A determined group of residents tried Tuesday night to prevent the Hermosa Beach City Council from adopting an ordinance prohibiting short-term vacation rentals in residential areas, but were unable to sway any of the council members as the ordinance again received unanimous approval.
The ordinance was introduced at the previous council meeting May 10, drawing more than 60 speakers on the issue. Prohibition of the rentals had the support of all five council members, but they chose to modify the ordinance’s penalty mechanism over the one originally suggested by staff, prompting the second reading and adoption item at Tuesday’s meeting.
Owners of short-term vacation rentals descended on the City Council meeting after being rallied by Jim Holtz, a city activist and rental-owner who has spoken against regulation. Holtz sent out a mass email Monday to short-term vacation rental owners in the city, telling them, “If you value your [short-term vacation rental] and depend on the income, I strongly urge you to do what it takes to attend and follow the instructions below.”
What followed was a prepared speech that Holtz had evidently written for use during public comment. After getting the ordinance pulled from the consent calendar, five consecutive speakers read the exact same speech into the record. The speech focused on letters sent to the city from the staff on the California Coastal Commission.
The first letter, sent the day of the May 10 meeting, warned that a vote to prohibit short-term rentals would constitute “development” within the meaning of the Coastal Act. The second, sent about 90 minutes before Tuesday’s meeting, warned that the adopting the ordinance could expose the city to penalties for “knowing and intentional violation” of the act.
Hermosa Beach is currently seeking Commission approval of the city’s Local Coastal Program (LCP), which are written sets of rules that municipalities use to locally enforce the state Coastal Act. Under the state law, development within the coastal zone — usually defined as the area within 1,000 yards of the mean high-tide line — must be regulated by an LCP. Hermosa and other cities without approved LCPs must obtain permits from the commission to regulate any development.
Assistant City Attorney Lauren B. Langer disagreed with the interpretation offered by the commission and residents. She argued that the ordinance in question clarified an existing ban rather than creating an entirely new one, undermining the commission’s interpretation that the rule be considered “development.” (The original ordinance was written before the advent of websites like Airbnb and VRBO, and ambiguity made it difficult to enforce.)
Council member Justin Massey, an attorney, said that even if adopting the ordinance did present some risk, it was an acceptably low risk.
“We’ve been threatened with lawsuit from landlords, from property owners. But the city gets threatened with lawsuits constantly,” Massey said. “Part of our job is to assess litigation risk. And I’m comfortable with our position here.”
Underlying the dispute was a debate over the extent to which short-term rentals provide affordable coastal lodging. While the letters from commission staffers have taken an affirmative position, many residents have noted the high cost of Hermosa rentals, some reaching thousands of dollars per weekend, and said that position was rooted in a lobbying campaign by companies like Airbnb and VRBO.
“It’s ironic for those of us that have been around since the 70s when the Coastal Act came into being that narrow, private interests are now cite the Coastal Act to protect their narrow, private interests,” said former Hermosa mayor George Schmeltzer.
