what's best for the community and so I'm talking about a couple Changes that I think we can make to the ordinance. Uh, that might help um from The standpoint of someone who's actually running these and managing all these all the time without any complaints Our goal is not to have any parties. We don't want any noise Um, we want to have our houses blend into the the neighborhoods just like Your neighbors that you like and so Uh, let's go with The main concern for strs is noise and partying. I think there's two easy ways to remedy this Um, one require a two-night minimum people coming for just one night. We've we found Uh, pose a problem. They're coming two party. We have a two-night minimum and all our properties It almost eliminated any noise right off the bat Um, two Propose a fine for the violators that are actually coming to the property and making the noise Um, just like someone's gets a speeding ticket You could write them a ticket for making the noise of the property and make it mandatory for these For the host actually Advertise that when someone sees that they could get a violation or a fine of a thousand fifteen hundred dollars for visiting A property and partying. It's easy to actually look the other way or look for a different place to stay um I think that we have Just like we had operators and good standing were omitted from the thousand foot rule and I was first put into place I think there was only 25 property owners that owned more than one property I think we should look at those operators and get standing the same way and allow Uh, property owners to have more than one short term on the area. Thank you. Sorry. Thank you Mike Bryant Yes Thank you for your uh Time this evening. I appreciate it. Can you um, please talk into the mic. Okay. Can you hear me better? Yes, thank you My name is Mike Bryant and I've lived in town here with my wife For 44 years raised our family here I heard the percent of one percent and zero to one percent of the housing market being at issue here But if you live across of backyard fence where there's a seven bedroom home And that's going to be a party house and that's a hundred percent for those that live next door to one Not one percent And I do know that the surveys that were conducted I appreciate the fact that Input from the community was sought But those surveys indicate that most people Do not favor non-hosted Short-term rentals in neighborhoods. They should be restricted to commercial districts I haven't met anybody that would uh feel that my backyard has Been improved or if I wanted to sell it that the the value of my property has been enhanced By the fact that I've got a short-term rental next door the um Hope is that the 198 will be the top end and that as those units expire we we don't replace them and I do hope that the commission Will listen to the community and respond to the Voice that came out in the surveys the majority of people are not in favor of residential communities having non-hosted short-term rentals Thank you Thank you Daniel gill Hello, my name is daniel gill I am a local real estate agent and also co-owner of a local Vacation rental management company that we manage properties throughout sonoma county And we currently manage seven homes and within the city limits of santa rosa I had a lot I wanted to talk about tonight But I want to just kind of touch on some specific issues brought up by by some of the individuals that are here tonight Real quick in terms of the comments on how strs are are In one way or the other destroying your property value So I pulled some numbers here from berries mls all from march 1st on so very current data Berry's mls is where about 99 percent of of sales take place residential sales take place in santa rosa And so here real quick are just some numbers to share Home sales are up 44 percent from the previous month Average price per square foot is up 7.8 percent from the previous month and up 1.9 percent from the previous year this same month Average days on market is down 19 percent showing that homes that hit the market are selling fast And then lastly supply of inventories down 36 percent over month 25 percent from last year Showcasing that there is not a mass exodus out of the city due to the presence of strs So those are just some facts to to to I think Respond to some of the emotion based argument And then I'd also like to just really quickly touch on the party house because clearly that's a big issue here And I have some things I wanted to say but Chairman sanders asked if a property management company could share some of their practices on what they do to limit parties And so real quick some of the things that we do as a company To limit parties number one we exclusively market our properties on air b&b because they have a two-way Two-way rating system if we have a guest at parties we can tag them to no longer Allow them to stay at our homes and future hosts will see that they are a problematic guest we communicate We communicate with our guests on at least three occasions before they check in to describe our no party policy And we have cameras installed along the perimeters of our home to monitor parking and also monitor noise And we engage our neighbors to make sure they have direct numbers to call when things escalate We have a two-day minimum as I mentioned and we also have a 24 hour We have a employee that is available 24 7 365 days a year to deal with the complaints. Thank you David long Followed by joe romano followed by laden timmar Good evening commissioners. My name is david long. I have lived in santa rosa for the past 35 years And I appreciate the opportunity for you to hear me speak in person this evening. Thankfully no mask Internet-based platforms like air b&b make it possible for anyone to offer and rent their residential property for short term enjoyment by anyone Being possible does not make it a good idea In fact these platforms simply provide the means for short term rentals to operate in an autonomous atmosphere This presents the city and its residents monumental problems And these problems are bound to continue unless the frequency and or duration of non-hosted rental operations are reduced Every non-hosted rental negatively impacts at least six neighbors I am thankful that staff have made recommendations for changes to the short term rental ordinance that will improve the current situation Contrary to claims by non-hosted rental proponents their business enterprise Enterprises are not essential to our community and are not compatible with residential neighborhoods Staff also provided very weak examples of in-home occupations to try and justify zoning code consistency Although the city is moving methodically to create reasonable regulations for short term rentals It made one critical misstep early in the process The urgency ordinance contains an overly broad list of zoning districts where non-hosted rentals are allowed to operate That list includes seven of the eight residential zoning districts and encompasses about 88 of the total land area Within the city's boundaries no other land use and the zoning code enjoys anywhere near that amount of latitude And neither should non-hosted short term rentals Santa Rosa's a well-rounded community where people live, work, raise children, go to school and grow to know one another We are not a resort town that depends on tourism to survive Please make choices that benefit our community rather than a few enterprising individuals. Thank you. Thank you Joe Romano See if I can get my phone to cooperate My name is Joe Romano. I've lived in Santa Rosa since 1968 I own a seven thousand square foot str on the second district And I'm also the president of a group called str a a team which is short term rental advocates association It's pretty difficult to Beat some of the concerns of the people here You can see that many of them have big financial problems not being able to operate their strs In my situation, this is a large night bedroom house With 7000 feet of deck a swimming pool a hot tub all that it is an entertainment palace I've actually had more trouble with long-term tenants paying five figure a month rent Then I have short term rental guests Most of our guests are corporate companies doing training personnel bonding sessions Bachelorette parties are good and actually our bachelorette parties are the quietest guests you could ever get We're going to be losing a contract with a major corporation that was renting space from us for 180 days a year guaranteed They actually paid for some of the remodeling to get the facility the way they wanted it But the deal breaker for them is they will not sign any agreement on guest Limits they think if they're going to rent the space if they want 40 people there they should get them there They also cannot agree to bedroom limits because one of the things they do is They take their top employees. They send them to an str To take their families on a vacation they pay for the whole thing including catering bus transportation all of that stuff And uh in meetings with them. It's just a deal breaker. They're not going to Put their employees through that and they're paying top dollar for these spaces They don't do it in hotels for thank you All right, I hope you will consider turning this down. Thanks Latin temir followed by christopher kane followed by Luke magarva Good evening. I'm vladen temer. I live in santa rosa district 4 I've been a santa rosa resident for 45 years and I've lived in my present home for more than 40 years As you look around the room you'll see on display two distinct sets of signs The science reading homes not hotels are all being held by residents of santa rosa Those residents have been actively engaged for the past two years with santa rosa city staff and city council With the goal of reclaiming neighborhoods from the nuisance of non-hosted short-term rentals The other set of signs has been sponsored by the sonoma county coalition of hosts As we all suspect from the name sonoma county those signs are being displayed primarily by people who do not live in santa rosa This is the same organization that rallied its members to appear before the sonoma county board of supervisors And the Windsor town council To push their agenda of increasing the numbers of non-hosted short-term rentals within all areas of the county Rather than being concerned residents attempting to protect their neighborhoods These folks are primarily commercial business owners driven exclusively by their business interests They are effectively outsiders attempting to impose their vision of short-term rentals everywhere while seeking to maximize their profits I urge you all to pay attention to the different agendas of these two groups as you listen to and evaluate the statements that you are hearing today Through the city's own surveys residents have consistently stated that we do not want non-hosted short-term rentals in our residential neighborhoods Ladies and gentlemen, I ask you to please honor the wishes of those of us who are your constituents. Thank you Thank you Christopher kane Hello, i'm christopher kane. Can you speak into the microphone? Please absolutely. Is that a little bit better? That's much better. Thank you Great. My name is christopher kane. My family and I have resided in santa rosa for the past nine years I retired last year as an executive after 37 years of service with hula packard adulate and then keysight technologies Non-hosted short-term rentals located within residential neighborhoods likely provides an economic benefit to the owner But that comes at a substantial impact to neighboring long-term residents I have witnessed firsthand my neighborhood negatively impacted with higher traffic at all hours of the day and night increased speeding on our narrow and twisting neighborhood roads Parking that blocks access to residents and emergency vehicles increased litter especially liquor bottles excessive noise wood burning and offensive language Not all short-term rental tenants create these issues But more and more of them are using a short-term rental to let loose and party since they don't live here Our neighborhood increasingly is feeling more like downtown san francisco Filled with transients that don't care about our family oriented lifestyle And that has been putting our safety at risk and eroding tax-paying residents quality of living My family and I are giving serious thought to living elsewhere Where we can again enjoy a high quality of living in a beautiful quiet diverse and friendly neighborhood I know the city has received a number of surveys from residents who have consistently stated We do not want non-hosted short-term rentals in our neighborhoods Please honor the wishes of your constituents. Thank you Thank you Luke magarva Followed by jeff bean Good evening commissioners. My name is luke magarva. I am a longtime saner's resident. I've been here for over 40 years I Currently own my home of 12 of those years and I've been living next to an str for close to three years You know, we purchased our home with the expectation that the current zoning laws would preserve our neighborhood That's changed You know a couple things I want to address a lot, excuse me a lot. It already has been addressed But the key difference between these short-term rentals and the other allowable Businesses within residential areas is supervision While it was mentioned it's not required to have supervision on site for those type of businesses The nature of those businesses in fact for the most part would guarantee that Now when you have Folks that don't live our neighborhoods coming in, you know every weekend They are less concerned, you know, they're after one thing which is to have a good time And I can appreciate that you know all of our neighbors. We like to have people over at times But it's a frequency Consistency of every single weekend having new people next door that you can't go talk to You know, you're worried how they're going to react And uh, you know now we're closing our windows can't go outside, you know It's constant no solution coming into our house more than 20 feet of this stuff going on and it's uh It's It's the it's the daytime and the problem with the enforcement is It has to be at night So what happens between nine and nine o'clock and you have a constant Activity going on at loud noises every, you know thursday friday saturday It just gets to be exhausting and your anxiety goes up and it's affecting your family life And it just becomes a huge problem You know, we're considering moving ourselves But then of course, you know the disclosure of strs and the risk of who wants to live next to one of these things Is definitely prevalent. So please consider the impact to you know, all these individuals here that have these next to us now And possibly that increasing causing problems intentions that are in arids. Thank you Thank you Jeff bean Hi, Jeff bean I'm a lifelong resident of uh, santa rosa. I live in the mcdonald historic district Next door the home was a traditional rental When we moved in it was rented by drug addicts Who were up late fighting and arguing it took the owner about four months to get them evicted We had the opportunity to buy that house Uh 765 square foot home so we could have peace and quiet next door We turned it into an str And we've had many of our neighbors using the str to hosts that are visiting relatives We are right next door A mere 20 feet from the adjacent house Yet We're classified as non-hosted There's no one who wants peace and quiet at that str more than my wife and I do Thanks for listening Thank you. Is there any that's the end of the cards? Is there anybody else who would like to speak who didn't fill out a card? Okay, seeing no one We do have some people on zoom, but we are going to be taking a 15 minute break right now And then come back and take the comments from zoom And then go into our deliberations. So with that, um, we back about what is that? What's 15 and 10? 825, thank you I Ready to go okay Um, do you need to Recall the roll Okay So, um, we're back in session And we will now move to Um commenters on zoom if you are on zoom and want to make a comment, please raise your hand and you will be Asked to unmute and called upon so with that the first Yes Mario with stalsky Um, i'm going to give you a prompt to unmute yourself. Please state your name for the record And as a reminder, it is two minutes. My name is maria ustalsky My name is maria ustalsky I am from europe from communist country and I came here to have better life and uh Please keep short term rental and I make an income from short Income and I support my family and I feel comfortable here And that way I I can live a beautiful country Anyway, I have it will forest me to to leave the san jama county And I support that family because of course of the short term rental Please keep them sure friend. So thank you Thank you Amanda, I'm going to send you a prompt to unmute yourself. Please state your name for the record Hello, my name is amanda haykar I am the owner and operator two non-hosted short term rentals in the city of san aroza I want to see fair legislation That supports the majority of short term operators as well as our neighbors and focuses on stopping serious infractions like parties And noise and not small fractions like that don't impact the community in any significant way Like an individual holding their home in an llc. They own a hundred percent of Currently the income I receive from these parties is income my family and I rely heavily on When I was told that I would potentially be losing one of my two permits Both of which are in good standing. I became very fearful as this would be a devastating financial loss I had no idea that something was even legal The process of obtaining And now fighting to maintain these permits has been a stressful and frustrating process It continues to be a fight that seemingly never ending and stacked against us by the very vocal minority The majority of short term rental owners and operators are good hardworking people That included their property in their long-term financial plan including their retirement To have a governing body be able to take away a lifetime of hard work with one vote is unimaginable to me I ask the council, please consider how their actions will devastate these citizens In addition to voting no to taking away valid permits by limiting to one per person I ask that the strike system be amended to include a punishment that fits the infraction And add warnings for non-aggregious offenses My fellow hosts are having to pay hefty fines for things like allowing two daytime guests versus the higher number The city allows are not writing verbatim no amplified noise versus no loud noise in their listings Such minor infractions should come with a warning and not a hefty $1,500 fine and strike finally Arguing that short term rentals are impacting our housing stock is just not supported by the facts Our likelihood that these homes are coming back on the market has an affordable private rental is just very low Thank you Thank you Carl Rashad I'm going to send you a prompt to unmute yourself. Please state your name for the record Hello Pardon. My name is Carl Yeager Carl Rashad Yeager I bought my unhosted short term rental So that my parents as they age And they are they're 87 and 88 Could eventually move to santa rosa and be near us so that we could care for them And there's a way for me to afford to Purchase this home and have some income until they're ready to make that move and that move is Happily sadly imminent I think we can all agree That really good strong legislation that centers around noise nuisance and safety Makes a lot of sense So let's focus on that make them real Make them harsh Most hosts do it well I ran a short term rental in a condominium in sf Where we shared walls with others not one single complaint over six years We hosted a nurse in our house in santa rosa and we had Neighbors on our doorstep shouting at her that she is not welcome here. She was a nurse of color Haring for people during covid And saving lives. I think the families whose lives whose family members she saved would welcome her here When you have someone standing on your doorstep yelling at your guests That just is not a good thing So I would say that we need to have sensible legislation We need to tone down the rhetoric and we need to do with actual data of what are the noise and nuisance complaints Not all the rhetoric that I'm hearing tonight Thank you Thank you Eric frazier. I'm going to send you a prompt to unmute yourself. Please state your name for the record Thank you. This is eric frazier and i'm at truth in tourism at gmail.com Happy to join my community to discuss this important topic Uh, I do have a wc fields quote to start off with if you can't dazzle them with brilliance You've dazzled them with and I want to get on to shari mead's comments here because there's a lot of things that are defective In today's presentation For instance, she didn't mention that there's already a three property cap in place. Why not? I mean We're being jerked around quite frankly Confident managers that have something to say are given two minutes slices to talk As a planning commission, you should be offended that you didn't get a chance to hear this issue of short-term rentals That just came forward as an urgency ordinance Well, let me tell you about that shari mead's again is confusing the facts by saying that The economic subcommittee is the same thing as the economic recovery task force. No the task force No public meetings. That's behind closed doors Economic subcommittee rarely convenes and they did the ram ride these urgency ordinates through with no proof Anything that they offer doesn't get verified Look at the meeting with the santa rosa tourism business improvement advisory board also a faux thing here You know, if you read that law, there's no strs allowed on that board by law Even though that we've contributed over a million dollars in bia over the Life term of that. How can we don't have that money to actually research the facts? So we don't have to hear our neighbors Try to create these economic analysis on the back of an napkin Look at this stuff. It's too important to get wrong You guys are lying to the public. You're manipulating us. I want to get to those brass tax So when I heard shari say that her door is open to me with me My numerous requests over email certainly can't be ignored In fact, allowing people to filter whole testimony forward only helps us when it the rubber hits the road Either with the voters or in a court of law Thank you very much Thank you Alex see i'm gonna send you permission Sorry, i'm gonna send you a prompt to unmute yourself. Please say your state your name for the record This is alex Hi, first of all, I want to thank commissioner sanders for asking really good questions. You're purely paying attention After that, I really want to say that You know the financial benefit and security that comes with owning wine short and rent the wooden in my partner Is real. I mean, you know, we got caught up in the layoffs recently. My mother got sick I was faced with potentially taking a leave of absence from work. So knowing that I have a little income coming is A piece of mind But I do want to now get into my point and I want to say that I also see kind of two Worlds here. I see the world of myths and anecdotes And I see the world of good point of facts, you know, in fact, uh, you know I see the the world of you know people wealthy rich people and people who are trying to make ends meet Um, so let's start with the myths, you know myth number one STRs take away from the housing stuff and contribute to the housing crisis and housing affordability So we saw we also the data is 30 basis points point three percent. So don't say that It's just you're just gonna sound like a fool. It's wrong. So myth number two Noise and parties are a common occurrence eight Eight complaints for noise out of 281 so three percent. So something doesn't add up here, right What's going on? Someone's lying. Someone's not saying the truth. So real data on noise It is not as big of a complaint myth number three my home value will decrease if I live next to an STR I don't know what realtor told you this but you should fire that person because that's not true If you're if your home value has decreased you should call Jerome Powell the fed guy It's because of raising rates your home value is going down Um, and then I want to make a couple a couple other points You know, there's something in your data says 119 finds out of 21 complaints. I'll call it the harassment rate. So 60% were not real 60% a neighbor called on a neighbor because they hate the other neighbor not because that was a real complaint Thank you so much Thank you Jessica, I'm going to send you a prompt to unmute yourself. Please state your name for the record Hi, my name is Jessica and I wanted to talk about Why we need to keep short term rentals and not put restrictions that are we already have so many restrictions on these rentals My mother she came from a communist country in europe to give her Self a better future and an income for our family. She worked for short term rentals And that's how she supported her family And as I've grown up and an adult that is how I pay for my books And for my college tuition to be a teacher And if I could not work for short term rentals, I would be forced to no longer Have the ability to go to college And I wouldn't have the ability to live in beautiful Sonoma county and In addition to be a Sonoma county resident my full life Short term rentals don't just provide an income for me But I also worry about other Sonoma county residents that are getting an income and supporting themselves from short term rentals Short term rentals provide local business Opportunities and local businesses profit from these guests. And I also wanted to mention how Guests are always very respectful And I haven't heard of any noise Complaints of all my years working for short term rentals. So I'd like you to think about the Impact that short term rentals would have on our economy if we restricted them. Thank you Thank you Joe schneider. I'm sending you a prompt to unmute yourself. Please state your name for the record Hi, my name is Joe schneider. I'm with the north bay association of realtors I want to thank the planning commission and staff for taking the time to analyze review and ultimately propose these changes On its face, most of these proposals make sense in weighing economic vitality and the perceived and or Real new nuisance is that short term rentals can sometimes cause However, there are still some concerning issues that remain with the ordinance Which I would describe as much more than some just technical changes First placing a cap on the number of strs in a city only serves to block current Santa Rosa residents from earning an income on their property As it was stated earlier This cap is based on a time when city staff had a backlog of permits versus actual rationale for making the cap We're teetering on a brink of a recession here in the country, which will have dire impacts to all residents The ability to legally rent out someone's home may be the only viable income option that that person may have The city has a lot of 215 permit applications And so you have effectively closed the door for that potential income for hundreds of Santa Rosa residents Second limiting the number of units that a person may own will not necessarily free up more inventory for renters or buyers We live in one of the most prolific second home markets in the country If someone who currently owns multiple homes is required to take one of those strs off the market They may choose to use that second as that use that as a second residence as opposed to put that into long Long-term rental inventory with that the the local businesses the city the county Will all lose out on the economic benefits and the toot tax We've heard from so many people this evening And you as legislators you have the you have the job to use facts to create policy rather than act on emotions Thank you Thank you. Uh, is there anybody else on zoom, uh, who would like to make a comment? If so, please raise your hand Christian this vaunthen. I'm sending you a prompt to unmute yourself. Please state your name for the record Christian if you're speaking you're still muted Christian you're still muted Lonnie, would you please remind her again how to unmute? Can you hear me now? Yes, hello Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you Okay, so my name is christiane gonzalez. I'm a citizen of california since 2006 And of center rosa since 2021 So I know the constitution I'm protected by the constitution And I would like to know why the city of center rosa is treating me differently from my neighbor Who lives 900 feet from me? He has five permits Non-hosted five permits and I cannot even apply for a permit just because he exists Sorry, this doesn't make any sense. I would like you guys to repair that So, uh, second point is that one of the points made by the city against a part-time hybrid non-hosted permit today Was the difficult difficulty in monitoring This also doesn't make any sense at the same time. You guys are saying that Uh, it's not monitoring the t o t taxes and it's relying in the self Reporting so what's the difference why you can rely on self reporting for one thing and not for the other thing Third point we should all of us here Be fighting against the bad operators Bad operators Not against each other's we are neighbors. We all have it have different reasons to like or not like But we have to live in a society and we have to take each other's needs consider each other each other's Needs as well. Sorry. I'm a little bit nervous because I'm quiet Disappointing by what I heard today So please you guys have the job to and have the obligation To fix the ordinance the ordinance doesn't make sense It's great to have an ordinance and have rules. We all want that But we cannot discriminate. We cannot segregate people and we cannot Disconsider other people needs that's all. Sorry for my moot Thank you. I don't see any other hands raised Okay, that is correct. I don't see any other hands raised either Thank you. So with that, I will go ahead and close the public hearing on this item And um, I think how we'll work this is I heard certain themes From the public as well as in the all the correspondence that we received Over the last weeks so, um If Let's let's start with uh, my fellow commissioners. Did you hear a certain theme you want to talk about? um, and we could ask staff questions Excuse me chair weeks. Um before you all start with deliberations Can I ask if someone would be willing to make a motion to? Read the resolution of a motion in a second to put that on the table before starting discussion Sure If if it becomes the will of the commission to propose amendments or friendly meant etc as you proceed through your deliberations That would be appropriate At that time Okay, if you could open with the resolution that would be great. Thank you Thank you. Is there somebody who's willing to? Commissioner siscoe I can do that I move a resolution of the planning commission of the city of santa rosa recommending to city council the adoption of zoning code text amendments to title 20 Of the santa rosa city code chapter 20 dash 48 Short-term rentals to revise and add new definitions and policies And to incorporate technical changes to improve functionality and aid in implementation and enforcement file number re Z 2 3 dash 0 0 1 and way for the reading of the text I second there second second. Thank you So that was moved by commissioner siscoe and seconded by commissioner duggin And now we'll talk about themes is that okay, so um, you want to start Commissioner sanders sure And we can talk we can take kind of one theme at a time and all will all comment on that And see if we need further information from staff Well, the two themes that seem to stand out to me is noise The party house will call it noise and nuisance and and quality of life In and being able to enjoy, you know, peaceful enjoyment of the home that you live in Those seem to be the two Things that we're trying to balance and it seems that we have to figure out a way to Uh enact an ordinance of policy That that generates an inclusive Opportunity for local wealth creation right And at the same time balancing the needs of all members of the community and that's the Balancing act that we're trying to you know balance tonight Um, so those are the two that I see Turn that on So with the noise, um That is something we heard also around the fines and that the fines should be somehow adjusted so that noise violations are Find differently than leaving the garbage can out um So I'm not sure can I have kind of a question on that for weeks So go go ahead because I'm not quite sure how to to do this. Sure. Sure. I um, so we'll we'll kind of learn as we go. I guess Maybe this is for uh, Mr. Kirk, but I guess the question is so we heard from neighbors. Hey, there's a party I call Nothing seems to happen Can you tell me a little bit about This this new ordinance that talks about verified complaints, you know How is that going to happen? Are you going to have to hear the noise if the neighbors call? But there's not 24 7 staffing for code at that point, you know, what happens? What are the different scenarios? The way the ordinance is intended I'm on uh, there would be 24 7 staffing now, of course, there's always vagaries about staffing in the future But I I think I said in the staff meeting that I would go out if no one else could so we'll have someone out Part of the confusion that we heard tonight Was that again the numbers that I gave you Were just from september of 2022 on Now when I came into this position in july We had a considerable backlog in str complaints that was resulting from some staffing shortages, frankly And you heard me mention point-in-time complaints And I was faced with Complaints that were six months old for a noise disturbance that nobody witnessed And was long since passed and I made the decision to close those cases And I think one of our residents made reference to that tonight So but that is in the past and now under the staffing we have under the ordinance we have We have that capability to come out when there is a noise complaint And again, we've only received eight since september of 2022 And have been able to resolve those all satisfactorily so far To the best of my knowledge and we'll continue that effort Well, but I guess the question maybe to argue a bit is assuming there's adequate staffing The process will work, but I think based on my time on up here That's can be a pretty big assumption So I guess the the concern is if there's not adequate staffing Our neighbors just left to twist in the wind or you know, where's the teeth in this? Well, again, if there's a staffing shortage and we receive a call I'll personally be out there taking a look at it You're in hawaii then then what? Then mr. Oswald will I'm volunteering him This is also for maybe my fellow commissioners. I don't mean to put you on the hot seat I think the point I'm trying to make and again, we are talking about uncertainties I think we're getting to a point where our staffing is much more robust And I think we're going to be able to to meet these demands I'm confident that we're going to be able to meet these demands So so then related what is the final? So let's say each each weekend for three weeks. There's a noise violation At what point, you know, does the permit get pulled? Is there enforcement action to things get red tagged? I mean, what's the next step after that? So upon a third citation being issued within a 12 month period as we've discussed I would alert planning that We have a three strikes case And then they would be able to commence their revocation process And to go back are these verified complaints? Meaning you heard them or a verified complaint is something that we've observed and have been able to write a citation for Okay Yes, commissioner deggen and I'm not Trying to dispute anything you've said But i'm just thinking about the weekends like the winter wine land weekend when it brings tourists from all over And they're all here to party And what if like all the big short-term non-hosted short-term rental homes with multiple bedrooms are full of People going to winter wine land And there you get numerous noise complaints at the same time Can you can it's capacity big enough to deal with that? You know, I I think we'll be able to call him back up as necessary. I'm going to stand by that One of the things that I'd like to discuss and I don't quite know logistically how to do it So miss crocker if you can help me is I would like to see a difference in the fine schedule related to noise complaints To be I think that would discourage Owners and managers from Renting to bad actors or people who come bad actors even if they didn't think they were So I would like to see that I think Actually if you could maybe do a list of Things that we'd like to see changed And then we can talk about that as we go So that's one thing I personally would like to see I don't know if my fellow commissioners Changed which way? Oh increase So that it's a really different it's really differentiated With the noise which seems to be the biggest problem we heard tonight and that we um Read in all the letters that we got um from people So that's something that I'd like to see changed I'm sorry. I want to clarify. You're asking to increase the fines Over and above the 1500 3000 5000 that are proposed I just would like to note that those are set as maximums under state law Okay, well then have it be that the maximum for the noise and something less for To differentiate between the different right fractions. Okay. Thank you. Yeah um commissioner carter um I'm not sure if it was uh sherry or you mr. Kirk, but I thought there was some obligation under the uh the fee schedule and the and the current ordinance to That obligated us to those fines. Can you review remind me of what you said? Those were the fine amounts that were uh, I'm not sure how they were established, but they were established in the ordinance They were less than the maximums so they were allowed Um, but uh, and then there was a senate bill that came sp60 that modified those california government could find amounts So that that's what prompted us to to align The fines with those amounts. I'm not certain what The the government could said at the time that the urgency ordinance was adopted ii so the The proposed fines are in line with state guidelines correct and Would would it be possible to lessen fines for other Infractions and still remain within those guidelines. I guess it's my guess these as as as actually said these are these are maximums Okay, thank you Mr. Duggan, okay, I've got um, I've got one sort of related to fines and then two other ones um, the fine one is is there a legal mechanism for a host To pass along a fine to like somebody the the person who rented from them that that hosted the party on site Is there a way for them to say I got this $5,000 fine and i'm going to pass it on to you Yes, the owner of the str can impose fines But there was one commenter who had suggested that the city imposed fines upon the renter and that would not be appropriate in that the city's permitting Relationship if you will is with the property owner And so fines would run to the property owner But in turn that owner could pass the fine or whatever fine amount They wanted on to The renter But I just wanted to clarify that it would not be appropriate to have the city going and imposing fines upon the renters Thank you. And then my other question was related to um, we heard people Saying that they they identified themselves as multiple permit holders And can you clarify what happened? So if we decide to adopt the recommendation of one non-hosted and one hosted permit maximum per person What happens to the ones there people who have multiple ones right now So they would be able to continue to operate as they are until their permit expires And then it would be up to them to choose which one they wanted to renew Then the others would become non-compliant with the ordinance. So they would not be able to apply for a renewal for those I would like to follow up on that question if I could so of the people of the folks who have uh multiple How many have two how many have five how many have 50? I know nobody has 50 but Gotta find it. I have too many notes My staple wasn't big enough to hold it together. So I apologize. I've got to I'll just add something well. Oh, you've got it. I finally found it. Um, so at this point I I want to clarify that this is taking names from gis and sometimes those names will be It'll look different so From my best knowledge and this is something we would obviously verify when somebody is trying to Renew their permit it appears that 13 entities own two four entities own three One entity owns five in various configurations. Their name is in you know with several other people And then one entity owns six So if if that is totally correct and we did end up Allowing only one per person that would um Again, I'm not saying this on the you know that it's for sure for sure because it would take some definite checking It would potentially open up 30 new opportunity opportunities for new non-hosted rental operators I had a follow-up that I remembered so, um We heard at least testimony from at least one person saying that they have multiple short-term rentals surrounding their house Obviously within a thousand feet of each other So there's if those people all Renew their Permits on time and don't get shut down because of fines Could that just go on indefinitely or are we going to have some sort of sudden setting provision where we're going to Maintain the thousand foot separation So that's something that would be at your discretion We don't have anything in the ordinance that would prevent that One of the thoughts with also limiting them to one per person is potentially that could eliminate some in the over concentration areas, but That's a hopeful So can I follow up in that? I want to make sure I understand So somebody comes in for renewal and they're We're Within a thousand feet of another one Do they get renewed? Yes, so the original ordinance did not the council wanted to Acknowledge folks that were already paying tot and bia prior to the ordinance being adopted And so they wrote into the ordinance that if Someone who had been paying tot and bia prior to You know the ordinance adoption If they applied for a short-term rental permit by december third of 2021 then they did not have to Comply with that one thousand foot separation setback They were called operators in good standing which we're trying to get away from using but that was what they were called at that time so since There is nothing written in the code that once that one-year permit is up and they're allowed to go through the renewal process They would be renewed in the same location And you know and like like you said unless they sell or or lose their permit in some other way Now that again that's something totally within your purview, but it's not something that We have had direction from council to include and any other comments on The issue of The noise and the One thousand feet and the I said we're going to do one thing at a time and here I'm going to more than one thing so Let's go with commissioner sanders With regards to this question about fines You mentioned, uh, mr. Kirk that Fines are levied when observed Can we define what? I mean because clearly you can't you know, you're not there waiting for the party, you know So no, that's true. Um, so again in most cases we're responding to a complaint of some sort If it's a point in time violation such as noise It would typically be a complaint that would come in through our hotline And then again, we would respond. We've got a pretty good track record of being there within half an hour We would observe we would listen. We would document. We would not necessarily make contact Because again the tenants are not going to be the people we're citing And then we would go back to the office and then Process the case how often is it that you show up and now the noise is not happening Then what? Well, if it's not happening then we do miss things Sometimes somebody's noisy for a moment and a complaint comes in and and it was just it was just a moment. So Those types of things will slip by we'll slip by habitual violators. They're going to be caught And then what I heard today Which I'm almost ashamed to say I didn't even think about but it's it's the noise during the day Right and you know, we all know that Dog next door that won't shut up Makes it tough to go into backyard if you've got I mean, what are the rules about noise during you know Daylight hours, I mean that would seem to be very difficult to You know drive around and find them for enjoying I mean you have long-term tenants making noise during the day You have long-term owners making noise during the day that stupid dog. I was just talking about making noise during the day How does that work? Well, other than amplified sound I don't know that there are any provisions in the code that would cover that Now keep in mind. There are there are other provisions of law Such as there's provisions of the penal code that the police department could enforce For disturbance that is outside of the str ordinance So we could we could consider something like that if if the commission so desired to try to work something out for daytime disturbances, but Right now. I believe it's just amplified sound that we talk about in the ordinance So what do you think that would look like I'm just referring to your expertise? Oh, um It could be based upon decibel levels like our noise ordinances. We could we could refer the Reference the noise ordinance that might be the easiest way to do it Because again, it would apply to it would apply to all properties, but we could also apply it to strs That's the one that most comes to mind Thank you Chair weeks. Can I Can I add something just about the noise? Sorry I believe that our noise ordinance is based upon It's a cnl standard. I believe which is like a 24-hour standard So it doesn't capture single event noise Which I believe is like an l max factor so that if you've got a you know slamming door or repetitive Ball noise those are single event noises if I'm getting the terminology correct I'm not a noise expert, but so I think it would be difficult in this instance to say you you couldn't really compare A loud party that lasted an hour wouldn't necessarily violate the noise ordinance over the whole 24-hour period So I don't know that that would be a metric in our current noise ordinance in any event that would prove useful here, and then I just wanted to note also that Oftentimes to those those types of property rights for quiet enjoyment If you will are enforced through public and private nuisance claims I'm governed by some other sections of the code. So I want to offer that to you Thank you, I'm sorry just one comment. Mr. Kirk Kudos to you because there were people in the gallery today who thanked you personally for the work that you've done in helping this along and we have seen A a big difference between the wild wild west days prior to the ordinance and to now you being here and I think you refer to it as a you know landing into a maintenance Area, so I mean that tells me that you're doing a good job. So thank you. I'm surrounded by good people, but thank you for saying so Vice chair Peterson we're a little bit down the road a bit, but To put some structure on this. I'm just looking at the the presentation starting on slide 11 I mean is there a value to my fellow commissioners in going section by section with the proposed amendments and seeing Who's in what looks good who's in favor who's against any tweaks? Yes, that's I think that's a great idea. Yeah Thank you for putting some structure in this And then that would enable the commission if you desire to to talk in those um general Categories and you can you know engage in some straw votes and things that you've done in the past to try to To garner ideas for if anyone would like to propose any amendments So if we start with Section 20-48 Dot 010 the purpose Any Changes in that section anybody Okay, the next section Application of this of this chapter Any changes corrections Then we go into definitions Um were there any It was deletion of unnecessary terms adding some other definitions Uh, the one thing I had in this section is the Operator and good standing term, which I know you talked about before Sherry about making it that That is just a It's a hard concept. I think Um, so I don't know if there's I know you said you wanted to try and get away from that term So I would love to be able to just delete that term but because Of what we've talked about so far this evening and that these Original applicants were able to avoid that 1000 foot separation requirement. We have to keep that As a category of permit holders The good thing is it it's just those people that sounds terrible to say it that way It's just it just represents those applicants So it's not something that we have to say a lot But it does explain why in some cases non-hosted short terminal permits are You know on properties that are closer than 1000 feet apart We could change it and we could call it something else Um, which I would be totally open to but it would be kind of confusing because of us having used that all along Introducing something new would be yeah Yeah, so um any changes in that section for anybody? Uh, sure. I think uh, this is the first instance of it and I think it'll have implications throughout I guess my position after hearing the testimony From the public today reading what we've got online is that I would remove non-hosted Short-term rentals from this ordinance. I would only permit Hosted rentals and I wouldn't worry about the cap things like that Can you repeat that so for instance former sub m Current sub j I would just delete the non-hosted rentals are outside disordnance. They're not permitted in the city only hosted rentals Is that would that be a problem in any way for? Enforced well, they still have to get a permit If they're a non-hosted I mean if they're hosted they still have to get a permit Can I use banning them? Yeah, I think can I ask for clarification? I think that's what I thought I heard Commissioner Peterson are you suggesting that the city not allow non-hosted? at all anymore correct So eliminate non-hosted In the city correct So I think we could have a discussion about that and figure out where we all stand on that Okay thoughts people I'll kick it off. Okay I guess, you know, so what what we heard tonight what we've read um Is that you know, if you own a non-hosted you're in favor and if you're a neighbor you're against And from what we heard from staff, you know the amendments to this what I see Short-term rentals seem to be a hotel that exists outside of the restrictions that are a hotel is normally subject to Um, there are some self certification aspects to it, but it's not ADA compliant It's not, you know, code enforcement isn't going out there to inspect to see where the fire pit is They theoretically have signs For emergency exits. They're theoretically training their guests if there's a wildfire But I'm a little skeptical of that Happening in reality, especially if it's a you know a frequent booking So There's sort of the the policy end of that where it looks like a hotel Hacks like a hotel, but it's not subject to the same kind of restrictions a hotel is Um, there's the resource issue for the city again I I think code enforcement is doing a great job. This is nothing to do with with staff, but I think Things are going to ebb and flow the city is going to have more and less resources to commit to this and Again, if it's a self certification enforced essentially by neighbors, you know, I think it's a it's a hard sell When it's non-hosted when there's somebody that's not there that's invested in the community On-site to kind of deal with it And then, you know, finally the the kind of the technical things when it gets to the the resolution is I think it's going to be hard for me to make a finding that a non-hosted rental As part of this ordinance is consistent with the general plan and the zoning code when you look at the the zoning code Um, you know It's to provide home rental and ownership opportunities Choices in housing types to improve access to affordable housing. There's nothing about, you know, owning two three four five 10 rental properties and short-term renting them It seems incompatible with the purposes of residential zoning And the same with the general plan, you know, if you look at the policies that the general plan lays out Meeting the housing needs of santa rosen's Maintain and rehabilitate the housing supply to support affordable housing Expand the housing supply to make it available to low-income households I just I I don't see that certainly. I mean, I I think you could go as as far as just banning short-term rentals but At least when it comes to non-hosted this this just seems outside the scope of The santa rosen's ordinances and policy documents, so And I understand the you know what we've heard too from Uh short-term rental owners, but you can still rent the property There's the just is just longer for than 30 days. So I don't know it's It's hard for me to make the findings and then as a policy recommendation to counsel uh, I don't see a lot of Value and and non-hosted rentals at this point Have you given it any thought as to how That would affect the the current short-term rental the 198 They would just at some point. Well, I guess that would be up to the attorney to Calculate to figure out As to how you would eliminate them. It would be the one-year renewal. They just aren't renewed Yeah, I mean the the technical implication Um, certainly I Need the assistance of Miss crocker, but I would say that after the one-year term as we had been talking about with some of the other proposals the You would not be able to renew that permit. So over, you know, a year's time They would all basically just be eliminated because nobody could come in for renewal and you could not issue any new ones They would become legal non-conforming uses during that interim period lots commissioner sisco well, I what I'm Hoping we remember is that there is a current ordinance. It was vetted very thoroughly through counsel With all of the same kind of public comments um The council at that time I assume assume that there's a place for short-term rentals in our Policies and What we're being asked to do is to take a look at the technical changes And I think making a move towards banning them would would be a fairly drastic Recommendation, I don't think that's what we were being asked to do And I think that it has been vetted and determined by the council that the short-term rentals Are consistent with the general plan and have a place in san rosa. They have some economic Benefit as well as A lot of the modifications that we're making Through code enforcement to make them operate better. So I would not be in favor of Making that recommendation commissioner duggan um, well, I can see the the logic of Vice chair peterson's comments I think if if that determination comes down, it should come from council in their direction I feel like um commissioner sysco said it's like we're just making some technical changes and policy should be at the council um And I think there's if we did Advocate for and or if council Decided to ban non-hosted rentals. There should be a place for People like one of the one of the public who spoke saying he lives within 20 feet of his short-term rental And it's a separate property, but he's right there and he considers it a hosted one But because of living in a separate parcel It's a non-hosted permit And I should think there should be consideration for someone like that in that situation that they are effectively managing the rental and Policing it, but they're not technically on site Commissioner sanders I guess it would seem to me that jumping to banning Is You know a couple of steps down in this process You know at this point Enforcement even by the admission of some people here who probably would like it to be banned Recognize that the new enforcement the new ordinance that we have put into place has made a drastic difference Uh Enforcement After the ordinance than it was prior. So it seems that you know, we're Working with something that's you know, it's a works in progress and it's It's moving in the right direction to then jump to banning Just seems a little less like the you know, those are a few steps Um, certainly easier, you know just to say oh, I'll just forget it. We'll ban it But I think you know, we could do a little bit more Work together To make this work for everyone or as many people as we can Commissioner Carter Yeah, I mean one of the first notes I wrote down is the The use that's allowed by right in residential neighborhoods is housing in residential use and It's hard to make an argument that there are Uh rights to making Making money off of the property in residential uses. I mean the way you do that is through sale or rental of them long-term rental Um, but I think as commissioner duggan pointed out and uh, commissioner sisco The direction from council was to create an ordinance to manage short-term rentals not to Eliminate them necessarily I do think that um, the ordinance as proposed now has a lot more teeth and gives more um capacity for enforcement and We've Been told by staff that the capacity exists to enforce the ordinance has written now So i'm going to take them at their word on it on that um So I think the ordinance is written as a Cleaned up regulatory devices going in the direction that the council wants. I certainly think the council Within their purview could decide for a much more restrictive ordinance Given the the problems we've heard with the operations of strs in In our residential areas um, so while i'm not ready to jump to a recommendation to the council that non-hosted Short short-term rentals and maybe if we called them casual lodging instead of short-term rentals We'd not be having a lot of this discussion because it is a lodging enterprise that we're talking about here um, so I think more regulation with staff's assurance that What we've got before us is a enforceable And again, it's a cooperatively enforceable involving the permittees the the renters the staff and code enforcement people um, there's a lot of responsibility spread around here, but It's not a perfect ordinance, but it may be workable as as we've seen it and I would be more on the side of supporting it to go forward to the council and perhaps um passing on Considerations our considerations for changes that that the council should be considering If that made any sense. Thank you Well, so let me respond to sort of two things one um, I do think it is within the the purview of the planning commission to make a Recommended change like that. We've done it with downtown station area specific plans. We've done it with the general plan I I think removing non-hosted short-term rentals from This ordinance Is is not beyond the the pale when it comes to our our powers and duties and I mean we started off with the statement of purpose so um, I You know look back at that I I guess I can propose a straw poll on Removing non-hosted Short-term rentals from this ordinance. Um, I have a sense of how it will go, but we can at least I'm looking at, um, mr. Crocker kid. Is that I believe I just heard uh, each of you provide your comments and thoughts on this except for chair weeks. Oh, sorry um, I It would be hard for me to eliminate all of the Non-hosted to eliminate non-hosted short-term rentals I think the ordinance the proposed ordinance In my view need some a few changes which we'll get to um to make it a little more I don't even know what the right word is a little easier on neighbors But I think until we hear from the council that they want to do away with non-hosted short-term rentals I would be it would be hard for me to make that So I think there you go Five one So then let's go on to the other amendments Oh, and do we have any other amendments on any other changes on the definitions section? So then, uh, we'll go to the requirements Uh section 20-48 About zero four zero Uh short-term rental permits requirements and limits In what I want to follow up on uh a comment that we heard from a member of the public that commissioner dug in mentioned uh where they live adjacent to their non-hosted short-term rental but It's a different address so they have to so they're You know very close so they can monitor what's going on, but it's a different address So it wouldn't it's not considered a non-host. It's not considered a hosted. It's considered non-hosted Was there any discussion in at any time about certain number of feet between your primary residents and your non-hosted str Thank you chair weeks. Good question. So when we design this ordinance, we wanted it to be ministerial So there's not discretion involved with, you know, uh, whether these 20 feet are You know more or less impactful than These 20 feet from another house So we did limit it to Being on the same parcel Originally, we actually said it had to be in the same home but then We did relax that to be if they're in a legal dwelling unit on the same parcel, but I I Obviously you're a discretion, but I I feel like We we're trying to keep things very ministerial and either yes, you're on the same parcel or You know or you're not type of thing. And so that's one of the reasons that we didn't Incorporate a whole bunch of different nuances like that and we also don't want to make it any more confusing to administer enforce or permit, but obviously it is totally your discretion Any comments on that commissioner sanders it would be difficult because I mean, you know The first thing that comes to my mind is well, I live right next door to it. And you know, I don't want to you know I will know first hand if there's Something going on and I can you know intervene personally by walking out my front door and going to next door Well, then the next one comes well, I only live two houses away So I can walk you know a few more feet and go knock on that door Well, I only live around the corner while I lived in the next neighborhood while you know and you can see where this goes So, you know, I don't know how You know at a certain point you got to kind of draw a line You know in my thought I I know it It doesn't it's not it's not I guess in the interest of you know the the broader picture It it stinks. I live right next door. Why can't this be? But you do have to you know make a decision or else you're down the road And you know the the horse has left the barn and you can't stop it Any comments on that? Well, I I agree with everything that uh commissioner sanders is saying I think it Where do you stop and you know Yeah, I can appreciate if it's um we're intending this to be ministerial It's like you have to draw the line somewhere and this is a good hard line so Okay, so then uh We'll continue with short-term rental permit requirements and limits Any comments on the rest of that section? I've got something for you. Yes um It for uh discussion. I mean we've seen it, you know, we saw it with the cannabis ordinance Is there a reason to treat hosted short-term rentals differently than non-hosted? I mean, I'm going to lose on that so For the record would remove but You know putting a cap on the total number of permits issued having separation requirements for hosted as well This is b sub 1 abc Was there any discussion uh in any of the work groups about that Originally somewhat we threw, you know, we talked about we tried to talk about everything but council was very um I don't want to say adamant they were very um They wanted hosted to be available to anybody anywhere So we took their direction completely when we wrote that there's no limit on hosted and they can be in any zoning district And they can be right next door to each other now I will say that we've worked with this ordinance for 18 months now So if if people want to see changes like that, maybe we ask lou have there been issues with too many hosted near each other with Parking issues or something like that, but that's how we ended up with that. It was it was Just we we felt that hosted were not causing the same level of complaints or potential nuisance issues Any discussion on that? Well, I think if we go back to the definition I think the reason everyone is or council was maybe um More considerate of the hosted is that it's required that they're sleeping in the same building at the same time as the rental So, you know living down the street or whatever and checking on it isn't the same as i'm in the room In the house with the you know, so I think it eliminates a lot of problems. So and They're valuable that way Mr. Sanders just question does that you know proximity, I mean does that refer to I know two different parcels, right or the same parcel with a separate living unit Does that you know does that count? It has to be on the same parcel and it has to be a legal dwelling unit Does that make sense to be hosted? So you can Stay in your adu and rent out your main house as a short-term rental And that's considered hosted because you're on the same parcel and the assumption there was again as Others have mentioned that you're going to be aware of what's going on And be able to you know manage the situation if anything arises So so here's my concern again building from the cannabis ordinance, you know Which was concerned with over concentration creating sort of a red light district for for cannabis We heard from the public that yes theoretically my neighbor lives in the 500 square foot adu And it's a hosted, but i'm also surrounded by Parties every weekend. So I guess that's you know, there's going to be neighborhoods that are more and less attractive for Hosted in quotes, uh rentals. So I guess that that would be my concern for for having them treated separately without setbacks Um and with without a cap on the number any other comments so then we'll go on to um See where are we the short-term rental permit? So we have the neighbor notification Transferability Loss of operating good standing status denial appeals Etc Any buddy have anything else on that section? Okay, uh, okay So then we'll go to registration Requirements, uh anything on that section or on the occupancy and parking requirements Which specifically which letters are you which letters are you looking at? Oh, I'm sorry. It's um 20-48 dot 060 Occupancy and parking requirements Thank you, okay um and then operating requirements Which is 20-48 Dot 070 commissioner dug in. Yeah on this one. I've got um A question for my fellow commissioners, let's say. Um, I personally am not Comfortable with having fire pits in the city and also having the owners to be on the neighbors to alert their Short-term rental neighbors that you know, it's a spare the air day and put out the fire and that kind of thing So I would be happy to take that out of the ordinance Uh comments as would I As would I I don't like those fire pits Even before we had fires Well as the firefighter I would have to say Bad idea So can we add that to the front a friendly amendment that we would eliminate the section? um, or somehow clarify this section regarding, uh outdoor fires Which is Outdoor burning it's Five points It's five, right? Yeah. So just to clarify. Um, are you talking about striking recreational fires fire pits? outdoor fireplaces Yes, and leaving barbecues and grills I Or do we wanted to maybe maybe clarify that it has to be only um Maybe we should get paul on here because are we talking about even if it's gas propane? Which I'm fine with I just want to make sure that we're covering all of it Because I would make a big distinction between a you know gas fired barbecue And an outdoor fire pit I mean, we're okay with the barbecue. Well I could be not necessarily but um, yeah But I would be happy if the whole section You know if it's outdoor burning was prohibited Uh question for consideration on this. So, um, they're allowed in all zoning districts Not all zoning districts have the same level of wild land urban interface or or fire danger um, do you want to tie it to Something like that. I mean I don't know if that's feasible for staff, but sorry are you saying if you're in the Bowie that you don't you can't do fires and if you're not you can Yes, I mean something that would again be feasible to include in an ordinance You know, I mean if somebody's having a barbecue on cherry street downtown, they're probably okay Um, yes and no I guess You know and an outdoor fire Thing Is you know, I've got my little paper cup right there and all of a sudden that falls in And then embers are flying around because that's what embers do Um as opposed to a grill Which has a cover Preferably someplace not near Wood structures old wood that kind of thing. So it just seems that you know with an open fire pit. You may be inviting you know Laziness not laziness is terrible word say um people may not be as diligent Around an open flame. It's my thought. Yes. Sorry to be clear. I I'm in favor of Outdoor burning pits. I think barbecues. Maybe You could tweak depending on the I don't know what the definition would be but like a covered barbecue grill Something for cooking Specifically for cooking Not charcoal If I may assist a little bit here Back in the day. I used to be a fire marshal There's some clear differentiations between outdoor burning with solid fuels versus gas barbecues propane barbecues So if we could be clear try to try to isolate what we really are after and hey paul paul is with us Um, I don't want to steal his thunder But there's there's already a prohibition for using solid fuels for flames in the wildland urban interface during fire season So would we want to carry that throughout regardless? Just within the willy throughout the city regardless of Where they are and they are an str. So we want to try and find that path To be clear. So we're able to write the ordinance To your desires or at least the recommendation to to help with that But but this particular uh prohibition would only be for the Non uh non-hosted rentals. It doesn't have to be city-wide. It's simply saying that City-wide wherever these non-hosted rentals are we don't want any fire Happening anytime whether it's wildfire season or not So I mean we could adopt it that way right we could amend it that way Without impacting our other fire ordinances Yeah, I think if we could have uh Our fire marshal paul lowenthal speak to this All right, thank you So, yeah, so the attempt was to resolve the concerns regarding fire We try to differentiate the differences between solid burning and gas fired So the risk associated with the open fires typically from amber cast Which is why we try to tie in the language specific to eliminating that solid fuel type fire during fire season when there's the risk that A fire pit could spread And then would transition it to A gas fueled where you're not going to be dealing with the the amber cast If there's a desire to be more stringent on it, then yes, we can look at potentially eliminating solid burning period regardless of time of year And or potentially the the gas fire as well. We were again just trying to Minimize the risks still allow some activities to take place, but cut the Cut the amber cast out and replace it with with fuel fuel fired Activities We can definitely take it further and again look at Additional restrictions that are tied to the wooey Or if there's obviously the desire from The commission to take it even further than we can look at what that means across the city specific to What the cabinet brought up earlier? We have Put these short-term rentals in our CAD and system So when we do respond to incidents or complaints that come in through the 901 system about a fire We do have the ability to Handle these from an enforcement standpoint much differently with it with a response From our department as well. So we did really did try and Look at it from all different angles to how we can Keep some of the activities taking place still but make them as safe as possible I guess my view is why I take the risk I mean, yeah, the the upside seems limited and the downside seems enormous so think saying Within fire season to somebody who's from out of town and hasn't lived here through fire seasons Like I'd rather have specific dates if we kept that anything in there about burning outside I'd also like to add that You know, no one's going to be as diligent and as careful with their home than the homeowner And and no, you know be familiar with what's going on in their home When you're bringing in guests, I mean, you know the fire marshal is correct And you are also correct that you know solid burning fuels are going to cast embers where gas fires don't or won't Under the best, you know conditions, but you know, again, I've seen that cup I've seen that Whatever place on the edge of the fire pit and because someone's not really paying attention And then, you know, it doesn't necessarily turn into a conflagration But you know having your deck burned down or your fence burned down Stinks so why I agree with the vice chair, you know, why chance it? I also would like to be stricter. Um, so I know Mr. Lowenthal said that you guys could work on something Um before it goes to the council I just think I mean, we've had such horrific experiences that I think it's better to be safe than sorry So if I'm going to propose a friendly amendment Again, I'm not sure what work needs to be done on it. If we're just saying this should be removed as an option I don't get what else needs to happen as far as recommending to council what we want Actually, you're you're right. If we just say there will be no outdoor burning So I think that would be on number five would be outdoor burning recreational fires fire pits outdoor fireplaces barbecue grills And other similar items are not permitted Yeah, that sounds like a really good simple statement to me So I would propose that friendly amendment uh to that particular section five And so anything else? Well, we'd need a second if somebody wants to go with there Well, I would second it and I also I would accept the friendly amendment as stated I didn't hear a friendly amendment actually be proposed. I thought we were still just Hypothesizing. Okay. Well, yeah, I would propose a friendly amendment amending section five to say Recreational fires fire pits outdoor fireplaces barbecue grills and other similar items are not permitted And just leave it with that. That's my friendly amendment. That's the first friendly amendment That's the first and only one so far. Yeah So And does commissioner duggan need to Commissioner duggan you agree to that friendly amendment? Yes, I do. Thank you So the motion On the table is now The friendly amendment, you know, it will include the friendly amendment correct And before we vote we I can go ahead and summarize That resolution again with whatever friendly amendments are other options. We've changed. So We'll keep it clear So do we vote on each friendly amendment as it comes up or do we wait till the end when we might have others? I think we should continue in the discussion And as a we should continue in the discussion because I believe You have more to go through here. So the motion on the table as it stands now is the original resolution amended to delete section 2048 070 or modify 28 070 sub five as Proposed and accepted in the friendly amendment So we move on to the next thing So we do vote on it. No, no, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It's okay We're good. Thank you It takes a village. Thank you Chair weeks If I could before we move on to the next section, which I believe is the enforcement section I'm hoping that we can take a step back and go back to Section 20-48 point zero four zero It would be b2 Or sorry b b3. This is the one that is limiting the non-hosted short-term rentals to a maximum of one per property owner I I'm not sure unless I missed it I don't think that there was discussion from the commission on that one and it was a topic And so hoping to get some feedback from the commission on that one Mr. Sanders Yeah, I would like it to be three And I don't know how we move forward from that, but I guess my rationale is we've got I'm I'm uncomfortable Well looking at the numbers we only have what did we say one that has six And the vast majority have two Some have three but top out at six And you know to Say that you now can't do this activity Tomorrow that you were able to do yesterday. I'm not comfortable with that so I also think that you know it allows for you know, I mean My whole Thought process is about Creating opportunities for our citizens our people which most of the short-term rental Owners in santa rosa are santa rosa residents Let's not hamstring people who've You know have been counting on this For their retirements their income I mean what I'm seeing in this room is if they're not a lot of you know rich corporate fat cats To me, maybe you are I don't know maybe you guys are all rich fat cats. I don't know but you seem like nice enough folks to me and I think that that's a reasonable number Also, since we're talking about less than 1% at the numbers that we are now I don't think we're getting anywhere close to I mean I I'm sure that hopefully we'll get that those numbers like That question I asked about you know, what is the saturation before it really starts to affect housing? Maybe we'll get answers to that, but I don't think that through you begins to touch that so I'll bring that for more discussion from the My fellow commissioners any comments I mean, so my position would be zero, but in Instead I mean I think I think the idea again, you know looking at the resolution and trying to make the findings uh It starts to look like a very commercial enterprise if you've got three non-hosted and one hosted That doesn't look to me like, you know, hey, I want to make some extra cash I you know, I want to go travel for a month in a time or visit family for a couple weeks That starts to look, you know beyond the scope of this ordinance to me. Um, so I you know My my sense would be one non-hosted short-term rental per person Seem seems appropriate within the scope of what the ordinance is trying to do with what we've heard from the public the owners These are, you know, not generally, you know, big commercial Enterprises so, um, I would not be in favor of more than one I agree with uh commissioner peterson Commissioner dug in I also agree with commissioner peterson. I think especially if we have this um cap right now of 198 That if we restrict it to one per host Then we have that many more people who are eligible to participate commissioner carter I'm in agreement that the cap should uh remain as proposed And I'm also in agreement that it should remain as one so, uh lose Was there did you want to go on to enforcement or was there something else that we needed to clean up? No, that was it. Thank you. Okay So then uh 20 Dash 48 Dot 080 enforcement Um Yes, what yes, which what would you like to go back to? Um in 20-48 0.070 It talks about uh to Section 2 amplified music amplified outdoor music um What does that do? How do we address, you know, the music wasn't outdoors? It was inside. We just opened the windows Which which numbers? That's um Oh the next page b section 2 um subsection b so, um That is specific to outdoor as you mentioned however the ordinance does tie back to our This ordinance the str ordinance ties back to our normal noise ordinance So if something was happening in in the house that was beyond what the city's noise ordinance allows that would be That would still be a um A short-term rental violation because it's Noted here in the section that short-term rentals and daytime guests shall comply with all requirements of city code section chapter 17-6, which is our noise ordinance Does that answer your question? Yes. Okay, great Okay, uh enforcement, uh, this is going back to my comment earlier about um I'd like the Maximum fines to be associated with noise Uh Rather than Other things Um, I don't know is there any agreement on that or disagreement? Um, I I think it there's kind of a moral hazard question. Um, you know, if you carve out specific exceptions, um I think there's there's the opportunity for particularly non-hosted to engage in kind of consistent bad behavior potentially with with relatively minor fines So I'm in favor of keeping it as it is. I would Again, we heard I think enough and and read enough That in fact things are not working even with the heroic efforts of code enforcement So I think putting some sting into it Will incentivize the property owner, especially in a non-hosted to keep on top of the guests Any other comments on that? Um, I agree with commissioner peterson I also agree with commissioner peterson. Okay commissioner carter I think we've heard heard from a lot of, um operators Of how the ordinance could be tweaked to Deal with their situation more equitably but I think Coming back to the fact that we wanted a ministerial document here. That's easy to administer I'm more inclined to keep things as they are and and not try to carve out some different fine schedules Okay, commissioner sanders Yeah, I just It's tough to think that we're going to send someone a $1,500 bill because they had a sign that wasn't on the property That's not the same thing. It's not the same nuisance as You know a big party I'd love for us to be able to uh The counterpoint would be that we're relying on self-certification and self-regulation and I think Absence of teeth. It's really easy to You know, I I I tried but you know Yeah, and you won't you won't make the same mistake twice And I'm I'm hoping that when you present this to council that you'll as part of your presentation You'll you'll mention that some of the concerns we had as you know, like maybe one or two per People had a concern, but it didn't We you know it didn't rise to the majority Absolutely, and I do want to clarify too That when you mention like not having a sign or something like that Code enforcement is complaint driven We're not going out and knocking on doors and saying do you have your permit hanging in the right place or whatever so I think it's important to know that if something Is made a if code enforcement is made aware of something It's something that I most of the time I would say is going to be a noise or or Parking or occupancy Or advertising for too many people staying at your home And not so much a sign that's not posted I appreciate that. Thank you um Anything else on this section on enforcement commissioner dug in Uh, this is not um enforcement, but it's something that came up during the meeting Somebody mentioned that we could require two night minimum stay. I'm just wondering if anybody else was inclined to do that I have no idea how how you would enforce that that seemed more like an on an air bnb ad Maybe that's what you would put but I guess Jesse lou what what would we do with that as a requirement? That's true. It would be it would be very hard to enforce. I acknowledge that As mentioned a few times the this is a Many of the elements are self-certified One of the elements that this could look like is that It be clear because we because we do have very specific requirements on what their ads Shall and shall not indicate If The proposal is to move forward. It would be a requirement of at least the advertisement And then the the rest would rely on complaints that To to be able to enforce so it is a good question is how do you enforce that? So I I would say it would be basically on the advertisement and then complaints If I may um, I I heard that suggestion too and I thought it was very compelling But ultimately I think that that was a shout-out to fellow str operators that hey if you want to stay in good standing This is something you might want to consider doing on your own Not something that we should probably try and put into an ordinance I try for it I mean, I mean, you know if that's if that solves the problem that the neighbors are having for instance, right? So is that do you want to see if we have a Straw up to under a straw pole on tonight minimum sure Yes, I'll say yes No No No, no Okay, um One thing in my notes that nobody brought up tonight, but that we got in a couple of letters and it was about garbage cans About that the city should as part part of the permit should require the largest size garbage can Just to make sure there's not trash around and I wondered if there had been discussion about that in any of your meetings We didn't discuss specific Receptical sizes, but that's definitely something you could add if you wanted to Um, certainly we're hoping that people are recycling instead of just putting everything in the trash cans, but I think that that's definitely something we could include Although i'm not sure how we would verify that I guess upon Application they would have to submit a recology bill showing that it was the largest I mean we could figure out a process for it if that's something you guys wanted to do Yeah, I didn't think that the city monitored that I thought that was between The owner and the in recology So Does the city somehow have a say in what size we we don't and that's what I was saying We would if we wrote that into the ordinance as a requirement for a short terminal We would then um, and i'm assuming you guys are thinking of this more for non-hosted short terminals Then upon the application we would just request a copy of something showing that they have the largest receptacles that are possible But thinking, you know, what you just said about Recycling we want people to recycle and compost So kind of defeats the purpose saying you have to have a the huge just the biggest garbage can there is so Forget I even mentioned Well, and and we do have in here a new policy that says that they can't have trash and recycling That's not within the receptacle So if the owner ends up getting in trouble because people are leaving stuff laying around they would likely get the largest receptacle and and maybe Have something in their Rental agreement talking about recycling one thing um That I haven't asked before uh is do you when somebody comes in and gets a permit do you give them a list of Like good do's and don'ts for being a str host Like make sure you uh put the garbage in the garbage can make sure you Do all that kind of stuff So when somebody gets a permit we actually have something that goes with their permit that basically lists out every single thing That's required in the ordinance Um there are Also sections on the web page that talk about compliance and that type of thing, but we're always open to new ideas if you have anything to to um To make it better And I think lue had something he wanted to add Yeah, if I if I may just add on to that after the uh Urgency ordinance was amended and prior to the ramp up and enforcement that occurred in september We set out a notice to every known Uh str operator every known applicant every known local contact I think we set out over 500 pieces of paper Just letting them know that There had been a change in the ordinance that could enforcement was Going to be ramping up based upon where we'd been in the past And one of the things we included was something we called a success guide for str operators And it was just what you're describing. It was a list of of of dues and don'ts to uh to essentially Not run afoul of the ordinance and we still have that document. So that's something we could easily Revitalize it and continue to use Any other comments questions before we Take a vote So we have the excuse me the ordinance with the friendly amendment And that was commissioner sisco And commissioner duggin if I recall um, is that right? so, um Do you before you take the vote? Let me just ask Do you have what you need from us before you go to council? And then also I think you're going to council mid june. Is that right? So I believe that we have everything that we need and sherry can Verify, um, but at this point it's looking like the item will be scheduled for potentially the first meeting in july for council So you have what you need from us I just want to make sure there is only the one friendly amendment And that is to the outdoor burning section and instead of saying are permitted with the following restrictions We're going to strike that part and to say are not permitted Full stop. Yeah, I think is that That's that it and that was it. We've been taking notes feverishly. So we will summarize You know where there was maybe some discussion that didn't end up in a unanimous thought Hey, and just to add on to that just to clarify For the record that the section that we are referring to in the outdoor burning is 20-48 070 sub b 5 Hold on Yes It's the the section under operating requirements is 2048 070 Yes, that's current b 5. Yeah, that's it Okay, so we can call for the vote now Before we vote can we thank staff for all their hard work? Yes Especially you all what is this how many hours later, but thank you for all the hard work and Giving us all the good information we need to make this This happened tonight And thank you for those who I know are in the wings and for to captain corkman and officers And fire marshal lomenthal As well as all of you. Thank you so good And I will add all these citizens that showed up to let the feelings be known Yeah, I I do think a lot of times we're up here and there's nobody that shows up And we've not heard from anybody and it's really nice to see what I consider democracy in action and that's my little soap box So I'm sorry Do you have a comment you'd like to make? Would I do that now make my comment now before my vote? I don't know how this works Yes, if you all have additional comments and go ahead and make those now before we call the vote Yes, so long as everyone's clear as to the Proposed resolution on the table, right? So I guess I guess my comment And why I don't think that I'm going to be supporting this We have Someone can own 10 long-term rental properties And we're okay with that we're okay with that commercial endeavor But someone who owns three STRs somehow is That's incompatible And that's that's a money-making scheme That needs our attention that seems out of balance to me Um, you know if I own 10 long-term rental properties I'm making money So why are we upset that someone who owns three short-term rentals is also making money? It doesn't affect our housing our housing is A stock is less than one is less than 1 percent of that housing stock Um I think it's going to create a financial hardship for people Who operating multiple? Short-term rentals without incident And I fear where we may be punishing Uh the whole for the actions of eight Complaints from september if I have that number correct eight and so now anyone who has Because we didn't have you know in ordinance. I like to call it the wild wild west They purchased furniture They purchased homes. They are fixing up homes And now we're saying sorry And you know we listen to people talk about you know older folks talking about their future finances being tied To this activity and we are saying no um In a sense, we are determining the level of risk that we think is appropriate for someone to take Not everybody wants to take the risk of long-term rentals that comes with a whole another set of challenges that maybe they They don't want to take And I think this should be allowed to make those decisions so um I think that's it. I mean I I think that's It feels like an overstep to me That's all thank you. So will you be supporting the ordinance? I will not commissioner carter Well, I will be supporting the ordinance Nobody seems to like it. So it must be a good ordinance No, I think Staff has done what they were directed to do by council and I think The ordinance isn't perfect. It can get better I think we've given some suggestions to council as to how it may get better But I think it's up to the council to make that determination And I think uh our our uh discussion Was good and and we'll give some additional direction to council. So I'll be supporting Moving the ordinance forward Thank you commissioner duggan. I'm also in support of the ordinance. I think um Even though long-term renting can have challenges Long-term renters can add to a community just as homeowners can in a way that short-term rental occupants will not um I think also some of the people that came and spoke to us tonight Who are surrounded by short-term rentals mentioned that part of their discomfort is the level of activity of all the the house cleaners The bands picking up people not necessarily just an outside party Not just a disruption from that and I think that a lot of that would go away if we Adopt the ordinance as we've sort of made our small changes to it. So I'm in favor of the ordinance Thank you. Mr. Siscoe Yes, I'm also in favor of the ordinance and um, I know we're required to make the uh zoning code Findings which I can make and I'll be supporting the ordinance. I think it's you know So much work has gone into this and really I always feel kudos to our code enforcement department. You guys are amazing and um In a lot of ways Because of the the enforcement issues in this ordinance um The short-term rental Neighbors are better off than maybe someone like me Issues with my long-term neighbors and has code enforcement issues. They'll get treated faster, etc So I I think that's a plus as well Thank you vice chair Peterson Uh, so I also like uh, commissioner sanders do not support this ordinance for for different reasons as was discussed, I think uh To have continuing to have non-hosted short-term rentals in the city is is a mistake I think there's a meaningful difference between short and long-term rentals in terms of the the Relationships they build with the neighbors the quality of the neighborhood things like speeding parking trash Respect for your neighbors. I mean I I think there can be bad long-term neighbors, certainly But even if you've got a long-term neighbor, uh, that's bad They're probably not throwing a rager every weekend And if they are you can maybe at least build the relationship with them It's it's the same person that you're seeing so I think there is a meaningful difference. And I think Um non-hosted invites ad behavior And I'm also a little skeptical of of the financial argument. I mean We're talking about people with at least one house and often More than one house and one of the most expensive property markets in the in the country The restriction is not Anything other than you you cannot rent it for shorter than 30 days. You can still rent it Or you can sell it. Uh, so I I I think the the public comments on that we're we're pushing that a bit from my perspective But again with all that said it's it's hard for me to make the findings that are necessary With the inclusion of the non-hosted rentals because I I don't think it Is in line with the general plan or the zoning code Thank you. Well, I will be supporting the uh ordinance. It's not perfect Um, but uh, I think it is an improvement and uh at some point when it gets to council if they Decide they wanted major Changes and they would direct staff and we'd see this back again So, uh, but for this for what you were directed to do. I think uh, This is a good outcome. So I will be supporting it Vote commissioner carter I I Commissioner cisco I Commissioner dug in I Commissioner sanders. No Vice chair peterson. No Chair weeks I So that passes with four eyes and two nos And with that, I think uh, the meeting's adjourned Thank you all