Palm Springs considers forming Vacation Rental Enforcement Department
Continuing its crackdown on the vacation rental industry, Palm Springs will consider forming a vacation rental enforcement department at a special council meeting Wednesday.
The meeting will include a summation of recommendations gathered from meetings conducted by the city’s Vacation Rental Subcommittee, composed of City Council members Geoff Kors and J.R. Roberts.
Among the recommendations is the formation of a Vacation Rental Enforcement Department, intended to issue citations and handle complaints on a 24/7 basis. Two “Vacation Rental Compliance Officials” would handle permit procedures and enforcement, with additional help from code enforcement officers, a building inspector, and the Palm Springs Police Department, according to a city staff report.
Enforcement resources would be most heavily relied on during weekends and holidays, when usage of vacation rentals is most likely to occur, the report reads.
An increase in the annual vacation rental permit fee — from $234 to $900 — would help pay for additional enforcement resources, with the enforcement department expected to require $1.7 million annually.
Other recommendations include limiting owners to renting out their homes 28 times per year, allowing, at most, two people per bedroom and eight people per vacation rental.
Fines would also be increased for violators, and renters could have their permits suspended for receiving three violations in a year’s time. However, residents reporting false violation claims to the city could also face penalties, though those consequences were not specified in the city’s report.
The recommendations are the latest in the city’s efforts to quell the growth of an industry that officials say has rapidly reduced Palm Springs’ housing availability. The City Council voted 4-0 last month to prohibit the
conversion of apartments to short-term rentals.
Officials also say that the boom in rentals — from 960 in 2009 to 1,936 at present — has led to an increase in noise violations, disorderly conduct, traffic congestion, vandalism and illegal parking.
Meanwhile, Kors warned residents Tuesday of what he said was a recent fake telephone poll soliciting local opinions on the proposed ordinance, which provided what he said was misleading information.
Listen: second robo call, which didn’t include the poll, was also sent out to residents on Wednesday
“They are asking residents their views based on the false information that they provide. This is deplorable,” Kors wrote. “They are even falsely saying that the process — which included eight public meetings — was not
transparent and that tomorrow is a non-transparent study session, not a Council Meeting and wasn’t properly noticed. All lies. The only goal of the poll is to incite anger and create division. Whatever side you are on regarding this issue, this behavior is unacceptable.”
The source behind the poll — which comes from a Washington, D.C.-area number — is unknown, but Kors said “that for some the only thing that matters is lining their own pockets and they couldn’t care less about our city.”
The ordinance has received opposition from local vacation rental owner organizations, who are circulating an online petition requesting that the City Council reconsider some of the ordinance’s provisions “in order to reduce the economic and socio-economic threats that will likely accompany this change in policy.”
The petitioners also call for the council to consider a third-party economic impact study on the potential effects of the proposed ordinance, which ordinance opponents say will be completed sometime next month.
