Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupplmnt Info - Ord 1332 CorrespondenceSwartz, Kevin From: Denise Lengyeltoti <dlengyeltoti@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 8:43 PM To: Swartz, Kevin Subject: Palm Desert Short Terms Rentals Hello, My name is Denise and I own a short term rental along the Palm Desert County Club. I bought the property last year and hired a respectable property manager, Adi Gross, who manages the property full time and employees a team to maintain the property in between stays. In addition to maintaining the property, Adi vets every single rental request. She declines requests that seem suspicious, especially during festival season. The home is a three bedroom, two bath and therefore, she doesn't allow more than six guests to stay during a single visit and usually requires a three night minimum. In order for guests to confirm their reservation, Adi requires that they sign an agreement acknowledging that they are responsible for any damages, noise complaints, etc., which will result in them losing their security deposit, potentially paying additional fees, and losing their privilege of staying at my home in the future. This has been effective in maintaining good tenants who are respectful to both thc house and to our neighbors. My property is usually rented out by returning families and snowbirds who spend weeks and sometimes months at a time in Palm Desert, playing golf at thc Country Club, exploring the Living Desert, attending nearby tennis matches, hiking the local trails, and enjoying Greater Palm Springs. We offer our guests the latest visitor guides from the Greater Palm Springs tourism board and a binder of local attractions and activities to experience during their stay. Our home and our guests contribute to Palm Desert's economy with tax revenue and spend at local restaurants, bars, grocery stores, attractions and museums. In the cul de sac where my property is located, there are four other vacation rentals. The block is beautifully manicured and 1 have not received one complaint during the one year I have owned the property from our neighbors. If they have any complaints at all, they know they can contact myself or Adi to have the problem addressed immediately because Adi and I have gone around to the neighbors to introduce ourselves and establish a relationship with them. During off-season, I had a few stay requests. In between those, I visited the property to make enhancements and stayed a week or so at a time exploring the local neighborhood, joining the local Orange Theory and supporting the economy, further building Palm Desert's reputation as a great year-round destination. I really do love Palm Desert and have enjoyed being a part of the community. I understand the need to ban or fine party houses, however that is not what I own and to completely get rid of short term rentals all together is not a solution to the problem. If this were to happen, blocks like the one my property is located in, will become vacant and lose their appeal; local businesses will lose clients and could potentially shut down, hurting the local economy. I'm interested and committed to working with Palm Desert to find a solution to the problem and I hope that I can continue to contribute to the city and establish my roots here. Best Denise December 8, 2017 City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: City Council Members Dear Honorable Crty Council Members: fte: Short Term Rental Ordinance My name is Galin Jovovich-Loginova I am a local Palm Desert homeowner who responsibly operates a short-term rental out of my home with a licensed permit. Since the 2010-2012 recession, short-term rental homeowners have improved the entire city of south Palm Desert It is now beautifully maintained and flourishes with a budding economy. As a contributor to this advancement. I am strongly opposed to the recent ban on short-term rentals in the R1 and R2 zones in South Palm Desert that was recently passed in first reading by City Counal. I am very , V a . . J about the impact this ordinance will have on the City of Palm Desert's economy, community culture and local property values Palm Desert is a tourist dependent economy As such, local residents must understand they do not live in a typical residential neighborhood. In addition, this ordinance does not solve the problems the City Council stated it was trying to correct: noise, constant new neighbors, and excessive parking, and unjustifiably restricts R1 and R2 neighborhoods from having short-term rental units but permits it in other nearby neighborhoods As an experienced short-term rental homeowner and operator, t consistently take steps to ensure that all my renters abide by the short-term rental rules and regulations. Instead of a zone-speafic ban that seems unfairly discriminatory, I recommend the implementation of stricter regulations. They are as follows: 1. Increase the minimum nightly rental to 4-7 nights. This would eliminate the party houses. The people Doming to party want to rent for 2 nights, not longer. 2 Disallow outside music after 9pm on weeknights 10pm on weekends 3. Limit the total number of persons allowed to stay at a house to a maximum of 2 per L F W V Vn. up to a total maximum of 10-12 persons with special allowances for small children. 4. Maintain the increased fines and penalties for violations of rules. 5. Increase the cost of the permit to allow for more enforcement dollars. 6 Require damage deposits from renters so that they can be fined and those fines can be collected ,.. ..;, a 2 7 Limit the total number of STR permits in each area so as to avoid large concentrations in one area. Grandfather existing STRs permits and allow attrition to take effect and over time. reach the desired numbers. If this ban goes into effect, 1 believe these will be the consequences, 1. Vacationers will rent in Palm Springs instead of Palm Desert, taking all their vacation dollars with them Businesses along El Paseo will suffer. 2. Property values in south Palm Desert will decline significantly Many owners will have to sell. Disallowing STRs will drive purchasers to other areas where they are allowed. - 3. The City will lose tax revenues that could be spent on better enforcement of stricter rules for STRs. This ordinance is contrary to the best interest of all of Palm Desert and 1 strongly urge the City Council to reject it on second reading Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Galina Jovovich-Logmova Address: 2175 Hercules Or. Los Angeles. CA 90046 Email' Boosinkal @aol cam Telephone. 213-200-3060 Rental Property Address 72890 Homestead Rd. Palm Desert. CA92260 City of Pabst Desert 73-5.ro Fr+nd Waring Drive Pabtr Desert, Cif moo A[Lentioim City..Camdl Dear Cita, Council Mernbers December 8, 2017 Re: Short Trrm Renrel Dan My name is e tile(-7Fr Vawn, a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spend tons of money et restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the Gty Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the Gty of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the City of Palm Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. 1 see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and I always folbw the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you! Sincerely, •J 111 - • City of Patin Desert 73-00 Fred Waring Drive Patin Dart, CA 9226o Atten iott Cit�Ca+ it Dear City Cowen! Members R Skurt.Tiret Rental bat; December 8, 2017 My name is ' • -0i=, 1 ; / . I am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spend tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the City Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the City of Palm Deserts economy and culture. Palm Desert Is a tourist city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the Oty of Palm Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. 1 see no issue with short-term rentals especially since (amity and l always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you! Sincerely, !; )5 I ..n.LL .1 d r• ti r r ry YLt t (, ) • City of Pabn Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Pabn Desert, G 9236o ttnrrti_nrs _CiCon1 Dear C,ty Council Members: December 8, 2017 Rs: Short Term Rents! Dien Cc4n , recently heard the City of Palm Desert is planning to ban short-term rentals in re idential zones R1 and R2. 1 felt compelled to write to City Council as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with thls ban. If It passes, I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future. 1 prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utslize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my extended family vacations. When we come to Palm Desert, we shop and dine on El Paseo, and buy groceries and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money between our accommodations, food and beverage, recreational activities and shopping. If we are not able to stay in short-term rental homes, we will no longer spend our family vacations in Palm Desert and take our business elsewhere. I strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. Instead I recommend the City of Palm Desert enforce stncter regulations and fine noisy, overly disruptive people for any and all troublesome behavior. Thank you for your consideration! Sincerely, A' 1 1 t4t-0 1,0i iy City of Pabn Desert 73-5to Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, C4 9226o Attention Cary Council Dear City Carmdl Members: December 8, 2017 Rel_Sherticros Rcpptaflin. \ ' I 1 ���? ' L am a frequent renter of Galina iovovich's home in Palm Desert. My family and I look forward to our vacations every year and prefer her accommodations over local hotels since they do not provide the space or intimacy that we enjoy so much during our vacations. Galina takes great care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to rent from her. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals in zones R1 and R2 as this ordinance may force my family to vacation elsewhere. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Nil r _7 != '.: `+ " •"} It�FR . 7 j :r' _'r ! ^ • City of Pabm Desert 73-5ro Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert. CA 9n6o Attention City cc11 Dear City Coamcil Members December 8, 2017 Re: SkertJerrn lental Dan My name is I,1 i -1 C'\ 1 . I am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spend tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the City Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the city of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the City of Palm Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no Issue with short-term rentals especially since family and I always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you! Sincerely, 1 l(('ylto zl1 n IA. )F= i(3'i •A :" ; Lx),; (z' -? )q City of Pahn Desert 73-5ro Fred Waring Drive Pabn Desert CA 9226o Attesfjor,: City Cmznd1 Dear City Council Members: Re: Short Term 1eptat Data December 8, 2017 My name isCeNktelMIE M 4'1 m a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spend tons of money at restaurants an8'stores on E1 Paseo. My family, friends and 1 very much enjoy all the benefits that short -tern rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the City Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I strongly urge Gty Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the City of Palm Desert's economy and cuhure. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the Oty of Palm Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and 1 always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank youl Sincerely, (- %ii v J;ram. Pr- ,�,, . E-17- 7711.6 Ja-7,10 • City of Patin Desert Ito Fred Waring Drive Patin Desert, CA pzz6o l4tte tiorr Citq casrtcii Dear Gty Council Menberr December 8, 20 Re; Short Tenn ,tent.1 Bon My name is r. iu-'4"1 am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spent tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brough to my attention that the City Council might ban short-term rentals in residential tones RI and R2. 1 strongly urge Oty Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact of the City of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such 1 recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the city of Palm Desert then 1 will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and l always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you! Sincerely, �.L 'L) '1(}112.. 1-I1 t-!�-%):• ./. M�.�� :S • ,�,� {`�,.y'ij ....�Na',•.ii"'�.:t.;...•Pi .; .�� �L :� ! t. City of Pabre Desert 73-5ro Fred Waring Drive Pabn Desert, CA 92260 Attcnti'Q Courkil Dear G.ty Council Meneberr: December 8, 2017 Re: Shorsier= Rental Dan etzrheonvnt o , am a frequent renter of Galina lovovich's home in Palm Desert. My family bnd I Zook forward to our vacations every year and prefer her accommodations over local hotels since they do not provide the space or intimacy that we enjoy so much during our vacations_ Galina takes great care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to rent from her. I strongty urge city Council to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals in tones R1 and R2 as this ordinance may force my family to vacation elsewhere. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, -tt 6OU.2e5c 5 /r7Gtn _ 2_SS. 2o1__Z� r ;1 , r jY , najli. l . .�..•,irt . . wit. City of Pabe Desert 73.5ro Fred Waring Drive Pab, Deserl. CA 9226o Attertionc City Council December 8, 2017 Dear city Goaded) Members: Re: Short Terns Ingot Ban My name isTf'tf.I re,uaril I am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year 1 spend tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and 1 very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the city Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the City of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the city of Palm Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and I always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you! Sincerely, 31' ' . rizs Ca 92a°3 3a . 73.837) Gag of Pabn Desert rslao Fred Waring Drive Patin Desert, CA 9236o Attentions City Cozrneil Dear City Council Members: December 8, 2017 Skort rerw lterstelB.nn 1, ZQ lo „rirequent renter of Galina lovovich's home in Palm Desert. My family and I look forward to our vacations every year and prefer her accommodations over local hotels since they do not provide the space or intimacy that we enjoy so much during our vacations. Galina takes great care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to rent from her. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals in zones R1 and R2 as this ordinance may force my family to vacation elsewhere. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, � L�za��� Pado.eau36s- Vr6r izel/o0p. ,yJ._. ...... .., 4.f. . City of Pabn Desert 7 - IO Fred Waring Dive Paba Desert. CA 92260 Attention: � Co necil Dear City Council Membrrr December 8, 2017 lc; Short Tea Aestal Des My name 1 An' 1{� ( am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spend tons of n>< at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and 1 very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the Gty Council might ban short -terns rentals in residential zones RI and R2. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge Impact on the Gty of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If 1 am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short -temp rental in the City of Palm Desert then 1 will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and 1 always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an Ideal vacation destination. Thank you! )AGa-CA, C /\ - QGA 9cx; (v .,� :,:{ i�f r. .'i. `.ry=fin City alPbbnDesert 7-5ro Fred Waring Drive Palm DeSen, CA 92260 Aermiorr: City C.ormci Dear Crty Council Members December 8, 2017 Re; Shark/ern'Rental Ban I, k q/Q 11eDi �, am a frequent renter of Galina lovovich's home in Palm Desert. My familyand I look forward to our vacations everyyear and prefer her accommodationsr kscal Pr over hotels since they do not provide the space or intimacy that we enjoy so much during our vacations. Galina takes great care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to rent from her. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals in zones Rl and R2 as this ordinance may force my family to vacation elsewhere. Thank you for your time. Sincerely. SF- ?0-P 49-ot i LLry Yri+rjlr; : • • City o% Pabn Desert 73-5ro Fred Warbsg Drive Paba Desert, CA 92260 Dear City Council Memberr Anentiorp City Council December 8, 2017 Re: Short Term Rental Raft 1,3-P/P1K /2 t/ , recently heard the Oty of Palm Desert Is planning to ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. 1 felt compelled to write to City Council as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. If it passes, I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist In the future. 1 prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utilize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my extended family vacations. When we come to Palen Desert, we shop and dine on El Paseo, and buy groceries and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money between our accommodations, food and beverage, recreational activities and shopping. If we are not able to stay in short-term rental homes, we will no longer spend our family vacations in Palm Desert and take our business elsewhere. I strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. Instead I recommend the Clty of Palm Desert enforce stricter regulations and fine noisy, overly disruptive people for any and all troublesome behavior. Thank you for your consideration! Sincerely, 03e- o ? 7 9r;Q/ 0333 & 44v , eeg A. i�.i�'.. s t. 1 .mil: i� .i....L���• ' 1,�{ ..i.i �.7.l1tl,_,i-•J�►.•iJ�i,.• - Cag of Palm DefErt 73-10 Fred Waring Drive Pain Desert, CA patbo Atientiaor atu n o' December 8, 2017 Dear My C,arrscil Member:: ftnt Nbut Tank lsstwl to eei 11 f OPO (/ am a frequent renter of Gating JovvvirJfs home in Palen Desert. My family and I look forward to our , .. G , til every year and prefer her accommodations over local hotels since they do not provide the space or intimacy that we enjoy so much during our notions. Galina takes great care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to neat from her. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals to zones R1 and R2 as this ordinance may force my family to vacation elsewhere. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, �• i. / L" /5!f;% ,PE- (. 4a fx ;/ /..,/1i l . ./. (0. l/ ('.�f • f /. — 1 '�jL/iC�..'7, / .%' �t >;��IG1�., fit'/l fr• City of Pabn Drsrrt 73-5to Fred Waring Drive Patin Desert. CA 9226o Attentiam City Council Dear City Council Members; uecemoer ts, .cuir i> Slier! Term Rental B ,20f? QLpo My name is nF2I9 4/ 'K/. 1 am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year 1 spend tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and 1 very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the City Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge Impact on the City of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such l recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the City of Palm Desert then 1 will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and 1 always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you! Sincere n1_.5 _ /7' c. Mojs` L eon etk KeimpPe!site; Oae. Cony aid- 6 .5- 7-07 uor Lim et row? L • • •-•"3 bVirrinis r rrrr^r Pain Dcsat. CI cm6o Atrauiori t �i December S. Dear Orly Coward iwerwrwr t Z. Skort Terra , t LTitBd s/�/CI ////Cl/gheard the Oty of Palm Desert Is planning to ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. 1 tett compelled to write to Clty Council as 1 am so concerned about the future of Paim Desert wren trios can. IT it passes. r ww not oe voiunst .� Desert as a tourist In the future. t prefer to stay In homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utilize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my extended fatuity vacations. Merin we cone to Paim Desert we shoo and dine on Et Pasco. and buy eroceries and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a tot of money between our act . i Irons, food and beverage, recreational activities and shopping. If we are not abbe to stay in short-term rental homes. we will no longer spend our family vacations in Pater Desert and tag+ raw ►.,«i.+►a• elsownere 1 strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. Instead I recommend the City of Palm Desert enforce stricter rertutations and fine noisy. overly disruptive people for any and all troublesome behavior. Thank you for your consideration: Smceret, i3y3SS:Pw4/ g,r. Uar� /;?U,3, et,. 9/4/0 _EiissiammaQ 93Ci2p/eco Ciny of Pabn Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Pabst Desert, CA 9226o Atterniort;. (-lilt Council December 8, 2017 • Derr City Council Meatberz Re.; ShprL Tercet gistta! Ban 1,110 TXe W �I1i recently heard the City of Palm Desert is planning to ban short-term rentals in residential zones Rt and R2. I felt compelled to write to City Council as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. If it passes, I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future. I prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utilize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my extended family vacations. When we come to Palm Desert, we shop and dine on El Paseo, and buy groceries and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money between our accommodations, food and beverage, recreational activities and shopping. If we are not able to stay in short-term rental homes, we will no longer spend our family vacations in Palm Desert and take our business elsewhere. I strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. Instead I recommend the City of Palm Desert enforce stricter regulations and fine noisy, overly disruptive people for any and all troublesome behavior. Thank you for your consideration! Sincerely, /41I G/0o/ l36OD, /204 Act sQrNi_TX 77sq {lu/,s_ilRR kA/lane si), yrn4-il. enM • ' $ • Crty of Paine Desert 73-5ro Fred Waring Drive Patin Desert, CA ga26o Attention C ty W December 8, 2017 Dear City Council Membrcr= Re, Skor-t1eTINR al Jaee My name is l ‘ Kti+ovtoa . I am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spend tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My (amity, friends and 1 very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the City Council might ban short -tern rentals in residential zones R1 end R2. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the City of Palm Desert's economy and cuhure. Palm Desert is a tounst city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the City of Palm Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. l see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and I always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you! Sincerely, 25 e -' Q,Qe_Qk s O�. �l tic) qi (3Z9 3'1 `y o IF !Z- c7-/ 7 cv'- is City of Pate Desert Ito Fred Waring Drive e Pate Desert, CA 9226o Attention Gty Council Dear City Council Members' December 8, 2017 Re: Short Term Rental Ban My name is Agre7-014901SP- m a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spend tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the Oty Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones RIand R2. I strongly urge Oty Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the City of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such 1 recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the Oty of Palm Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and I always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank youi Sincerely, gip- S-i-oo�.Q V.83 Yoyee/i-V"Wiggle iewf //A 4. ?LW (wig 4gOrpA cod/ (k9silize daPpiel,e9 4-NW �. , ir • �i S,`1'�y;.> Se.`^L' tL _ �..L� s. . .. i .y • .'�: �, _+� ` .,li. .,/ �d��. _',L.. i _� i • .., l. w.in . fi +I,..��•.tc � � _ �.: December 8, 2017 Cray of Paha Desert 73-5ro Frail Waring Drive Patin Desert, CA 92z6o Clear City Omani Meaebers: ite Sion Term Xenia Ben 1, 'k4Xl) ! 1 P/'P/ ; recently heard the Cky of Palm Desert is planning to ban short-terrn rentals in residential zon S R1 and 82. 1 felt compelled to write to City Coundl as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. If it passes„ I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future. I prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utilize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my extended family vacations. When we come to Palm Desert, we shop and dine on El Paseo, and buy,, ..., and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money between ow accommodations, food and beverage, recreational activities and shopping. If we are not able to stay in short-term rental homes, we will no longer spend our family vacations in Palm Desert and take our business elsewhere. I strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. Instead l recommend the City of Palm Desert enforce stricter regulations and fine noisy, overly disruptive people for any and all troublesome behavior. Thank you for your consideration) Sincerely, ,fificie . D r% jueRo.497,33 th23 1)1 roc/v I1L1C ,Yi . /T /KONH r`P'l old &WM Oty of Pabst Dart 73-Jo Find Waring Drive Pairs Desert CA - aler l ere US$ Council December 8, 2017 Dear City Cowed] Aife+.ber= Slaw! �Term iDAS'Qf14 S ( 1 P Warn a frequent renter of Galina 1ovovich's hone in Palm Desert. My family and f look forward to our vacations every year and prefer her accommodations over local hotels since they do not provide the space or intimacy that we enjoy so much during our vacations. Galina takes great care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to tent from her. 1 strongly urge City C.ouncd to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals in zones R1 and R2 as this ordinance rnay force my family to vacation elsewhere. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, (7-0 j s z, F' of e Q- 431‘. AS1 ilYe/J, (°.ga0a or& Ciagg0 7eafil q/IJP/ei �11/€ eat> ,S�o- 67I-vs-5 • City of Pala Desert T5-5zo Fred Waring Drive Pant Desert. C4 92260 Dear Gay Council Member= rt Term Rental Batt 1, alDQacently heard the City of Palm Desert is planning to ban short-term rentals i residential zones R1 and R2. I felt compelled to write to City Council as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. if it passes, I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future. I prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utilize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my extended family vacations. When we come to Palm Desert, we shop and dine on El Paseo, and buy groceries and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money between our accommodations, food and beverage, recreational activities and shopping. If we are not able to stay in short-term rental homes, we will no longer spend our family vacations in Palm Desert and take our business elsewhere. Atienti ty Council December 8, 2017 1 strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. Instead l recommend the City of Palm Desert enforce stricter regulations and fine noisy, overly disruptive people for any and all troublesome behavior. Thank you for your consideration! Sincerely, /03,3 cs-wxq /�l��zic;a(/v, TA City of Paint Desert 73-1to Fred Waring Drive Pabn Desert, CA 92260 Atterttigre City wig December 8, 2017 Dear City Council Members: itk _ Shortimiaattallan I, /oC/1e7e0ecentiy heard the Gty of Palm Desert is planning to ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I felt compelled to write to City Council as 1 am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. If it passes, I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future. I prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utilize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my extended family vacations. When we come to Palm Desert, we shop and dine on El Paseo, and buy groceries and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money between our accommodations, food and beverage, recreational activities and shopping. If we are not able to stay in short-term rental homes, we will no longer spend our family vacations in Palm Desert and take our business elsewhere. I strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. instead I recommend the City of Palm Desert enforce stricter regulations and fine noisy, overly disruptive people for any and all troublesome behavior. Thank you for your consideration) Sincerety, l� •���r /o�.� aWe Pk/5Oi ..47Z /9. ea • f , 0/0 ga /1-7 409#01/e41/ 343—CMi/429 i2-0g it .i.z-.:.1�' US/ Off ram trio Wanro Drive t talu v SCST. to 91200 titiggieriSitzi Coundi bear Lan t wrrrai Memtrerr 1teM Skort T'eren ltrrrtaat Dan 4 t, e`44C, , am a frequent renter of Galina iovovtch's home In Patm Desert. My family and I look forward to our vacations every year and prefer her accommodations over local hotels since they ao not prowne the space or intimacy mat we enjoy so morn awing our vacations. Galina takes great care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to tent from her. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals in zones Ri and H2 as this ordinance may torte my tamity to vacation elsewhere. December 8. 201 Thank you tor your mile Sincerely, tet-,hz):;:r / 4 Pet/e/l , � Coo. eq/4ssQ l0607 tail Of num ves:- '-sto rred Waum Dnru Pabe Oestst. IA 92200 Dear RAW Canvas Men bar oo/// iY1 , PeC�;�atrf a hlquent remer of Gauna Joovovach's home In Palm desert. My famI y and I look forward to our vacations every year and prefer her accommodations over bpi hotels since they do not provide the space or tntunacy that we enjoy so much awing ow vacations. Galina takes peat care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to tent trom her. I strongly urge Uty toundi to reconsider the ban on short -tern rentals In tones Ri and Kl as this ordinance may force my tamlty to vacation elsewhere. AtKrit3ar Cm Canidt December 8. 201' Thank you tor your time Srncerety, PV461&-p0 WO/ eaggetieP orz iqet/eg/X ier/ iz?/so _3(0--sz--6Z/fY .-...'iiyz},: arg of hba Desert 73.-Iro Fred Waring Drive Paha Desire!. CAyaado Derr at, Coundl Adetiaberr C... A. 8,2017 tt: _Short _Tern Restalihra /, 7?a1Pov,4 . am a frequent renter of Galina Jowvich's horde in Paint Desert. My family and 1 look forward to ow vacations every year and prefer her accommodations over local hotels since they do not provide the space or Intimacy that we er*oy so much during our vacations. Galin takes great ore of her home and k would be a shame to not be able to tent from her. I strongly urge Crty Council to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals in bones R1 and R2 as this ordinance may force rev family to vacation elsewhere. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, .s7 Fi;FRaeoet. .5;- 'Joys - ,I, X eg. Qaoti 5 rDQRovQ' 8ra(/ C 2/ff 3 �� � y �o- � -- 5- Gty of Pabn Desert 73-5zo Fred Waring Drive Patin Desert, CA 9226o Attsntiar City C.au ril Dear G.ty Councit Menrberr December 8, 2017 Re: Short Terse Rental Dan rr • I, p141'TR� Oq//10es'.g,frecently heard the City of Palm Desert is planning to ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I felt compelled to write to City Council as 1 am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. if it passes, I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future. I prefer to stay In homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utilize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my extended family vacations. When we come to Palm Desert, we shop and dine on El Paseo, and buy groceries and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money between our accommodations, food and beverage, recreational activities and shopping. If we are not able to stay in short-term rental homes, we will no longer spend our family vacations in Palm Desert and take our business elsewhere. 1 strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. Instead 1 recommend the City of Pa)m Desert enforce stricter regulations and fine noisy, overly disruptive people for any and all troublesome behavior. Thank you for your consideration! Sincerely, z?,5-o gak3,,0# emotePta .109 ,yam A £. 9/0/ 7500,e/ochowds)00,00, pop gig-8& «9jZy ""P`i...- • - • rLr Gty et Pan Desert 73-110 hr& Waring Drfse Pablo Desert. CA pze6o otterstiorx at Omni Dem. at Cmoxll Members: December 8, 2017 ar....._nettraianitamm fiPO( &Dive, recently hear the City of Palm Desert is planning to ban strort-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I felt compelled to write to City Councll as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. if it passes, I ion not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future. 1 prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utllize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my extended family vacations. When we come to Palm Desert, we shop and dine on El Paseo, and buy groceries and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money L. .1 .. our accommodations, food and beverage, recreational activities and shopping. If we are not able to stay In short-term rental homes, we will no longer spend our famlly vacations In Palm Desert and take our business elsewhere. I strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. Instead I recommend the Oty of Palm Desert enforce stricter regulations and fine noisy, overly disruptive people for any and an troublesome behavior. Thank you for your oonskierationi Sincerely, /5-4( V9 PP490 g (30 rP.0.(17 etekrn R DeVelelpit9e Clad> 4 nt.j1.,.' , ef..� ..;f.i�l'y.if City of Pak e Desert 73-120 Fred Warring Arise Palm Desert. CA gss6o Dear Qity Coined! Membe r December 8, 2017 t� Terav ifaal ja OW/VS PZ/19.0)reticentty heard the Gty of Palm Desert is planning to ban start -term rentals In residential zones R1 and R2. I felt compelled to write to City Coundl as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. If it passes, I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future. I prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utilize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my extended family vacations. When we come to Palm Desert, we shop and dine on El Paseo. and buy groceries and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money between our accommodations, food and beverage. recreational activities and shopping. If we are not able to stay in short-term rental homes. we will no longer spend our family vacations In Palm Desert and take our business elsewhere. I strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. Instead i recommend the City of Palm Desert enforce stricter regulations and fine noisy, overly disruptive people for any and all troublesome behavior. Thank you for your consideration! Sincerely, 5i ieli'Q p 4 S/j-L !/l7 l Q• / / SPMXIII sou iipL Na,/ eA0,1 f� City of Pabst Desert 73-510 Fred Ww*tg Dri e Pobec Dbvt G 9as6o dittentiser City Condi Dear Qty Carnal! Members: December 8, 2017 KO (I na , I, 41,' �KPt, Ey/ , am a frequent ranter of Galena lovovicMs home hi Palm Desert My family and I look forward to our vacations every year and prefer her accommodations over local hotels since they do not provide the space or intimacy that we enjoy so much during our vacations. Galina takes great care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to tent from her. 1 strongly urge City Council to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals In tones R1 and R2 as this ordinance may force my fam(7y to vacation elsewhere. Thank you for your time. Sincorely, egookagiv 00;,K-F,0 0Cos fi /P.4, 04'• Pof(t? Pew reiglie20. cop, h',Y-333 -/ 7 ( g-OcPr /f ON of Palm Desert moo Fred Waring Drive Pains Desert. CA 92260 Artgruicrn Grit Council Dear City Coundl Me gibers: December ts, lutI Rcz SbQrt Trr Peeta1 Dww p My name is K eofcte feeof atn a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year 1 spend tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short•term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the City Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as 1 feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the City of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short•term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the city of Paim Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and I always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you! Sincere ;938n, GUesV 0/4,7q0 Oes7 /% _�a. r2c 69 Qrlel/%oe'1 "Mew/9 C .• � i c.:_wdf�.:y a. City of Pabn Desert 73-SI47 Fred Waring Drive Patin Desert, CA gzsbo Attentkn...00i Cosu/cij Dear City Conrtdl Mrnrberr uecemoer a, evil IRr. Short Terat_�ejtal Ban l,l 1ff pl�I/t DOtCFrecently heard the City of Palm Desert is planning to ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I felt compelled to write to City Council as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. if it passes, I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future. 1 prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utilize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my extended family vacations. When we come to Palen Desert, we shop and dine on El Paseo, and buy groceries and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money between our accommodations, food and beverage, recreational activities and shopping. If we are not able to stay in short-term rental homes, we will no longer spend our family vacations in Palm Desert and take our business elsewhere. I strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. Instead I recommend the City of Palm Desert enforce stricter regulations and fine noisy, overly disruptive people for any and al! troublesome behavior. Thank you for your consideration! Sincerely, 710 h C o 6P (rnfrt cv)ol, po76 LL%/zwibo f .0imaa/ roof (3a3)578 5 Ctg cf Paha Desert 7 Fred Warfig Drive Plebe Deurt fit gaa6o am Omega De r adyGnaidl 1He.be r 11... . 8, 2017 f//c2 7 f ° -;Ci Keoently heard the Oty of Palm Desert Is planning to ban short-term rentals in residential zones Ri and R2. 1 felt compered to write to City Council as 1 am so .. .. ..1 about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. If it passes, I wilt not be visitirr Patin Desert as a tourist in the future. 1 prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dinkhgameniU.s and do not utilize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my I andad tamely .. . When we come to Palm Desert, we stop and dine on El Paseo, and buy . . and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money between ow accommodations, food and beverage, . _ .. .1 activities and .. . , ping. if we are not able to stay In s ort-term rental homes, we well no longer spend our family vacations in Palm Desert and talon ow business elsewherQ. I strongly tw a you to not proceed with this ban. Instead I — . „ , d the Oty of Palm Desert enforce stricter regulations and fine noisy, overly disruptive people for any and ati troublesome behavior. Thank you for your . Sorel Sincerely, r/as NIvsavP, Ds #94ge/a, Coo. ?rag (//Q2iS'/4d. 7171eqioi/Oliia//CNJih' ads �6� ayo,� Swartz, Kevin From: Dawn Templeton - Templeton Real Estate Group <dawntempleton@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 11:57 AM To: Nestande, Gina; Swartz, Kevin; Stendell, Ryan; Jonathan, Sabby; Stanley, Jane; Kelly, Kathleen; Weber, Susan Marie; Harnik, Jan Subject: [SPAM] - To City Council Members: Please read & add to records in opposition to STR ban Greetings Palm Desert City Council Members, I am writing to express my family's opposition to the ban on STR's. Unfortunately, we closed escrow on our Palm Desert Retirement and Family vacation home just as the moratorium originally went into effect. We didn't realize we should've submitted for a permit while in escrow, so we don't have a permit to rent our home. Realtors and everyone said "oh don't worry it will most likely be something like Palm Springs".... Wow were they wrong! We purchased our specific home for these reasons that seemed wonderful to us at the time: 1. We want a place to go throughout the winter until we retire, since we are currently in Idaho. you can't do that if you are forced to do long term rentals thus making it unavailable to the owners) We came to PD regularly as kids when we lived in OC and we chose it because we love it even over Palm Springs! 2. We thought we would be able to off set costs and home upkeep by renting the property as needed when we are not there. Now, we are looking at the finances and saying maybe this doesn't make sense ( I am sure many other homeowners are saying the same thing!!) 3. Our entire extended family is just 2 hours away in San Clemente CA , so we like that 4. We purposely bought in the R-1 zone as there IS no homeowners association dictating any rules or regulation on a property owner. Isn't it true that if you want enforcement in the place you live you should choose a neighborhood that has a strong HOA? Thats why we specifically chose R-1 so we would avoid HOA requirements 5. We thought this would make a wonderful retirement location and we believed that we should buy now due to the low interest rates! We never in our wildest dreams imagined that this complete STR ban would happen! Here is what we put into "Your" economy and neighborhood since purchasing ( and we are just one family), thinking that surely the moratorium will be lifted with reasonable requirements. Let me out line it for you: 1. We have spent nearly $150,000 in property improvements with local contractors and landscapers 2. We have spent hundreds, if not 1,000's of dollars eating out at local establishments just on each of visits ( which is now at a about 6 since we purchased) 3. We have spent multiple 1,000's on shopping at local stores purchasing furniture,home decor towels, bedding, etc etc from your local stores boosting the economy every time we do etc etc 4. We have had our family stay with us for the Thanksgiving week ( you can't have a family stay in a hotel for any amount of reasonable cost!) spending 1,000's on all the things that tourists like to do in Palm Desert. 5. Further, I am waiting to be able to employ even more people to keep our property in tip top shape Here is what I would hope you would see: 1. This property is an important investment for us as I am sure it is to many, its our future retirement home! However we can't really afford to keep it if we don't rent it to RESPONSIBLE known renters from Boise Idaho. Just like us! ( older empty nesters nearing retirement )We do not want weekly partiers thrashing our place, and we love to be good neighbors. We are responsible and care about the neighborhood mainly for our investment of over a half million. If STR owners are forced to sell this WILL affect property values, its simple supply and demand 2. You are changing the rules after the fact which is going to be very detrimental to many 3. I believe the city council needs to communicate to the people who are so unhappy.... that things change, the world changes. and STRS have clear benefits to the Palm Desert community. No One is forcing them to stay in a home they are no longer happy with, they can move at any time and to choose one with strict HOA's or we can try enforcement PLEASE CONSIDER: 1. Allowing responsible STR ownership 2. Consider strengthening enforcement: as these code violations should be handled anyway, whether someone is renting for 2 days 30 days or is actually the owner! 3. Please consider the cost/benefit of banning STRs it won't be good for PD economy or home values that is just basic economics 4. Don't allow more than one STR per person 5. Consider a maximum on STR contracts per year Please don't make me leave and go to Palm Springs O DAWNTEMPLETON Owner I Broker I Realtor@ Templeton Real Estate Group 0: 208-473-2203 I C: 208-890-1352 See whhdt makes us 1 in East Boise' 2 City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: City Council Dear City Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ban I have just heard that the City of Palm Desert voted 3-2 to ban any new short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2 immediately, and to go further and disallow existing permitted short-term rentals in these two zones as of December 31, 2019. I wanted to write to City Council in order to articulate my concern about the future of Palm Desert with this ban moving forward. I cannot believe that the City would not grandfather existing permitted short- term rentals. It is very displeasing to hear that the City would not honour these rentals. If this ban goes into effect I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist, as I prefer to stay in homes near shopping, dining, and entertainment amenities. This is why El Paseo was so attractive to me and my family. Hotels do not provide a comfortable space for extended family vacations, we prefer to eat in El Paseo, shop for groceries and wine, and use all of the services El Paseo offers — and spend a lot of money on each trip. If this ban gets put in place we will certainly stay elsewhere and not in Palm Desert. This ban will decrease tourism in Palm Desert. The attraction to Palm Desert is the privacy and comfort of staying in your home, not in a hotel. If there is a concern with the noise levels of renters, then there should be stricter noise by-laws in place and noisy people should be fined. Please reconsider implementing this ban before it's too late. Thank you for reading my letter. Sincerely, David MacFayden david.macfayden@avisonyoung.com Avison Young 1055 West Georgia Street, Suite 2900 Vancouver, BC V6E 3P3, Canada D: 604.757.5272 C: 604.761.5547 Swartz, Kevin From: David Mercier <Info@CaliforniaDesertRental.com> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 10:15 AM To: Swartz, Kevin Subject: STR ban is very disappointing Hello Kevin, I have to say that the whole process of the STR ban is very disappointing. I've had a TOT license and STR permit and got no notification until the December 1 form letter from you. No opportunity for input. No opportunity for discussion. My family and I were full time Palm Desert residents in the 90s. We've been part time residents since 2008 and have been legally doing short term rentals since then. We've paid sales tax on every penny we've earned, we got a permit when the 2012 ordinance was passed and followed every rule to the letter. We've never had a complaint either from the city or any neighbor. When we bought our home we put about $25,000 into it because it was very run down. Nearly every year since we've invested $5,000 - $10,000 each year on pool remodeling, new furnace, AC, painting the house, etc. We even took advantage of CVWD rebates and replaced toilets to lower our water usage. Believe me, my house looks a lot better than the long term rentals in the area. It's very disappointing to have a few owners affect those homeowners who follow the ordinances and pay required taxes. Just know that, if passed, we will either convert our home to a long term rental or we will sell it outright and find a city that is more friendly to part time residents. Between the closed executive course and now these restrictions, the Palm Desert Country Club community will again fall to disrepair. Thank you for your time. David Mercier Mercier Associates LLC David Mercier a office 303 439 40231 Info@ CalitorniaDesertRental.com 1 Swartz, Kevin From: Lisa Isherwood <Iisa.a.isherwood@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2017 10:44 AM To: CityhallMail; Swartz, Kevin; sharepalmdesert@gmail.com; Aylaian, Lauri; Harnik, Jan; Nestande, Gina; Jonathan, Sabby; Kelly, Kathleen; Weber, Susan Marie; Stendell, Ryan Subject: Short term rental ordinance City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert CA 92260 Attention: City Council Dear Honourable Council Members We are writing in support of short term rentals in Palm Desert. As residents of Indian Wells, we are already without short term rentals. Friends and family who come to visit have been able to have an enjoyable and affordable stay by accessing short term rentals in nearby Palm Desert. We are parents to 4 adult children who do not live nearby. Our home is too small to accommodate our extended family for vacations and holidays. Continuation of the short term rentals in Palm Desert will allow us to have affordable family gatherings in the future. Respectfully Lisa and Herb Isherwood Sent from my iPhone i December 9, 2017 Dear Mayor Harnik and City Council Members, I am a homeowner in the Palm Desert Country Club community. We purchased our home in 2015 as investment property and hope to retire here someday. We are permit holders and we follow the rules that are in place to protect our neighbors. We pay a management company to ensure that our guests follow the laws and that our neighbors are not negatively impacted by our guest. I have been coming to Palm Desert for well over 30 years as a renter. I cannot imagine how much money I have invested in this city over the years. Eating in restaurants, playing golf, shopping. Contributing to the bottom line for this community. Investing in the community I hope to retire in. It doesn't make a bit of sense to me that the City Council could entertain the idea of eliminating even 20% of the STR's in the city. This decision is going to be detrimental to our community. The community you hold office for and are supposed to support and protect. The golf courses are going to suffer without the income from summer play, the mom and pop stores, bars and restaurants are going to suffer without the income from summer visitors. Long term renters and residents alone do not sustain this town. Even the city earns only on STR's. I would love to see an Environmental Impact Study for what's being considered. Your website, the City of Palm Desert website says that this is a resort destination. If you vote to eliminate STR's that statement is no longer true. People don't always want to stay in hotels. For so many reasons hotels do not fill the needs and or desires of individuals and families. Are you aware that Airbnb is the biggest hotel company in the world, although they don't own any properties? If you ban STR's your taking this community backwards. I support Enforcement! To ban STR's without first attempting to solve the problem is irresponsible. It's unfair to those who abide by the rules. I completely empathize with homeowners who are impacted by the rule breakers. Stop the rule breakers and you eliminate the problem!!! I must believe that if you ban STR's your decision is purely political and not in the best interest of our community! Please do the right thing! Sincerely, Marplr.Thomay Margie Thomas 43-100 Illinois Street Palm Desert, CA 92211 cc: sharepalmdesert@gmail.com Stanley, Jane From: Ted Thomas <teded5oclocksomewhere@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 10:31 AM To: CityhallMail; sharepalmdesert@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Short term rentals Sent from space Begin forwarded message: From: Ted Thomas <teded5oclocksomo‘ here" ‘ ahoo.com> Date: December 5, 2017 at 9:00:24 AM PST To: iharnik "u cit\ olpalmdcsert.or2 Subject: Short term rentals I see that the short term rentals around the Desert willow golf courses are not affected. I don't think it's fare to make other courses suffer. Palm desert country club gets it share of snowbirds, they stay about a month at a time. In the summertime it's 3 to 5 days max for people to play golf and hang by a pool. Without that the place is a ghost town. We need every tourist we can get. You can see the old money is drying up with all the private courses begging for members. We are out of the Bob Hope era. We need vacationers. Sent from space City of Palm Desert Mr. Kevin Swartz Associate Planner 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 RE: Short Term Rental Ordinance Dear Mr. Swartz. R. Craig Wise 29311 Kinglet Court Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 77085 New York Avenue Palm Desert, CA 92211 December 10, 2017 VIA EMAIL: kswartz@citvofoalmdesert.org I'm writing to express my opposition with the recent to ban on Short -Term Rentals (STR) in the R 1 and R2 zones in South Palm Desert. The City's ban on Short Term Rentals should be reconsidered for the following reasons. 1 This Ban takes away our rights as homeowners; 2. This will potentially cause a financial hardship on existing STR owners, 3 This will cause STR owners to sell and the influx of listings on the market will cause property values to decline and/or cause owners to foreclose, 4 This Ban will also have a negative effect on the tourism industry as the renters would be forced to rent and shop elsewhere; 5. The workload for the blue-collar workforce (handymen, landscapers, contractors, etc ) will also be negatively affected due to the reduction in work with Tess STR properties Has the City considered other options such as: (1) placing a moratorium on new vacation rentals, (2) Fine irresponsible vacation rental owners who do not respect their neighbors or maintain their homes, (3) Limit vacation rental owners to having a maximum of 3-5 homes being rented out at any one time' I'm a responsible STR owner who pay the city's vacation rental fees, regularly maintain our property and most importantly insure our renters are responsible and respectful to the neighbors THIS WILL CAUSE A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP ON ME AND MY FAMILY' Ultimately. I hope the City will make the right choice and lift the ban on STR. Regards, f s , R. Craig Wise Stanley, Jane From: Isaac Jacobsen <isaac.jacobsen.1992@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 11:55 PM To: CityhallMail Subject: Stop the Short Term Rental Ban! Dear Palm Desert City Council Members, I have just learned that Palm Desert voted to ban short-term rentals altogether. I wrote before the last vote, and I am extremely surprised the ban went ahead when I know there was a lot of opposition to the ban. Furthermore, I really cannot believe that the city would not grandfather short-term rentals. I have never heard of a property -type situation where properties aren't grandfathered when some sort of zoning rule changes. For example, I own a property in London, Ontario, and when the city limited rentals to five bedrooms around the University, the city grandfathered any properties that had more than five bedrooms rented previously. This is because the city understood that people had invested with that knowledge. Now you are telling me that the people that have spent their hard-earned money to invest for their futures in Palm Desert (in short-term rentals) should suffer by taking an economic hit when they have to sell their property at a loss? And yes, property values will drop. I can recall a very recent situation where property values took an enormous hit — the recession in '08. When property values dropped significantly, people, especially in Southern California, lost everything they had, including their jobs. Short-term rentals have helped Palm Desert climb out of that recession. So, I think, at the very least, existing short-term rentals should be grandfathered. I would like to point out that "Grandfather clauses are commonly used in creating new zoning ordinances and city or state statutes" (https://legaldictionarv.net/qrandfather-clause/). Grandfathering is pretty much meant for situations like this. If this ban continues to be upheld, I certainly will not be visiting anytime soon, and I know my friends that visit there regularly also will not be. As such, the city, and more importantly, the people of the city, will lose all the money we spend on restaurants, clothes, gifts, and activities. I can guarantee the economy will take a significant hit, and personally I don't think any city council member wants to put its city in that situation. Please, reconsider the ban. Decisions don't need to be so black or white. We can make a compromise. So, let's start by implementing larger fines for noisy renters, and increasing the minimum short-term rental length (to a week). From there, you can see what happens, and make adjustments down the line if necessary. At the very least, don't take away people's hard-earned investments and retirement plans; grandfather existing short- term rentals. Regards, Isaac Jacobsen 1222 Richmond Street, London, Ontario, Canada N6A3M2 604-779-4279 Isaac iacobsen.1992 c(Domail.com 2 December 8, 2017 VIA EMAIL City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert CA 92260 Attention City Council Dear City Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ban have just heard that the City of Palm Desert voted 3 2 to ban any new short-term rentals ;n residential zones R1 and R2 immediately and to even disallow existing permitted short-term rentals in these two zones as of December 31, 2019 felt compelled to write to City Council as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. I cannot believe that the city would not grandfather the short-term rentals who already have permits now. I am shocked that Palm Desert would ban these rentals. I thought cities al,r.'ays grandtathered? If this ban goes into effect, I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future as I prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities which is why I came to the El Paseo area in the first place. i do not wish to stay in hotels as they do not provide a large space for our extended family vacations. When I come to Palm Desert. we eat and dine on El Paseo, many times each year. Anywhere from Armando's to El Pacifica, 2 Wolfgang Puck and so many other places. We shop in the clothing stores. We buy groceries and wine nearby and we use various services. We spend so much money on each trip we make to Palm Desert between our accommodations. food and beverage. recreation and shopping. We will choose to stay elsewhere and not in Palm Desert if you oRt this ban in place. Please note that we have stayed 3 weeks for the oast 5 years ana at eacn time have used restaurants, shops, malls, fitness clubs and more in the a+ea. spending much of a yearly holiday budget worth 20.000 USD. Money that will not go to any of these business anymore where this bar. to be implemented. Please do not go ahead with this ban as it will decrease tourism to Palm Desert. There is no way that those tourist dollars wik be made up with the new hotel as the people whc rent short-term rentals do not like staying in. hotels. I thirK that the City of Palm Desert should enforce noise by-laws across ail of Palm Desert as nosy, disruptive people should be fined for their bad behavior. Those noisy renters will think twice if they know rhev II be fined: Please reconsider this ban before it s too ;ate Thank you for reading my letter Sincerely Van Herreweghe Chris Kruisstraat 16 2820 P.i;menam Belgium Stanley, Jane From: Beverly Buries <beviegirl@me.com> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:30 AM To: CityhallMail Subject: [SPAM] - Decision by Council to stop STR's in Palm Desert R-1 and R-2 Properties December I I.2017 Palm Desert Mayor Jan I larnik As current and long time owners of two residences in the city of Palm Desert who have chosen to rent our properties occasionally on it short term basis we are very upset by the council action attempting to remove that very right of ownership. We have faithfully complied with city regulations related to renting our properties. we have obtained the city licenses.and paid the appropriate taxes required by city mandates. We have vetted our guests carefully and have required that they comply with city regulations on tenant hehav iors. At the same time we have developed a client list (primarily from Canada) of individuals who have appreciated the privaey. coupled with the cost advantages specific to renting in a private home and who. most frequently. return annually to our property. We, as representatives of the City of Palm Desert. have welcomed them and encouraged their return. even as their dollar value struggled. We now find that we and our guests are under attack in the discriminatory actions undertaken by the council on Oct. 26 and Nov. l6. 2017 to prohibit the renting of our R-I and R-2 private properties on short term bases. Many of us who do choose to rent our homes are retirees and rely on the additional income to pay our property taxes and upkeep of our homes. We screen our tenants very carefully. None of us want our neighbors disturbed or inconvenienced. None of us want our homes trashed or damaged in any way. We don't want to see our properly values driven downward based on non -compliant behaviors ofa small number of (most often) very short-term renters. We sympathize with those homeowners who have been inconvenienced by tenants renting properties from non -compliant owners or agencies. We certainly understand their concerns. It is frustrating to contact any city department and/or the authorities regarding an issue either as the violation is occurring or following it. and have little to no response. or worse yet. constant warnings. I he failure to follow through as described by those complaining homeowners should not fall on the backs of those who do comply. In siding with the hotel industry and a few angry residents the punishment is unfairly being foisted upon those of us who have carefully followed the city requirements and onto our complying tenants base. I his move. without appropriate compliance studies. documentation on offenders and punishments issued. is short-sighted and inviting legal actions by those homeowners who do comply' and whose property rights are being stripped from them. I he fault in these situations lie solely with: 1. a few irresponsible homeowners/management companies in a very limited number of R-1 and R-2 neighborhoods. 2. the city departments responsible for code enforcement 3. and/or with the local authorities for not enforcing the existing laves. As members of the council. it is incumbent upon each of you to have visited these offending neighborhood sites with code entorcement officials at the time of these issues That is the only way to understand and curb the reported offenses and to eliminate the offending parties. Put teeth into the existing laws, fine homeowners who rent and don't comply, and most important...enforce in-house tenant number standards. noise and disturbance ordinances consistently on violating homeowners of long and short term tenants alike. this council move will cause more individuals to rent their properties "underground'. (losing the TO I infusion into the city) and will provide less and less possibility of monitoring. When a family or 2 couples can share a home and not have to rent multiple hotel rooms at exorbitant prices: they can share rents and meals together. I he cost savings there -in allows them to remain in the area longer and send more dollars into the local city economy. I hey can visit more of the area golf courses. enjoy the area restaurants. shop in the local shops and partake of the local entertainment opportunities. All of this puts those revenue dollars and along with our TO1's back into the city and it's businesses. We want to continue to encourage this and to sec the city thrive. Please reconsider all that is threatened or lost in this move. Sincerely, Ron and Beverly Buries 72-784 Hedgehog, PD, Lic. k25827 45-831 Mountain View Av. PD, Lic. #46647 1 Swartz, Kevin From: Stanley, Jane Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:42 AM To: Swartz, Kevin Subject: Message in support of STR This email is blind copied to the City Council. Good morning, Palm Desert property owner Anna Deliganis called to ask you to extend short term rental permits. She is against the ban. Her address in Palm Desert is 72938 Joshua Tree Street. Her number is 206-295-2959. Thank you, Jane • Jane Stanley Secretary to the City Council Ph:760.346.0611 Direct:760.776.6315 jstanley@cityofpalmdesert org 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Paim Desert, CA 92260-2578 www.cityofpalmdesert.org December 9, 2017 Dear Mayor Harnik and City Council Members, I am a homeowner in the Palm Desert Country Club community. We purchased our home in 2015 as investment property and hope to retire here someday. We are permit holders and we follow the rules that are in place to protect our neighbors. We pay a management company to ensure that our guests follow the laws and that our neighbors are not negatively impacted by our guest. I have been coming to Palm Desert for well over 30 years as a renter. I cannot imagine how much money I have invested in this city over the years. Eating in restaurants, playing golf, shopping. Contributing to the bottom line for this community. Investing in the community I hope to retire in. It doesn't make a bit of sense to me that the City Council could entertain the idea of eliminating even 20% of the STR's in the city. This decision is going to be detrimental to our community. The community you hold office for and are supposed to support and protect. The golf courses are going to suffer without the income from summer play, the mom and pop stores, bars and restaurants are going to suffer without the income from summer visitors. Long term renters and residents alone do not sustain this town. Even the city earns only on STR's. I would love to see an Environmental Impact Study for what's being considered. Your website, the City of Palm Desert website says that this is a resort destination. If you vote to eliminate STR's that statement is no longer true. People don't always want to stay in hotels. For so many reasons hotels do not fill the needs and or desires of individuals and families. Are you aware that Airbnb is the biggest hotel company in the world, although they don't own any properties? If you ban STR's your taking this community backwards. I support Enforcement! To ban STR's without first attempting to solve the problem is irresponsible. It's unfair to those who abide by the rules. I completely empathize with homeowners who are impacted by the rule breakers. Stop the rule breakers and you eliminate the problem!!! I must believe that if you ban STR's your decision is purely political and not in the best interest of our community! Please do the right thing! Sincerely, Ma.pie Tlwmny Margie Thomas 43-100 Illinois Street Palm Desert, CA 92211 cc: sharepalmdesert@gmail.com Everything You Need to Know About the Big Vacation Rental Vote — Voice of San Diego Page I of 8 All Stories Sign In DONATE Newsletters Podcasts Events Pa'tnei VoA;tces Fact Check Education SANDAG Homeles �r t VCWrder va"ca&lbrYkentals y f GOVERNMENT Everything You Need to Know About the Big Vacation Rental Vote After years of wanting action, it aupears many vacation rental opponents would be greatly relieved if the City Council would punt the issue once again. The Council is set to decide on Tuesday whether to perrn;t and regulate vacation rentals. severely restrict them or drag the issue out once a gain, leaving a meiningiess ban on the books. Scott Lewis 1 f V in E NEIGHBORHOODS 4 } : TOR NEIGHBORS SIGN UP The latest decisior at the state capitol and hov they impact your life (Fridays https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/government/everything-need-know-big-vacation-... 12/ 1 1 /2017 Everything You Need to Know About the Big Vacation Rental Vote — Voice of San Diego Page 2 of 8 F'I',>tr, hy I),IStlri Neighborhood activists worried about short-term vacation rentals in the city of San Diego seem to be coming to terms with something: They don't have the votes on the City Council to ban homeowners from renting out their whole houses or condos to visitors. Tom Coat was a board member of Save San Diego Neighborhoods, whose supporters are expected to pack Golden Hall Tuesday to push for enforcement of a ban. Coat said it became obvious that even if the City Council agreed that the law, as it stood, prohibited short-term rentals, neither Council members nor the mayor wanted it enforced. "Which to me is very sad. But that's the reality," Coat said. But in September, Councilmen Chris Ward, David Alvarez, Mark Kersey and Scott Sherman released their proposal to create a permitting and enforcement structure. The most obvious fact in it is that a homeowner could rent his or her whole home to visitors all year, with a permit. Ei —� TRENDING STORIES Week Month Year Morning Report: San Diego County Burns Again What it Took to Clear l7th Street SoccerCity Analysis Is Bad News for the Project - and the City's Climate Goals When Police Can — and Can't — Pull You Over Morning The proposal from Ward and colleagues would allow Report: The Lilac Fire's investors to hold three permits each. Terrible — and Terribly Random — To Coat, that "means the end of neighborhoods as we Destruction know them," he said on our oodcast Friday. "I tried, as president of Save San Diego Neighborhoods, to persuade them to come to a situation where we would deal with the political reality as it is rather than holding out for the HELP US RAISE $150 best solution" YEAR END https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/government/everything-need-know-big-vacation-... 12/ 1 1 /2017 Everything You Need to Know About the Big Vacation Rental Vote — Voice of San Diego Page 3 of 8 So he is supporting a separate_voposal from We have no Voice withoL Councilwoman Barbara Bry. If she got her way, only the primary resident of a property would be allowed to get a permit to rent it to visitors - and even then, could only rent it out for up to 90 days total per year. This is the summer -in -Europe plan. Save San Diego Neighborhoods does not support Bry's plan. Coat and the group parted ways. Sue Hopkins helps provide data and talking points for the groups opposing short-term vacation rentals. Her experience as a Clairemont resident living next door to a vacation rental made her active. She and many of her counterparts see some of the same writing on the wall Coat does, but they don't want Bry's proposal. After years of wanting action, it appears they would be greatly relieved if the City Council would punt this issue once again. They're retreating to the position that we do not know enough about what is happening with vacation rentals to make the right decision. "Why are we making a change when we don't have a full data set?" Hopkins said. "Why has the City Council not spent any time or energy? I mean, at best, it's overwork or laziness. At worst, it's willful ignorance of the facts." On the other side is a loose coalition of people who suddenly realized they could supplement their income renting out rooms or their second homes. And with them $ 15 Monthly DONATE YEAR-END GOAL: $1501 https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/government/everything-need-know-bie-vacation-... 17/1 1 /7(11 7 Everything You Need to Know About the Big Vacation Rental Vote — Voice of San Diego Page 4 of 8 are old guard San Diego vacation rental managers who see Bry's ordinance as an existential threat. There's Jonah Mechanic, whose company SeaBreeze Vacation Rentals manages more than a hundred properties. He helped form Share San Diego, a group trying to protect the industry, especially along the coast. He paints a vision of the city charging big fees to get vacation rental permits and using the money to hire off - duty police officers to write tickets with escalating fines per infraction before rental operators lose their permits. Proper regulations would help the city collect hotel taxes. Right now, only Airbnb does that automatically for hosts. "We're trying to make sure we weed out the bad and really protect and reinforce the good," Mechanic said. He maintains that, at least on the coast, most of his properties are owned by people who see them as second homes. If they could not rent them out to visitors, they would not suddenly become part of the region's housing supply, as vacation rental opponents contend. They'd just remain vacant while the owner is not there. That's the big debate coming to a climax Tuesday in a special meeting of the City Council. Will the Council permit and regulate vacation rentals, severely restrict them or somehow, once again, punt the decision, leaving a meaningless ban on the books? Here are all the facts and reports we have gathered to help you observe and activate: https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/government/everything-need-know-bia-vacation-... 12/1 1 /2017 Everything You Need to Know About the Big Vacation Rental Vote — Voice of San Diego Page 5 of 8 • Here's our FAQ on how we got here. • It's not easy to figure out how many short-term vacation rentals there are in the city of San Diego. We worked with a group called Host Compliance and produced what we think is the best estimate vet. Interesting fact: Based on the Host Compliance analysis, only 22 percent of vacation rentals are used by visitors for more than 90 days of the year. If Bry's proposal passed, only a primary resident of a property could get a permit, and only for up to 90 days. If Host Compliance numbers are correct, this should accommodate 78 percent of owners who want to rent their properties to visitors. Bry has another major provision, however: Each person could only have one permit. That would be a major restriction on those who own multiple properties. If Ward et al. get their way, each person could have up to three permits. They would have to have owned their properties for at least a year before applying for a permit if they did not live in them already. Each person would be limited to three permits. And there would be a three - night minimum stay on the coast. (Meaning less churn in the properties.) • Here's the city of San Diego's staff memo explaining the decision the Council will confront, with a lot of helpful background. For one thing, there are 3,415 vacation rentals registered to pay the city's tax on hotel rooms. City staff estimates it would cost about $912 per permit (about $3.1 million) to administer the enforcement and https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/governmentleverything-need-know-big-vacation-... 12/ 1 1 /2017 Everything You Need to Know About the Big Vacation Rental Vote — Voice of San Diego Page 6 of K permitting program that would hire 13 new city staff members including police officers to investigate vacation rentals. Complaints could lead to citations and eventual forfeiture of a permit. • The California Coastal Commission has weighed in on the City Council's coming decision. The agency, which protects access to the coast, has interpreted its mandate to include affordable lodging and has warned the city and others not to make restrictions too severe. The biggest point the commission made: It will oppose a 90- day cap on short-term vacation rentals, like the one included in Bry's proposal. Show Comments (1) Written By Scott Lewis Scott Lewis oversees Voice of San Diego's operations, website and daily functions as Editor in Chief. He also writes about local politics, where he frequently breaks news and goes back and forth with local political figures. Contact Scott at scort.lewls(cvoIceofsandie or or 619.325.0527, and follow him on Twitter at �uvosdscott. MORE IN GOVERNMENT https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/government/everything-need-know-big-vacation-... 12/ 11 /2017 Everything You Need to Know About the Big Vacation Rental Vote — Voice of San Diego Page 7 of 8 To Create Its Sacramento City Won't SoccerCity Report Atkins Monitor Transit Analysis, Tapped to Lead and Bike Usage SANDAL Used a Again in New Loophole for the Development First and Last Plans Time WHAT TO READ NEXT Op pion Vacation Rental Owners — and Their Guests — Deserve a Fair Resolution Dennis Richardson and Julie Richardson NEWS VOSD Podcast: The Great Vacation Rental Debate Kinsee Morlan NEWS Morning Report: Pinning Down Elusive Vacation Rental Numbers Kinsee Morlan and Jesse Marx . • .'ii • https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/government/everything-need-know-big-vacation-... 12/1 1 /2017 Everything You Need to Know About the Big Vacation Rental Vote — Voice of San Diego Page 8 of 8 Voice of San Diego is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. About Us Submit a News Tip LAND USE Nearly 9,000 Homes in San Diego Are Vacation Rentals, But Not All Year Lisa Halverstadt Contact Us Submit an OD -Ed SUPPORT PUBLIC SERVICE JOURNALISM We rely on people like you to support this service. Please donate or sponsor VOSD today. HELP SUPPORT US BY DONATING V f Podcasts available on: 0 � '�� Nunes and Stitcher $ i ` Monthty DONATE NOW 110 West A St. Suite 650. San Dieeo. CA 92101 Phone: 619-325-0525 © 2017 Voice of San Diego. Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use Policy https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/government/everyything-need-know-hig-vacation-... 12/ 11 /2017 Swartz, Kevin From: Klassen, Rachelle Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 8:56 AM To: Swartz, Kevin Subject: FW: [SPAM] - Ban on Short Term Rentals will lead to the Proliferation of Sober Living Homes in Palm Desert Attachments: EXH 1South County Struggle With Sober Living Homes.pdf; ATT00001.htm; EXH 2 Dana Point Sues to Halt Sober Living Homes.pdf; ATT00002.htm; EXH 3 Newport Suit Over Sober Living Homes.pdf; ATT00003.htm; EXH 4 FAIR HOUSING ACT & SOBER LIVING HOMES.pdf; ATT00004.htm; EXH 5 Sober Living Business in Residential Areas.pdf; ATT00005.htm Rachelle Klassen City Clerk Ph: 760.346.0611 Direct: 760.776.6304 rklassen@cityofpalmdesert org From: Alan Cipolletti [mailto:alancipolletti@cox.net] Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2017 9:54 AM To: Stendell, Ryan; robert.Hargreaves@BBKLaw.com; Klassen, Rachelle; Jonathan, Sabby; Kelly, Kathleen; Nestande, Gina; Weber, Susan Marie; Harnik, Jan Subject: [SPAM] - Ban on Short Term Rentals will lead to the Proliferation of Sober Living Homes in Palm Desert Dear City of Palm Desert Representatives: I write to urge the City Council to reconsider its prior vote to eliminate existing short term vacation rentals, and examine a serious potential repercussion this action could have on permanent Palm Desert residents (one of which I hope to be in the next several years). Additionally, I request the City Council carefully consider a less restrictive regulation to a complete ban on short term rentals, and to base any adopted regulation on empirical evidence of the complaints, which it is attempting to remedy. I am currently an owner of one vacation rental property, a home in Palm Desert, which is managed and strictly monitored by Vacation Palm Springs. My husband and I rent it out sometimes via our management company, and other times we stay there with friends and family. I am also a licensed California Attorney, who has had some experience with other types of businesses legally popping up in residential areas, where cities have restricted vacation rentals to 30 days or more. These replacement businesses are Sober Living Homes and Residential Alcohol and Drug Programs. It is with this background and for the foregoing reasons, that I implore further research be done, and alternative options to ending short term vacation rentals in Palm Desert be considered: I. BANNING SHORT TERM RENTALS FOR CURRENT PROPERTY OWNERS WILL CREATE MORE PROBLEMS FOR THE CITY AND PERMANENT PALM DESERT RESIDENTS A. Proaerty Owners Will Convert Their Newly Illegal Short Term Vacation Rentals Into Legal Sober Living Homes or Residential Alcohol and Drug Programs 1 Property owners, who purchased a property in Palm Desert, relying and complying with the law regarding vacation rentals, are going to lose a substantial amount of money. Not only will they be unable to rent out their homes as they once planned, in order to pay their mortgage and other expenses, but most likely the property values on their homes will also be diminished, due to the law ending new short term vacation rentals. Faced with these issues these property owners will look for a solution. One extremely lucrative option is to convert the residence into a Sober Living home (hereinafter SLH) or a Residential Alcohol and Drug Program (hereinafter RADP), which have proven to generate income anywhere between $12,000 - $20,000 a month for the homeowner. This has occurred in my city of residence, Laguna Niguel, and is on the rise in other popular vacation rental cities where short term rentals are being banned. See Also, EXHBITS 1-3 attached detailing the struggles of the proliferation of these homes in residential areas because they are extremely lucrative and protected by the law. B. The City Council Will Be Unable to Prohibit or Even Regulate These SLH's/ADP's Because the Occupants Are Deemed Handicapped And Protected By The Law You may think the City can prevent or regulate these SLHs and RADPs as they do vacation rentals but they CANNOT! See Exhibits 1-5 detailing the struggles that the cities of Newport Beach, Dana Point, Costa Mesa, Laguna Niguel and other cities have encountered in trying to eliminate/or even regulate these very profitable sober living homes in their neighborhoods. Newport Beach has spent upwards of $10 million dollars in litigation, and the US Supreme Court refused to grant review of their losing battle with this issue. The problem: residents of SLHs and ADPs are considered disabled and therefore these homes are protected by the American Disabilities and the Fair Housing Acts, as well as the equal protection clause of the constitution. This means that local ordinances are either pre-empted by these laws, and/or any regulations or limitations on these homes, including the numbers of residents and/or locations are very likely unconstitutional because the residents of these homes are a protected class. (For a full discussion of these issues see attached Exhibits 4 and 5 Exhibit 5 is an article drafted by Christi Hogin City Attorney for Lomita, Malibu and Palos Verdes Estates and Exh 4 is an article regarding the Fair Housing Act and these homes.) C. Palm Desert Neighbors Will Complain More About Unregulated Residential Sober Living Homes and ADPs Than Properly Monitored Vacation Rentals While I understand local Palm Desert residents are very vocal and upset about current vacation rentals in the area, these complaints pale in comparison to complaints from residents living in neighborhoods where sober living homes exist. These complaints are also detailed in Exhibits 1-3 and range from: parking issues, loitering issues, noise, second hand smoke, trash, drug use and sales. If you have any doubt, please contact the city councils' city attorneys' and/or police departments' of Newport Beach, Dana Point and Laguna Beach, and ask about the complaints they receive associated with such homes. II. BANNING SHORT TERM RENTALS I5 AN UNFAIR TAKING OF PROPERTY RIGHTS FROM PROPERTY OWNERS WHO PURCHASED THESE HOMES RELYING ON SHORT TERM RENTAL INCOME For us homeowners that purchased our homes with the expectation and reliance of being able to rent our homes on a short term basis, it is the duty of the City Council to insure there is real empirical evidence of the problems complained about regarding the short term rentals, and to create a solution that is rationally related to the actual evidence of these specific complaints. That is the standard under which our constitution judges "takings" such as this by government regulation. Grandfathering in existing homeowners to the ban should be done and would eliminate this issue, as well as, the possibility existing homeowners will convert these homes to SLHs or ADPs. 2 A. There Are Many Less Restrictive Measures That Could be Adopted Than a Complete Ban on Short-term Rentals In fairness to existing homeowners, any resolution should be narrowly tailored to remedy the complaints for which there is actual evidence. If there is a problem with the current City policy of short term vacation rentals, an in depth study should be done to realize what the problem is. Is it with VRBO properties, or those managed by a rental company? Are the problem properties being held accountable, could they be better held accountable with the possibility of license revocation, and /or fines imposed, after a number of legitimate complaints? Are the rental properties paying the proper taxes and complying with other laws? Should property owners be limited to owning one vacation rental, as was done in Santa Cruz? Should higher deposits be required on short term renters, which can be revoked and distributed to the city upon legitimate complaints? Should additional fees be imposed on short term renters to help pay for enforcement costs? Should it be mandatory to have a local property management company be involved in all short term rentals and eliminate VRBO short term rentals? Should a 24 Hour phone number of the property owner be required to be on record during short term rental periods? Could stricter enforcement of existing ordinances solve the problem? Could additional ordinances involving noise limits, property maintenance standards, night time curfew, parking restrictions or property inspection requirements, eliminate the problems complained of? If so, they should be implemented on these short term rental properties, because these types of regulations are very difficult or impossible to implement against SLHs or ADPs. Ill. It is preferable for Palm Desert's permanent residents to have short term vacation rentals in their neighborhoods over Sober Living Homes and Residential ADPs: A. Pros of Short term Vacation Rentals I) Property is always properly maintained and cleaned regularly, or there would not be a new renter. 2) Provides money to the city through the occupancy tax. 3) Provides even more money as vacationers eat and shop supporting the local economy, and local businesses, which provide local jobs. 4) Property is vacant most of the time: short term rentals are most common on weekends with high vacancies during the week. 5) Code enforcement and management companies can rein in those few that are not following the rules via loss of deposits etc. We know all of our neighbors and none of them have complained to us about any of our renters, conversely we have had renters complain about dog barking of permanent residents. 6) Saves city money in litigation between property owners of short term vacation rentals, SLHs and RADPs and the city. B. Cons of Sober Living homes/Residential ADPs Popping up as a result of no short term vacation rentals 1) Because the occupants are a protected class of individuals regulation is difficult and/or pre-empted by State and Federal Law 3 a. Sober Living homes do not require a license and are not limited in number of residents: see attached article where one neighbor saw 20 mattresses being moved in to one of these homes. i. American Disabilties Act /Fair Housing Act/Constitution/ protect these homes from local regulation b. Where State Licensing is required State law expressly exempts certain facilities from local zoning regulations i. The state does not provide any notice to cities before a new license for a home is issued ii. The Attorney General has opined that the state may not deny an application for a license because a community already has a sufficient number of these homes 2) Residents live there year round 3) Parking issues, outside smoking, drug complaints, trash issues as seen from other cities that have had a proliferation of these homes 4) No positive impact to the local economy via taxes or shopping and restaurants IV. CONCLUSION This email and the attached Exhibits serve, if for nothing else, to put each member of this City Council on notice, that if current vacation rental homes are converted into SLHs or ADPs, which are lucrative businesses options for existing homeowners affected by the ban, the City could be powerless to regulate these homes and spend millions of dollars in court attempting to do so, as the city of Newport Beach did. This will much more negatively affect the permanent residents of Palm Desert, who are currently complaining about the short term vacation rentals, and who likely are unaware of the proliferation of these profitable homes in areas banning short term rentals. It is the duty of this City Council to protect the environment and economy of Palm Desert, even when its citizens may not realize what's in its best interest, until it's too late. As a person, who would one day like to retire in my home in Palm Desert, and who currently utilizes it as a short term rental in order to pay the mortgage, I urge the City Council to consider the foregoing arguments and let prudence, rather than politics, govern your decision to more narrowly tailor the regulation regarding short term rentals, so it is not a complete ban. A complete ban would result in the taking of property rights that existing homeowners relied on when purchasing their homes in this city, and will force these homeowners to pay our mortgages in an alternatively lucrative, but legal manner: converting them to Sober Living Homes, not subject to these regulations by the City. Thank you for your consideration of all issues and arguments in this matter. Respectfully, Michelle Cipolletti 4 South County cities `struggling' over sober living homes — Orange County Register Page 1 of 3 NEWS South County cities `struggling' over sober living homes Fg .•:-Tt'_..•s OralieCcJ^.tyRegister September !, 201 S R 1:2a pm floes throughout suburban South Orange County are working on how to handle the Irinua of sob/r- ising homes in their residtmial COmmunlbes, responding to Total nonwowiert complaints and ding their presence as a potential bleat to neighborhood character. "A lot of cws are struggling right now,' Laguna Niguel Assistant upr Manager Dan Fox said r«erwy. 'Mayne bying to figure out how to balance and preserve the nature of a single famlty neighborhood with the needs of those sober 1Mng residents.' Sober MMng homes how/ groups of IndMiduab recovering from addiction result and are often located in suburban .. . - a venue common throughout the county. -It ts an attractive area.' Foe said.' f.e have larger homes - lots of stngk family hones - that you can convert wry easily." Sober Wing horses hang long had a presence in orange County. but have garnered more controversy In recent years tiniest Newport Hach and Costa Mesa passed ordinances regulating their Femme. In 2001 and 2014 respectMly. http://www.ocregi ster.com/2015/09/09/south-county-cities-struggling-over-sober-living-ho... 12/6/2017 South County cities `struggling' over sober living homes — Orange County Register Page 2 of 3 Now, South Canty cartel end earear4adlacea coa.maes Hoe Lag+r. Niguel, Dial Tor Sr Caemte sad Sr lr Capsare.o ere looking ado bow they cm aptly rem who rag bore . tab resides?' grwarecas Many reaidr s s tree case who ate war the gray boor Ira roarer mepean - eced bard smote, rams are, taro trial pate1t. k + as rack they .y, m twit s igbbo hood's eleeclar. Lager Niguel r.edae Mdwa Caldwell web ad has err Crown Valley Elerrtery Schook end sea ■ wDm.d not .nisi Mos romp houses a gan.iL but Mho than truancy. "To contented d you bore too salty dram you re cirgrag the Leta of the rtgiborbod of Laga r Niguel," Caldwell sod 1'm wok apes all sober ktig bare; a just world M nice to bate sorlaag as the books Set wc.ad bean the s..aber.' Caldwell's act akrre. Soadr County rarest desplands ate caa.o. at City Coral meetars, bet `e cdii. my they bang re tad legally Sre law proems ban tom daring down on sobs tram barn the toe ea a tows nee tea. have to teat this r ton scold nay eagle }hearty tatefeco," sad Ann Lora, wood dineta of corrasy dockyard in Laguna Bach But rodents west wore sir not are throwing op lase heeds to the states in Sr Clarinet vase perk navy arise sober hilt% hoes has been the loudest. the City Corral peed a . oeaa um hay 7 boarq eny sew saber ling taboo . rasadeabel bad ummrael ore for fi days. City officials deemed it a necessary mote Aar a rap tie a the proicouraly aalacard bae.ase. - a nod some group boat rows run draimarry. 1 fad hte then ire a bar of people than ant md.ata.d s smrea.." sad lo. Scarce, anew of tar gray boor a Salk Claasnsdti r the hty 7 Sr Clements City Coral masers -And the eagle of our boor bete bra rearsoasd spit primarily harm they bob direr ton t+ybody else . the cormrity San Casaor's aaep l rep read billy earring sob. Laing briars a s. bang abet Dow hepq a ebes eye on low t . oationsr will play oat 'We're carefully wrtbiag Sr Claire to rre stet they do end d lre'e rylig we cis do from d r esgrw.ce,' sod Laguna Beach Cry Merger lobs P. WW1 a COMES to ngnlaag mobs rug homes, le cannot *elegy .rang ndgbbaag cam r to la or ray tab the f bet rap a a cormanrtul ordra.ce end if a weeks, they ce.W than tallow ant 1,tech of dad Marhos ogee now meat tan Say corral waaitag to at+ad costly hwpbc. like they've sea a Newport Basch *Lowy their nspabte law 'They span 10 mason rollers or r orderer that can be darer tooaaow, sad they Ira m talky tan the oo.t;' tad Dar port City Meng. Doug Ciomtvys about Newport Beach Legal tgba ban her any for the two Orris County Maas that o regalatig *Mr rig boats Newport Beach just toothed a wryer coat bald m ha 17 artar them corral regaling group bans, mar w6 tree sober liras property owns for a tool of S53 ears The nay also spent read 'fit tattl= a bra Bee Noires Beach's 2001 esdaesee - the% is place - reruns edy approval for sew mYeaerd sober toeing bore a cow orghbrAood, noel saabbrhad slobs boa, pate% d rotor ors d has roraa Not all oast err bweves, ben beer is lobar boar's brew is lawny, a federal jedge flamed s lawsuit tea detreged the Coax Mir s sobr•Inisg adr.ence ben sot s.Ekasedy dar.s*tbog dronrin it a the city's pet Can Moses aware ruched ■ 630-a bsThir brwata bares, raided bed spaces to anwr end erytied array employee bretgeord checks, earner oho twlee Ammer lawyer rani the Say r ongoing The Duet sects is Cosa Mena has spurred natant' resolve to rt Qes car a at tenderly Be Ix now, Sawa Camay are .e sell ware%, wtniag .d dacesaisg pored beide plan -Wire all along," Charity' save [Watch) Is algae the future of energy? t; http://www.ocrcgister.com/2015/09/09/south-county-cities-struggling-over-sober-living-ho... 12/6/2017 South County cities `struggling' over sober living homes — Orange County Rcgister Pagc 3 of 3 r. • .• •.1.1.".pit.%••1• -J. I •••• Matt Lemas Join the Conversation We invite you to use our commenbng platform to engage In insightful cot versabons about issues in our community. Although we do r ct pre-sr•een ce-nrrer s ae -eserve the r3*t at a t%•••'s b Tnc.e any far,- s :n c- ^• st* : s tat re ` ma`e• - .t!A. :., x.. d••la'.,: t; .t•• ►:. jr {. .,j f{t.. ;re,:.f •t • d.. ...a 4' t•. •• 1'•,..•.. .tt..•, roost ,j, M.. h.. I..)V a •n ..1:.f.r./! . :Ptl' ...• • 1 •t.. .. ..•..• these conditions. ', .•.•v•.: rw•'ti1t.J!. .1 1O.:• ..• �'••dr.4 '': • •JD If.;j••if•.4.• 9•.r.:. t}t 1. "•'f /' .) :11,• http://www.ocregister.com/2015/09/09/south-county-cities-struggling-over-sober-living-ho... 12/6/2017 Dana Point sues to halt two sober-Iiving houses — Orange County Register Page 1 of 3 NEWS CRIME + FUIUC SAFETY Dana Point sues to halt two sober -living houses :i I ''T erItchie Yscng.com Orange County Reg sty June 14.2016 at t1121 ern W WA POINT - Oty officials haw flied ono lawsuits seeing to shut down woo sober -inns houses affiliated with two treaMwnt canters In Capistrano Beasts saying their operation dolmas state law and the chtys zoning code. The lawsuits. filed Wednesday In Orange County Superior Court allege that sober -Ovine homes Capo Iy the Sea. at 27036 Anil Drive. and Soverelen Health Group. at 25512 Evans Pointe. an operating as drug abuse recovery and treatin Nit facer es %that state Banses. The city also alleges In the lawsuits that the homes are providing service to more than its people. whidn under the Dena Pont aonIn(tode means theyre a business. and thatthay art operating kn a residential area. *frith Is Illegal for businesses. 'Ware not trying to prohibit or regulate group homes.' said Dana Point City Attorney Patrick Munoz. 'Were simply acknowledging the law and ensurute operators are foik>1Mng John T. Kahalt who owns the house on Azul and operates Capo By The Sea. said the home Is not prwrdn%treatment makes. He said patients receive Vestment in his ikensed treatment facility at anotlwr Capo Beach house or at two outpatient suites in the Ortega Busies'. Center in San Juan Capistrano. If they want me to be Ikerrsed. I WU get licensed.' Kahal saki adding he has not yet seen the Went It I'm not moving my people out. This is a human rights Issue.' mate: said the tawsufs follow an kwestteation Into city and state regut Dons governing sober -Ming homes after residents complained about drugs. noise. secondhand smoke and the prolferatlon of these homes In their neighborhoods. On Tuesday. residents asked the City Council to create an ordinance es limb sober•Wkng homes in residential areas and for a census to determine the number of homes in their ..... - saw 20 mattresses delivered recently at a house an r y street.' said resided Nancy Leonard who kits mar a sober -ring house. We see drug deals going down In front of these horses. Short of hiring a private krator. I request more poke patrols.' Julie Mos told the council she has gathered hundreds of signatures from residents on a petition. The Dana Point lawsuits follow a spate of leyl action from Maribu to San Clemente In an area that has became nationally known as the 1tMera of Rehab' because of the hundreds of drug and alcohol addiction treatment cotters and saber-Mng houses concetrated there. The courts have limited what a Otycan do based Jaggy on concerns about discrimination against disabled people. said Muno:. addesthat Dana Point has been monlasrttgwltatodwr cities hang been deist. Newport Beach recently adopted a law that imposes permit requirements *MI restrictions. The city was sued and the Court of Appeal issued an injunction. The case was settled but cast the city about S10.2 million In damaes and legal foes. http://www.ocregister.com/2016/06/24/dana-point-sues-to-halt-two-sober-living-houses/ 12/6/2017 Dana Point sues to halt two sober -living houses — Orange County Register Page 2 of 3 Costa Mess adopted a variation of the Newport Beads ordinance that attempted to regulate sober. 1Mng hours with changes to resolve Issues raked w th the Court of Appeal In the thwpon Beach case. The same Court of Appeal Issued an injunction against the erdortement There was a settemein with one operator In whkh 30 houses shut down. but litigation Is sriI ongo4•4. In San Clemente and San Juan Capistrano. a moratorium was adopted. lid the moratorium ended In San Clemente and the dty amended its toning code to alai the CVOs regulate the sober -Ming homes in a wy dual Munoz says can be appbed to Dana Point. Mahal. who said he has been licensed to do recovery treatment since 2000. said the group -home setting has proven to Be stsocetSful for recovering addcts• Most pay S12. 00-520.000 a month. Many are doctors. lawyers. evert a neurosurgeon. he said. -They feel ilke theyre in a hone setting." he said. -They get to do normal daily activities.' St'te .. a -. t r•eat -I-'`a: •t: 'h Ir!,'t"a: pas 1 _'•(:Sa —•rt ce ter?are regiriased by the state and must have licenses and provide services that fadude detoxification and group therapy. but to no more than six people. he said. Sober -thing homes are plates where recovering addicts or akohoka can the togedser to support each others' recovery. There is no restriction on occupancy. Munoz said die two sober -Ming hones are wotdng hand -In -hand wilds the ono treatment anus and are not licensed for this partnership. In order for these hones to fun on !spay. Munoz said they would reed a state Ikense or to be Ikensed under the treatment facilities they are workingwlth. In addldon for the bvo Iawtu&Ct, the city is continuing Its Imestigatloo Into more unlicensed horns .nJr, aat. 1, inD..•,wear .fr.nthe fzurd•1rrim.T.''Y.an.,foot M 1urtneanhou• cash. Since February. the Clasen say thew peaceful neighborhood has changed. -They are out there on their balconies smoking pot and drinidns'Jason Daser said. Ibis Is a big deal. Xs sad what teihe doing to the neighborhood' contact the writer 7.4•7;5.2254 or or en Twitter ') sgr.na 1i Tags: . r! Our goal is to capture up to 90% of the CO2 from natural gas power plants while... c Erika I. Ritchie .r - . i.••. •1f.f•.•.... •• 'f. 'h"a•••:I .t.. • .• . , ( •'r .• h••. ' ( .. :•.. 1.'.••." . : 1 ., t • .:.1 c.�-•rtI !'+ 1 a • N r • ..r'. .w., •� 1.. .�r •. • . . •1 ,• • '• •A:,r .' • . • r•.• " •.•• . r i•, r • r..•. • , http://www.ocregister.com/2016/06/24/dana-point-sues-to-halt-two-sober-living-houses/ 12/6/2017 Dana Point sues to halt two sober -living houses — Orange County Register Page 3 of 3 Join the Conversation We invite you 1.• ust. our I. NrIno_nling plAt`oim to eri leg .1.1al.ightful C.ln v.ibuns about 1.•••ilt, u. twun ty Mttouw %:.• • 4r, ru.:•• r • rri!It .311 tart 4 10 411Crvs!. any 'if n r .os I' a .4,- re• : :•• • ..• : atjs .e, t-us, Jeri ria*-.T. ja. c 32-apt- a- e, !miecer: .)r se zt rat etc .,s c these corxistaans ,:... see •:-3"-re-ts 1-a", . e pease Irse .= 3-4: as Inarirc.mate e t, t - .er •.1-e ie z: . JI r , • ; " • e • 1. r ;• I I. .1. • http://www.ocregister.com/20 1 6/06/24/dana-point-sues-to-halt-two-sober-living-houses/ 12/6/201 7 Supreme Court will not hear case against Newport's sober -homes ordinance — Orange Co... Pagc 1 of 5 NEWS Supreme Court will not hear case against Newport's sober - homes ordinance By .. .. I Orange County Register November 4, 2014 at 6:20 am The U.S. Supreme Court announced Monday that it will not consider arguments on a Newport Beach city ordinance seeking to regulate sober - living homes in the city. The city adopted an ordinance in 2008 that required approval for any new unlicensed homes for recovering addicts and barred the facilities from operating in single-family neighborhoods. According to city records, there are 29 city -approved sober -living facilities in Newport Beach this year. In 2007, there were an estimated 86. Several group homes sued the city after the ordinance was adopted, arguing that it violates anti -discrimination and fair housing laws since those recovering from addiction are considered a protected group under federal law. The dry argued the language of the ordinance was not discriminatory. The Supreme Court's decision means the case will head back to trial at the district court level. http://www.ocregister.com/2014/ 11 /04/supreme-court-will-not-hear-case-against-newports... 12/6/2017 Supreme Court will not hear case against Newport's sobcr-homes ordinance — Orange Co... Page 2 of 5 "The mayor and City Council felt, and continue to feel, this case was important enough to our city and residents to merit the time and resources required to seek the (Supreme) Court's review," City Attorney Aaron Harp wrote in a statement_ "This case is and has always been about a city's right to enact non-discriminatory regulations to protect its residents from negative impacts associated with adjoining land uses.... We remain committed to protecting our residents quality of life and ensuring land uscs are compatible and contribute positively to our community." Harp said the city has spent about S4 million on the case so far. After a federal judge ruled the group homes couldn't sue the city in 2011, the case went to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The court's majority sided with the group homes, pointing to comments made during the City Council hearing for the ordinance which focused on addiction -recovery group homes. The City Attorney's office asked the Supreme Court to review the 9th Circuit's decision, arguing the case should be decided solely on the language of the ordinance and not the council comments made at the time of the ordinance's adoption. Steven Polin, the attomey representing the sober -living homes, said he wasn't surprised the Supreme Court passed on reviewing the case. "I don't think this case raises the kinds of issues that would merit the Supreme Court's review," Polin said While Polin said he agrees that the wording of the ordinance is not discriminatory on paper, the intent of developing and adopting the ordinance was discriminatory. The city's argument the council's comments shouldn't be taken into consideration is a moot point, he said. "There's tons of case law out there that says the intent of legislators is a factor in whether an ordinance is discriminatory," he said. Polin said the argument has driven the treatment facility he represents, Newport Coast Recovery LLC, out of business. That could open up the city to damages in a trial, he said. The Supreme Court's decision not to hear the case and allow the lawsuit to proceed could also affect other Orange County cities that have passed regulations on sober - living homes or that are considering restricting them. http://www.ocregister.com/2014/1 1 /04/supreme-court-will-not-hear-case-against-newports... 1 2/6/20 17 Supreme Court will not hear case against Newport's sober -homes ordinance — Orange Co... Page 3 of 5 On Oct. 21, the Costa Mesa City Council approved an ordinance regulating the estimated 200 soba houses that operate within the city, some of which have caused residents to complain of excessive noise, traffic and secondhand smoke. Cost Mesa's law requires sober -living homes be located in certain residential areas and register with the city. Other requirements: a 650-foot buffer between facilities, a six - bed cap in single-family homes and a house manager in each one. Fair -housing activists warned Costa Mesa over the past several months that the new law was discriminatory and that the city could be sued by local group homes. Deputy City Attorney Elena Gali countered that Costa Mesa's law was "as narrowly tailored as possible" to ensure it is "as defensible as possible." Costa Mesa Mayor Jim Righeimer said he neva expected the Supreme Court to hear the Newport Beach case, adding he thought the Costa Mesa ordinance struck a fair balance between the needs of homeowners and recovering addicts. Staff writs Jordan Graham contributed to this report. Contact the writer. r. I Ir. ,r.; . ;; on Twitter @MeganNicolai How fuel cells can capture CO2 from natural gas plants and generate additional power. C-Mvb'1 Providing more power for our growing world while capturing CO2 emissions. That's the potential of new technology... Megan Nicolai http://www.ocregister.com/2014/ 11/04/supreme-court-will-not-hear-case-against-newports... 12/6/2017 Supreme Court will not hear case against Newport's sober -homes ordinance — Orange Co... Page 4 of 5 Join the Conversation We invite you to use our commenting platform to engage in insightful conversations about issues in our community. Although we do not pre-screen comments, we reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable to us, and to disclose any information necessary to satisfy the law, regulation, or govemment request. We might permanently block any user who abuses these conditions. If you see comments that you find offensive, please use the "Flag as Inappropriate" feature by hovering over the right side of the post, and pulling down on the arrow that appears. Or, contact our editors by emailing moderator©scng.com. http://www.ocregister.com/2014/ 11 /04/supreme-court-will-not-hear-case-against-newports... 12/6/2017 Supreme Court will not hear case against Newport's sober -homes ordinance — Orange Co... Page 5 of 5 http://www.ocregister.com/201 4/ 11 /04/supreme-court-will-not-hear-case-against-newports... 12/6/2017 '© 2010 American BarAssodation. Al! rtphts reservtsd. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or :downloaded or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the 'express written consent of the American Bar Association. 607 Fair Housing for Sober Living: How the Fair Housing Act Addresses Recovery Homes for Drug and Alcohol Addiction Matthew M. Gorman,* Anthony Marinaccio,** and Christopher Cardinalet MUNIC[PALrrTES AND COUNTIES across the country are familiar with the Fair Housing Act ("FHA") which, generally speaking, forbids discrimi- nation in housing based upon disabilities. Because "disability" has been interpreted as including individuals recovering from drug or alcohol ad- diction, discriminatory housing practices involving recovering addicts is forbidden. "Sober living homes" function under the belief that hous- ing addicts in an environment that fosters recovery, such as low crime, drug free, single family neighborhoods, is essential to the success of any addict's treatment. When community members and neighborhood resi- dents object, raising public safety concerns, municipalities and counties must address how the FHA affects local government's authority to regu- late alcohol and drug recovery facilities in residential neighborhoods. This article summarizes the legal characteristics of sober living homes and their relation with the FHA. In particular, this article illustrates how the FHA can be used by owners of sober living homes to lawfully operate a facility, by neighbors and concerned residents to control the growth of sober living homes, and by local governments to balance the interests of both groups. *Matthew M. Gorman is a graduate of Loyola Law School (J.D. 2000) and the Uni- versity of California, Davis, where he earned a Bachelor's degree in Political Science, minor in Urban Geography (B.A. 1994), including extensive coursework in Chinese (Mandarin), and study at Fudan University in Shanghai, China. He practices law with thc law firm Alvarez-Glasman & Colvin in California specializing in the fields of mu- nicipal law, land use, environmental compliance, and water law. **Anthony Marinaccio is a lawyer with Alvarez-Glasman & Colvin in California, specializing in thc arca of redevelopment law, landlord -tenant issues, zoning and land use matters, environmental law, and real estate law. tChristopher Cardinale is currently a Law Clerk at Alvarez-Glasman & Colvin. He recently graduated from Pepperdine University School and is awaiting his results from the California Bar Examination. 608 THE URBAN LAWYER VOL. 42, No. 3 SUMMER 2010 I. What is a Sober Living Home? The facilities and operators of individual sober living homes vary greatly, but it is often argued that the Iocation of the home in a single-family neighborhood is critical to fostering addiction recovery by avoiding the temptations other environments can create.' The organizational design of sober living facilities also differs, ranging from the private landlord renting his home to recovering addicts, to corporations operating sev- eral full-time treatment centers across the country and employing pro- fessional staff.2 Because of the vast diversity in location and structure, the sober living model can be easily abused by landlords seeking to maximize rents. Because nearly any single family home can become a "sober liv- ing home" by adopting that label, some single family homes house up- wards of twenty or thirty individuals under the guise of "sober living"; in reality, they provide little in the way of actual treatment. This makes regulation of sober living homes by public agencies difficult, as they are forced to differentiate between legitimate homes and those abusing the system. Additionally, public agencies are forced to deal with public outrage often inspired by homes located in their communities. Com- plications are compounded by various state licensing provisions that regulate facilities providing care for the disabled or for those recovering from addiction. 11. How Does the FHA Apply to Sober Living Homes? As amended in 1988, the FHA prohibits housing discrimination on the basis of "handicap;' which is defined as: "(1) a physical or mental im- pairment which substantially limits one or more of such person's major life activities; (2) a record of having such an impairment; or (3) being regarded as having such an impairment, but such term does not include current, illegal use of or addiction to a controlled substance."' 1. Oxford House v. TWp. of Cherry Hill, 799 F. Supp. 450, 453, 456 (D.N.J. 1992) (quoting testimony of Mr. Regan, Executive Director of the Governor's Council on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse for the State of New Jersey). 2. See Oxfordhouse.org, Self -Help for Sobriety Without Relapse, http://www. uxfordhouse.org/userftics/file%oxford_house_history.php (last visited July 16, 2010) (among the most prevalent sober living homes is the Oxford House network. Each Oxford House facility is an independent organization, but the umbrella organization serves as a network connecting approximately 1,200 self-sustaining homes and serving 9,500 people at any one time). 3. 42 U.S.C. § 3602(h) (2009). FAIR HOUSING ACT 609 Congress enacted the Rehabilitation Act a few years prior to the FHA and clearly included "Individuals who have a record of drug use or addiction" in their definition of "disabled" under the Act.4 Be- cause Congress incorporated many terms of the Rehabilitation Act into the FHA, courts have included drug and alcohol addiction in their defi- nition of "physical or mental impairment" under the FHA. For example, the Ninth Circuit has held that "[i]t is well established that individuals recovering from drug or alcohol addiction are handicapped under the [FHA] Act.."' A. Establishing Alcohol or Drug Addiction As a Disability Under the FHA Demonstrating a disability under the FHA requires a plaintiff to "show: (1) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; (2) a record of having such an impairment; or (3) that the plaintiffs are regarded as having such an impairment."' To be substantially limited, the impairment must prevent or severely restrict the person from activities that are centrally important to most people's lives, and it must be long term.' Current drug and alcohol use, judged at the time the alleged discrimination occurred, are specifically excluded from protection under the FHA. B. Nexus Between the Addiction Disability and Housing Need To qualify for FHA protection, in addition to establishing a disability, a nexus linking the treatment of the disability with the need for housing must be shown. In the context of sober living homes, this nexus ex- ists when living at a particular location, for example in a single-family neighborhood, is a means of treating the alcohol or drug disability. Specifically, proponents of sober living homes allege that such envi- ronments foster sobriety and encourage trust and camaraderie between home residents. Courts have routinely agreed with this theory." This broad application of the FHA opens the door to any a number of living arrangements. Essentially, FHA protections might extend anywhere a 4. See Oxford House, 799 F Supp. at 459. 5. Corp. of the Episcopal Church in Utah v. W. Valley City, 119 F. Supp. 2d 1215, 1219 (D. Utah 2000). 6. Reg'I Econ. Cmty. Action Program v. City of Middletown, 294 F.3d 35, 46 (2d Cir. 2001). 7. See id. at 47. 8. Id. 610 THE URBAN LAWYER VOL. 42, No. 3 SUMMER 2010 sober environment is provided or where support for addiction recovery is encouraged. C. What Locations May Qualify as Sober Living Homes Protected by the FHA? Despite the broad application of FHA protections, there are some limi- tations to the Act. First, the FHA only applies to "dwellings," which includes "any building, structure, or portion thereof which is occupied as, or designed or intended for occupancy as, a residence by one or more families"' This definition is important because while "dwellings" are protected, "shelters" and other temporary housing are not. Thus, be- cause of the short-term care provided at sober living facilities and the high turnover rate at the facilities, facilities resembling "shelters" rather than "dwellings" are not protected. There are two factors for determining whether a facility constitutes a "dwelling": (1) whether the facility is intended or designed for occu- pants intending to remain for a significant period; and (2) whether the occupants of the facility view it as a place to retum.1) Courts typically define a "significant period of time" as longer than a typical hotel stay, but it can possibly be as short as two weeks." Courts also analyze the ex- tent to which the occupants treat the facility as their home, and whether they perform tasks such as cooking, cleaning, and laundry at the site. Accordingly, while boarding homes, halfway houses, flop houses, and similar locations have been found to be "dwellings" under the FHA,'2 homeless shelters and other similar locations are not protected.13 III. How Does the FHA apply to a Sober Living Home? FHA violations are established either (1) by showing disparate impact based upon a practice or policy; or (2) by "showing that the defendant failed to make reasonable accommodation in rules, policies, or prac- tices so as to afford people with disabilities an equal opportunity to live in a dwelling:'" 9. 42 U.S.C. § 3602(b) (2009). 10. See Lakeside Resort Enters., LP v. Bd. of Supervisors, 455 F.3d 154, 158 (3d Cir. 2006). 11. See id. at 159. 12. See Schwarz v. City of Treasure Island, 544 F.3d 1201, 1214 (l lth Cir. 2008). 13. See Johnson v. Dixon, 786 F. Supp. 1, 4 (D.D.C. 1991). 14. Corp. of the Episcopal Chun% in Utah v. W. Valley City, 119 F Supp. 2d 1215, 1219 (D. Utah 2000) (emphasis added). FAIR HOUSING ACT 611 A. Disparate Impact To establish a disparate impact a plaintiff must demonstrate that the challenged practice or policy actually or predictably resulted in dis- crimination." If this is established, the burden shifts to the defendant (the municipality denying a permit for a sober living home) to prove its actions further a legitimate government interest with no alterna- tive, less discriminatory means to serve that purpose.16 Additionally, a more substantial government justification is required to deny plain- tiffs requesting mere removal of an obstacle to housing, as opposed to some affirmative action." Sober living homes often have difficulty proving a disparate impact in areas zoned to exclude other group liv- ing arrangements such as fraternity or sorority houses." To prevail, the sober living home would have to prove the exclusion disparately impacts substance abusers more so than those living under different group arrangements.19 Regardless of this barrier, evidence of discriminatory intent makes proving a disparate impact substantially easier. Records of council meetings containing discriminatory statements against alcoholics have been found to be sufficient evidence of intent to discriminate.10 In such situations, courts are quick to find in favor of sober living homes assert- ing disparate impact claims.2' B. Reasonable Accommodation The FHA also requires "reasonable accommodation in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodation may be necessary to afford [a handicapped] person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling."22 An accommodation is reasonable if it does not cause undue hardship, fiscal, or administrative burdens on the municipality, or does not undermine the basic purpose a zoning ordinance seeks to achieve?a A three-part test is applied to determine whether a reason- able accommodation is necessary: (1) the accommodation must be 15. Oxford Housc, Inc. v. Town of Babylon, 819 F. Supp. 1179, 1182 (E.D.N.Y. 1993). 16. Id. 17. Id. at 1185. 18. See id. 19. Corp. of the Episcopal Church in Utah, 119 F. Supp. 2d at 1215, 1220. 20. Town of Babylon, 819 F. Supp. at 1179, 1181. 21. Id. 22. Id. at 1185 (citing 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)(B)). 23. Oxford House, Inc. v. Twp. of Cherry Hill, 799 F. Supp. 450, 463-66 (D.N.J. 1992). 612 THE URBAN LAWYER VOL. 42, No. 3 SUMMER 2010 reasonable and (2) necessary, and must, (3) allow a substance abuser equal opportunity to use and enjoy a particular dwelling.'" Courts also consider the governmental purposes of the existing ordinance or action, and the benefits or accommodation to the handicapped individual.2S Under this scheme, municipalities must change, waive, or make exceptions in their zoning rules to afford people with disabili- ties the same access to housing as those who are without disabilities.26 However, fundamental or substantial modifications to municipal or zoning codes are not required.v C. Standing and Exhaustion of Remedies The first hurdle plaintiffs must establish when challenging an ordinance or decision by a government body is whether the plaintiff has standing. Any "aggrieved person" -one who has been injured by a discrimina- tory housing practice -may bring suit to seek relief for a discrimina- tory housing practice.23 An organization can also bring a suit under the FHA when its purpose is frustrated and when it expends resources because of a discriminatory action 29 For example, if a discriminatory practice has injured an organization's outreach program, the organi- zation would have standing to sue on its own behalf.30 Additionally, traditional organization standing exists to allow suits on behalf of orga- nization members.31 In addition, there is another barrier to asserting claims under the FHA. "Plaintiffs must first provide the governmental entity an op- portunity to accommodate them through the entity's established pro- cedures used to adjust the neutral policy in question."72 However, a plaintiff is not required to appeal a decision through the local body appellate processes, and may bring suit when accommodation is first dcnied.33 24. Corporation of Episcopal Church in Utah, 119 F. Supp. 2d at 1221. 25. Id. 26. Town of Babylon, 819 F. Supp. at 1186; Horizon House Developmental Serv. Inc., v. Twp. of Upper Southampton, 804 F. Supp. 683, 699 (E.D. Pa. 1992). 27. Sanghvi v. City of Claremont, 328 F.3d 532 (9th Cir. 2003) (ruling that the plaintiffs presented no evidence from which the jury could conclude that the requested accommodation was required for Alzheimer's patients); see also City of Edmonds v. Wash. State Bldg. Code Council, 18 F.3d 802, 806 (9th Cir. 1994). 28. CAL. Gov'r. CODE $ 12989.1 (West 2010). 29. Fair Hous. of Marin v. Combs, 285 F.3d 899, 903 (9th Cir. 2002). 30. Id. at 905. 31. Smith v. Pacific Props. & Dev. Corp., 358 F.3d I097, 1101 (9th Cir. 2004). 32. Tsombanidis v. W. Haven Fire Dept, 352 F.3d 565, 578 (2d Cir. 2003). 33. Bryant Woods Inn v. Howard County, 124 F.3d 597, 601-02 (4th Cir. 1997). FAIR HOUSING ACT 613 IV. Pitfalls and Possibilities in Regulating Sober Living Sites The interests of individuals recovering from addiction and the interests of community residents seeking to preserve the "family -friendly" char- acter of their neighborhoods are pitted against each other in any FHA case. Faced with these competing interests, local jurisdictions must use discretion in making decisions to regulate sober living homes so as not to violate FHA restrictions. The fast challenge facing local agencies seeking to regulate sober living homes is the lack of a standard land use definition for such facilities. Local agencies must categorize the facilities within existing land use definitions such as "boarding houses," "rooming houses," or other types of "group living facilities." These land uses often require conditional use permits or other discretionary ap- proval from the city or county. However, zoning restrictions of this type are subject to limitations." Municipalities faced with a problematic sober living home may, depending upon the zoning restriction in place, classify the facility as an unpermitted zoning house, assert the facility is an unlawful multi -family use, or claim the facility operates a "business" akin to a hotel or hostel that is prohibited in residential zones. Another option is to attempt to use local or state building and housing codes, or other codes associated with land use laws and regulations to restrict the facility's operation. In response to such local government action, sober living facilities may assert disparate impact or reasonable accommodation claims, or both, under the FHA" The success of these claims, however, may be affected by specific exemptions contained in the FHA. For example, local, state, and federal restrictions regarding the maximum number of occupants permitted in a dwelling are specifically exempted under the FHA. The occupancy limits considered reasonable are often deter- mined by building inspectors or health and safety inspectors" An ad- ditional exemption in the FHA allows housing developments for older persons ("HOP") and discrimination based upon family status.'s If the 34. Turning Point, Inc.. v. City of Caldwell, 74 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 1996). 35. Oxford House, Inc. v. Twp. of Cherry Hill, 799 F. Supp. 450, 450 (D.N.J. 1992). 36. 42 U.S.C. 4 3607(b)(1) (2009). 37. Turning Point, Inc., 74 F.3d at 941. 38. Gibson v. County of Riverside, 181 F. Supp. 2d 1057, 1072 (C.D. Cal. 2002) (holding county did not qualify for 55-or-over HOP exception and therefore its actions in enacting ordinance imposing age restrictions on persons occupying dwelling units in certain areas violated the FHA prohibition on familial -status based discrimination). 614 THE URBAN LAWYER VOL. 42, No. 3 SUMMER 2010 housing development meets the qualifications of an HOP established by Congress, ordinances discriminating based upon age are valid.39 Exemptions under the FHA do allow cities some leeway in enforcing zoning and planning schemes. However, because exemptions are excep- tions to the general rule prohibiting discrimination, the exceptions are construed narrowly.4° V. Unanswered Questions While cases have done much to flesh out the application of the FHA in the context of sober living regulation, much remains unanswered. For example, while cities and counties may seek to strictly apply the FHA in order to limit the establishment of sober living facilities, courts have not addressed whether doing so violates those agencies' housing requirements, including obligations to maintain adequate affordable housing and to meet regional housing needs allocations.f1 Perhaps more importantly, no cases have addressed whether the FHA applies to "specialized" residential sites, such as locations which ex- clusively house parolees or probationers, locations which house sex of- fenders, or locations commonly known as "reentry facilities," which serve as transitional housing for those recently released from prison who are seeking to transition into "normal" life. Such facilities have increased over the past several years, and may increase dramatically in the near future, given the government plans to reduce prison over- crowding12 and federal court -ordered reductions in prison populations. Additionally, the downturn in the economy may also cause a dramatic increase in the number of facilities. Because sober living homes provide a "safe haven" for such individuals, a rise in sober living facilities can be expected. 39. Id. at 1075-76. 40. City of Edmonds v. Oxford House, Inc., 514 U.S. 725. 731 (1995) (exception to "a general statement of policy" is sensibly read "narrowly in order to preserve the primary operation of the jpolicyj"). 41. CAL. Gov'T. ConE §* 65580, 65913 (West 2010). 42. See, e.g., American Legislative Exchange Council, A Plan to Reduce Prison Overcrowding and Violent Crime (July 2007), http://www.alcc.org/am/pdf/ALEC- state-factor-bail.pdf. Cipolletti, Michelle ABOUT I ADVERTISE 1 EOITORIAI INFflRMATION 489E 1 SUBSCRIBE 1 LOG IN I MY ACCOUNT WESTERN-. uity THE MONTHLY MAGAZINE OF THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES WESTERN CITY / AUGUST 2014 / SOBER LIVING BUSINESSES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES SHARE •EMAIL PRINT , .' FEED 1 Sober Living Businesses in Residential Zones BY CHRISTI HOGIN • • ar^AO. • Christi Hogin is city attomey for Lomita, Malibu and Palos Verdes Estates. She serves as second vice president for the League's City Attorneys' Department and chaired the editorial committee for the League's Municipal Law Handbook, 2014 edition. Hogin can be reached at CHogin@LocalGovLaw.com. This column is provided as general information and not as legal advice. The law is constantly evolving, and attomeys can and do disagree about what the law requires. Local agencies interested in determining how the law applies in a particular situation should consult their local agency attorneys. Current law limits local regulation of sober living homes and residential alcohol and drug rehabilitation (rehab) facilities. These uses have become lucrative businesses in many Instances, and their operation in single-family neighborhoods is sometimes controversial. This article presents the current legal constraints and considerations for cities related to these homes and facilities. 1. Licensed residential rehab programs are subject to the same (and no more) Local laws as single-family homes. Cities may regulate land uses to protect the character of residential neighborhoods.' This authority is not unfettered. State and federal law can pre-empt local regulation.2 State licensing statutes expressly exempt certain residential rehab facilities from local zoning regulations. Alcohol and drug programs' (ADPs) that provide 24-hour residential nonmedical4 services to adults6 who are recovering from alcohol and/or drug abuse must obtain a state license. If a licensed ADP facility serves six or fewer patients, state law prohibits cities from regulating it any differently than a single-family home.° 2 2. State law Imposes fewer restrictions on licensed residential rehab programs than other licensed group homes. State -licensed group homes are subject to different restrictions. The Community Care Facilities Act, from which alcohol and drug rehabs are exempt, imposes various restrictions that protect the character of residential neighborhoods. For example, under the act, licensed foster homes cannot be for -profit businesses.' ADPs, however, may operate as for -profit enterprises in residential zones without business licenses because licenses generally are not required of other single-family uses. Cities receive written notice of a proposed Community Care Facilities Act facility, and "any city or county may request denial of the license ... on the basis of overconcentration of residential care facilities."8 The state does not provide any notice to cities before a new ADP license is issued. Under the Community Care Facilities Act, "overconcentration" exists when two care facilities are located within 300 feet of one another.9 The statute provides for a balanced policy "to prevent overconcentration of residential care facilities that impair the integrity of residential neighborhoods."10 The state "shall deny" a new group home license under the Community Care Facilities Act if approval would result in overconcentration.11 By contrast, the state's policy for alcohol and drug rehab programs is that "each county and city shall permit and encourage the development of sufficient numbers and types of alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities as are commensurate with local need."12 The attorney general has opined that the state "may not deny an application for licensure or suspend or revoke the license of a treatment facility because the particular community already has more than a sufficient number of treatment facilities to meet the local need."13 With that conclusion, the attorney general determined the Legislature's reference to consideration of "local need" in approving ADP treatment facility licenses did not establish a basis to limit their numbers in any neighborhood. 3 1: •t r r l f f s r • S -�f., ,- ere; Si' ) I. .I�i1:''`• 'tt, Legal authority �!1 r, Limited to Require Pre-empted Protected etc or fewer a stab by statute class under residents? license? from local fair housing regulations end-discrtm different than (nation taws single-family residence? Sober Uving Home Constdu:tonal nirt to NO :10 kU YES priva:.y A ''amiIy" 35 3-'4r by cu.•Ms *Wei aGcitC3�4i. Feaerai last dehne, reCr,V- er ^a al _ohcLcs. add As as -disabled' and aratects 1 :h^1 Parr d s,_nm.rat cr on hatters 2r.d ADA rea.sr-:, "reasorabo? a:CO-imcdsticn.' Alcoholism or Drug 'ira".n 3 Safety Cole YES YES 'DES YES Abusa Recovery/Treat- §' 1 i? 3 s C' 1 Norrrri :at, mint Program (ADP) re�dentor Community Care Act Residential Facility Hs3:;11 3 Safe;?' Cods §1E')3 No►+o^e nal rt :lderrui ' ES ES vES 1 EE 11.Q 1.=L mSmZ�f.Tii L. i.... it .C.0 ,. L. I a . I . .:II. ... . WTC;`" + 3. Sober living homes do not require a license and are not limited to six or fewer residents. A sober living home provides a substance -free, mutually supportive living environment for adult recovering alcoholics and drug addicts. No services are provided but residents may engage in self-help programs individually or with others. The state licenses residential facilities that provide nonmedical treatment and detoxification services. Where no treatment is provided to residents, no license is required. The limitation to six patients is part of the state statute. Because the license statute does not apply, sober living homes are not limited to six residents per single-family home. Also because the statute does not apply, cities are not pre-empted by state law from regulating these uses. However, as noted below, other legal considerations apply. 4. Anti -discrimination laws and "reasonable accommodation" requirements Ilmit categorical regulation of sober living homes. Federal14 and state13 fair housing laws protect people with disabilities from housing discrimination. Recovering alcoholics and drug addicts are disabled for purposes of anti -discrimination laws.1° When people in recovery live together in a "sober living" home, cities cannot discriminate on the basis of the disability, which means an ordinance cannot treat sober living homes differently than other similar uses in single-family" residential zones. Recovering alcoholics and drug addicts are also protected under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA requires cities to reasonably accommodate deviations from zoning laws to afford persons with disabilities 4 equal opportunity to enjoy housing. For example, a city may define "boarding houses" as more than three leases in a single home and prohibit boarding houses in single-family zones. Sober living home residents, however, may seek a waiver from enforcement as applied to them as reasonable accommodation to their disability that may benefit from a substance -free group living environment, allowing the ADA protection to exempt the sober living home from the "boarding house" prohibition. The Fair Housing Act Amendments of 1988 prohibit local governments, among other things, from discriminating against the disabled by establishing a bedroom/per occupant rule,19 imposing distance requirements between facilities or prohibiting commercial operators from running sober living facilities in residential neighborhoods. Likewise, requiring a sober living home to obtain a conditional use permit, business license or home occupation permit would impose requirements on the residences of "handicapped" persons that are not imposed on other residences. 5. Even an ordinance that applies equally to group homes for disabled and non -disabled persons may be discriminatory and illegal. A claim of discrimination against a city over a zoning ordinance may challenge its legality on its face or as applied in a particular circumstance. Either way, the claims will fall into one of three categories of illegal discrimination: a. Discriminatory treatment occurs when a protected class of persons (recovering alcoholics or drug addicts) is subjected to different treatment under a law. Discriminatory treatment is illegal unless the different treatment benefits the protected Gass or responds to legitimate safety concerns. A facially neutral regulation (that does not treat a protected class of persons differently) may still be illegal if evidence establishes that the intent of the statute is discriminatory. Regulations must be justified by legitimate, nondiscriminatory nonpretextual reasons. b. Disparate impact occurs when a regulation has a significantly different and adverse impact on a protected class. c. Failure to make reasonable accommodation of rules, practices, policies and services for persons of a protected class constitutes discrimination. An accommodation is reasonable unless it requires a fundamental alteration in zoning regulations or imposes an undue financial or administrative burden. A recent case suggests heightened standards for local ordinances challenged as discriminatory. The City of Newport Beach adopted an ordinance that appears neutral because it applies to group living situations (distinguished from single housekeeping units) but does not single out recovering alcoholics or drug addicts. Newport Beach was sued for discrimination by plaintiffs claiming that the ordinance's intent is to regulate sober living homes in particular. The Ninth Circuit ordered a trial to determine if Newport Beach enacted the ordinance with an intent to discriminate based on certain evidence that it was the city's purpose and because the ordinance "had the practical effect of prohibiting new group homes from opening in most residential zones."20 A petition to the U.S. Supreme Court for review of the ruling is anticipated shortly. 6. Regulation to benefit the protected class is allowed. Relying on cases interpreting the federal Fair Housing Act, the Califomia Legislative CounseI21 has opined that "sober living homes" may not be subject to distance requirements, unless the regulation benefits the protected class or responds to legitimate safety concerns raised by individuals affected rather than being based on stereotypes.22 The italicized provision marks the intersection between local and state interests. Cities exercise zoning power to protect the character of residential neighborhoods. The policy underlying state law pre-emption is to provide care in a residential setting. The antidiscrimination laws are intended to protect equal opportunity to enjoy housing opportunities. Maintaining the integrity of residential neighborhoods is necessary to provide the beneficial setting and the housing opportunity. Many would argue that distancing requirements both respond to the biggest concerns of local government and advance state policy.23 As more communities gain experience with the effect of unregulated uses, implementing antidiscrimination statutes may soon demand what they now appear to prohibit. For more information, visit www.cacities.org/GroupHomes. Interested in Learning More? September Webinar Will Cover This Topic in Greater Depth 5 21 The Office of Legislative Counsel is a nonpartisan public agency that drafts legislative proposals, prepares legal opinions and provides other confidential legal services to the Legislature and others. According to Legislative Counsel, it maintains an attorney -client relationship with each member of the Legislature and the govemor and releases only opinions that have already been released by a client. Excerpts of the 1997 opinion are in the public domain, such as the first page submitted by the Sober Living Network to the City of Los Angeles in 2008 when it considered adopting sober living regulations. 22 The legal test to determine whether an ordinance that subjects a protected Bass to different treatment — e.g., sober living homes must have conditional use permits to operate but other homes do not — is discriminatory in violation of the Fair Housing Act depends on the government's ability to establish that the restriction benefits the class or responds to legitimate safety concerns. Community House, Inc. v. City of Boise (9th Cir. 2007) 490 F.3d 1041, 1050. 23 Note that courts have been skeptical of the anti -clustering justifications raised by cities in various cases. However, these cases have largely arisen in purely theoretical contexts. As the "unregulatable" uses duster and create concrete examples, cities may be able to produce more sound evidentiary records of the adverse effects of clustering. This article appears in the August 2014 issue of Westem City Did you like what you read here? Subscribe to Westem City» Edit Module • Community Services • Economic Development & Redevelopment • Environment, Energy & Climate Change • Govemance, Legislation & Law • Municipal Finance • Land Use & Planning • Personnel • Public Safety • Public Trust & Ethics • Public Works & Infrastructure • Youth Home Job Opportunities I Calendar Contact I Archives About I Advertise i Editorial Information I Subscribe I My Account 7 The League will present a webinar for city officials and staff from 10:00 to 11:30 a.m. on Sept. 17, 2014, that examines issues related to sober living homes. Learn more about this topic, and take advantage of this opportunity to have your questions answered by experts. To sign up, visit www.cacities.org/events. 'Village of Euclid, Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co. (1926) 272 U.S. 365 (cities may zone property for certain uses and exclude others, e.g. creating residential zones where businesses are excluded). 2 See City Attomeys' Department, League of California Cities, The California Municipal Law Handbook (Cont.Ed.Bar 2013 ed.) §§1.33- 1.41. ' H&S Code §11834.01 et seq. Facilities that provide medical services are not residential uses and may be prohibited from residential zones. Also note that licensed community care facilities that serve seven or more patients must be treated exactly the same as a multifamily residential use and cannot be defined as a `boarding house." They may be prohibited from the single family residential zones. 5 Alcohol and drug treatment facilities for adolescents are govemed by the Community Care Facilities Act. They are licensed, nonmedical and serve six or fewer. H&S Code §1502(a)(1); H&S Code §1566.3. ' H&S Code §11834.23. 7 H&S Code §1502(a)(4) ("Private foster family agencies shall be organized and operated on a nonprofit basis.') 8 H&S Code §1520.5(d). 9 H&S Code §1520.5(b). 10 H&S Code §1520.5(a). " H&S Code §1520.5(a). 12 H&S Code 11834.20. 13 90 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 109 at 5 (No. 07-601). " 42 USC § 3804(f) 15 Gov't Code § 12955(a). t6 28 C.F.R. § 35.104; The Fair Housing Act Amendments of 1988 clarify that "handicap' does not include current, illegal use of or addiction to a controlled substance. 17 For land -use regulation purposes, a 'family' is people, whether or not related, who share household chores and expenses, eat meals together, participate in recreational activities together and form dose bonds. See Santa Barbara v. Adamson (1980) 27 Ca1.3d 123. The law prohibits a zoning ordinance from defining 'family' by distinguishing between related and unrelated persons or by imposing a numerical limit on the number of persons that constitute a family. ra Oxford House-C v. City of St. Louis, 77 F.3d 249 (8th Cir. 1996) (however, a group home's refusal to seek a variance precludes a claim for failure to accommodate). .9 Per -occupant requirements applied equally to all residential uses within the same zone are valid under the Fair Housing Act. See, e.g., Oxford House-C v. City of St. Louis, 77 F.3d 249 (upholding as valid an eight -person restriction). zo Pacific Shores Properties, LLC v. City of Newport Beach (91' Cir. 2013) 730 F.3d 1142, rehearing denied en banc, 746 F3d 936. 6 Swartz, Kevin From: Aylaian, Lauri Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 2:38 PM To: Klassen, Rachelle; Swartz, Kevin Cc: Stendell, Ryan Subject: FW: [SPAM] - Ban on R1, R2, Short Term Rentals NOTE: The City Council is blind copied on this email message. I received this email message, which was caught in my spam filter. Since I'm unable to see who received it an who did not, I'm forwarding it to all of you to be certain that you each have the benefit of Mr. Slater's input. Lauri A. Lauri Aylaian City Manager Ph: 760.346.0611 Direct: 760.776.6481 laylaian ticityofpalrndesert org From: Gary & Lynn [mailto:Rarv.Ivnnta azureseas.ca] Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2017 7:30 AM To: CityhallMail <Citvhal1Pcitvofpalmdesert.org> Subject: [SPAM] - Ban on R1, R2, Short Term Rentals To whom it may concern, 1 have been travelling to Palm Desert for a sunny get -away for the last 20 years and have spent many of my hard earned dollars playing golf at my favourite golf course, Desert Willows (among others) and dinning at one or another of the many fine dinning establishments in the area. I was shocked and saddened when 1 heard of City Council's movement to han all short-term vacation rentals in R- I and R-2 tones. I. personally will not travel to, and stay at. Palm Desert if I have to resort to staying at a Hotel or some such other accommodation. We have been renting a home in Palm Desert for several years and are responsible guests. We do not make noise or in any way annoy the neighbours as I am sure is the case with most vacation renters. 1 am sure there are many that just go to "party", but I would wager that is a minority and as such more of an enforcement issue, Without the ability to rent this home (77271 Ohio Circle) we would find it much Tess desirable to vacation in your city and would likely opt to go elsewhere. We love Palm Desert, but, if this bylaw were to he successfully adopted. would feel forced to choose another destination for our R & R. Please consider removing the han and give enforcement a chance to work. Please consider, 1 remain. Gary Slater Palm Desert Vacationer. 1 Ken Wright 1382 Wynbrook PI Burnaby BC V5A3Y6 604 454 4806 December 7. 2017 City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert. CA 92260 Re. Short-term rental ordinance Dear Honorable Members of the Palm Springs City Council, We have been informed that the City of Palm Desert has voted 3-2 to ban new short-term rentals in residential zones RI and R2 and to disallow existing permitted short-term rentals in these same zones. I wish to state my objection to this proposed ban, which would discourage me from visiting Palm Desert and in my opinion would do a disservice to the city, which benefits both economically and socially from such rentals. My wife and I have vacationed in Palm Dessert several times and have thoroughly enjoyed the climate and vistas and taken advantage of the first class golfing. hiking, shopping and dining available. Palm Desert is also a key location for my business in solar swimming pool heating. Part of the appeal of Palm Desert is that it is less busy than Palm Springs. But Palm Springs has very few hotels to choose from. We have found that the short-term rentals offer exactly what we want for a working vacation — a full house with a yard and pool. space to work and play and privacy, all within walking distance of so many amenities and attractions. and at a reasonable price. Our observation is that these rentals, many to Canadians like ourselves. contribute substantially to the economy and vibrant Palm Springs community. We sincerely hope that you will reconsider this proposed ban on short-term rentals so that we can make this beautiful location a regular stop for our vacations, work and our impending retirement. Regards, Ken Wright Swartz, Kevin From: Isaac Jacobsen <isaac.jacobsen.1992@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 11:55 PM To: CityhallMail Subject: Stop the Short Term Rental Ban! Dear Palm Desert City Council Members, I have just learned that Palm Desert voted to ban short-term rentals altogether. I wrote before the last vote, and I am extremely surprised the ban went ahead when I know there was a lot of opposition to the ban. Furthermore, I really cannot believe that the city would not grandfather short-term rentals. I have never heard of a property -type situation where properties aren't grandfathered when some sort of zoning rule changes. For example, I own a property in London, Ontario, and when the city limited rentals to five bedrooms around the University, the city grandfathered any properties that had more than five bedrooms rented previously. This is because the city understood that people had invested with that knowledge. Now you are telling me that the people that have spent their hard-earned money to invest for their futures in Palm Desert (in short-term rentals) should suffer by taking an economic hit when they have to sell their property at a loss? And yes, property values will drop. I can recall a very recent situation where property values took an enormous hit — the recession in '08. When property values dropped significantly, people, especially in Southern California, lost everything they had, including their jobs. Short-term rentals have helped Palm Desert climb out of that recession. So, I think, at the very least, existing short-term rentals should be grandfathered. I would like to point out that "Grandfather clauses are commonly used in creating new zoning ordinances and city or state statutes" (httos://lea_ aldictionary .net/arandfather-clause/). Grandfathering is pretty much meant for situations like this. If this ban continues to be upheld, I certainly will not be visiting anytime soon, and I know my friends that visit there regularly also will not be. As such, the city, and more importantly, the people of the city, will lose all the money we spend on restaurants, clothes, gifts, and activities. I can guarantee the economy will take a significant hit, and personally I don't think any city council member wants to put its city in that situation. Please, reconsider the ban. Decisions don't need to be so black or white. We can make a compromise. So, let's start by implementing larger fines for noisy renters, and increasing the minimum short-term rental length (to a week). From there, you can see what happens, and make adjustments down the line if necessary. At the very least, don't take away people's hard-earned investments and retirement plans; grandfather existing short- term rentals. Regards, i Isaac Jacobsen 1222 Richmond Street, London, Ontario, Canada N6A3M2 604-779-4279 isaac.tacobsen.1992@gmail.com 2 Swartz, Kevin From: Share Palm Desert <sharepalmdesert@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2017 9:28 AM To: Weber, Susan Marie; Nestande, Gina; Harnik, Jan; Jonathan, Sabby; Kelly, Kathleen; Swartz, Kevin; Stendell, Ryan Subject: FW: Stop the Short Term Rental Ban! From: Isaac Jacobsen fmailto:isaac.iacobsen.1992@Qmail.coml Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 11:55 PM To: citvhall@citvofoalmdesert.org Subject: Stop the Short Term Rental Ban! Dear Palm Desert City Council Members, I have just learned that Palm Desert voted to ban short-term rentals altogether. I wrote before the last vote, and I am extremely surprised the ban went ahead when I know there was a lot of opposition to the ban. Furthermore, I really cannot believe that the city would not grandfather short-term rentals. I have never heard of a property -type situation where properties aren't grandfathered when some sort of zoning rule changes. For example, I own a property in London, Ontario, and when the city limited rentals to five bedrooms around the University, the city grandfathered any properties that had more than five bedrooms rented previously. This is because the city understood that people had invested with that knowledge. Now you are telling me that the people that have spent their hard-earned money to invest for their futures in Palm Desert (in short-term rentals) should suffer by taking an economic hit when they have to sell their property at a loss? And yes, property values will drop. I can recall a very recent situation where property values took an enormous hit — the recession in '08. When property values dropped significantly, people, especially in Southern California, lost everything they had, including their jobs. Short-term rentals have helped Palm Desert climb out of that recession. So, I think, at the very least, existing short-term rentals should be grandfathered. I would like to point out that "Grandfather clauses are commonly used in creating new zoning ordinances and city or state statutes"(https://Ieaaldictionarv.net/grandfather-clause/). Grandfathering is pretty much meant for situations like this. If this ban continues to be upheld, I certainly will not be visiting anytime soon, and I know my friends that visit there regularly also will not be. As such, the city, and more importantly, the people of the city, will lose all the money we spend on restaurants, clothes, gifts, and activities. I can guarantee the economy will take a significant hit, and personally I don't think any city council member wants to put its city in that situation. Please, reconsider the ban. Decisions don't need to be so black or white. We can make a compromise. So, let's start by implementing larger fines for noisy renters, and increasing the minimum short-term rental length (to a week). From there, you can see what happens, and make adjustments down the line if necessary. At the very least, don't take away people's hard-earned investments and retirement plans; grandfather existing short- term rentals. Regards, Isaac Jacobsen 1222 Richmond Street, London, Ontario, Canada N6A3M2 604-779-4279 Isaac. iacobsen.1992 @bmail.com 2 Swartz, Kevin From: John Curran <curranj@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2017 9:48 AM To: Swartz, Kevin Subject: Noise case in Australia Kevin, I just saw this article about a noise complaint in Australia that concerns wind turbines. This is not the issue we have with party houses, but the government court did rule that the dB(A) method for measuring noise is irrelevant for low frequency sounds. Wind turbines make a constant noise, just a a party outside does. 1 have noted several times that noise from a house behind me is not loud enough to be a technical violation of the city ordinance, but the noise can go on for hours. We had a group of women (bachalorette party?) on a veranda one recent Saturday. They began before noon & went on until about 10 PM that night. Constant chatter, laughter, shrieking but not drunken loud It was loud enough to make me come inside when [ was trying to read on my veranda. 1 don't know if you have done any reading about noise guidelines but this court clearly thinks there are things other than volume that constitute an annoyance. Itttn.://.uonthe.cthin2..coin/20I7/12/09/auqialian-court-find,-v,61d-turbine-noise-cxno.ure-a-pathN.va\-to- di.ea.e-N.vaihra-Poundalion-b indicated/ jc John Curran Palm Desert, CA All messages from this address are gluten -free, as required by California law. 1 Swartz, Kevin From: Julie Solomon <julie.solomon@compass.com> Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2017 1:43 PM To: Swartz, Kevin Cc: Tim Householder; Alex Montoya Subject: Comments for Upcoming Meeting Regarding Short Term Rental Ordinance Dear Mr. Swartz and Honorable Members of the City Council, I preface my remarks by informing you that I served as a Planning Commissioner for eight years for the City of Goleta in Santa Barbara County. During my tenure, the Short Term Rental (STR) matter was before us and our City opted to NOT ban STR's in favor of an enforcement approach which has worked out well for the City as well as residents. Our City continues to benefit from the Transient Occupancy Taxes generated by the STR's and our residents have recourse should a rental property become problematic. STR owners who fail to demonstrate responsible management of their properties are fined and are subject to license revocation. We own a residence in an R1 zone of Palm Desert which we use both for our personal use as a second home and as a rental. We love the City of Palm Desert and are respectful of our neighbors. We don't believe that we, along with other responsible, respectful homeowners should be punished severely because the City chooses to not use a lawful, due process approach to this issue. I am writing to respectfully ask that the City of Palm Desert, rather than banning STRs in R1 zones, use the rule of law to restrict STR's to those owners who are responsible and respectful of their neighborhoods and fine and withdraw permits from those who break the rules. Thank you for your time and consideration of this request. Sincerely, Julie and Steve Solomon Julie Solomon Realtor 1002 Anacapa St, Santa Barbara. CA 93105 n 805 403 6020 1 Nr W YUHK ; ER(JC)KL YN I EAS1 HAMo1PTON I E?RirJ ;r.HAM.MProN I SOUTHAMPTON I SAG HARBOR I WASHINGTON DC CHEVY CHASE I BOSTON I CAMBRIDGE I MIAMI I COCONUT GROVE I BEVERLY HILLS I MALIBU I PASADENA ' MONTECITO I SANTA BARBARA I BASALT I ASPEN I SAN FRANCISCO 2 Swartz, Kevin From: desertcat4@juno.com Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2017 6:47 PM To: Swartz, Kevin Subject: THANK YOU Kevin Swartz: I want to Thank You and your staff for all the hard work done to bring ordinance 1332 this far. I hope that in the second reading it will again pass. Again, I can't Thank you enough for your hard work and the hours you put into this ordinance. Cathy Forrister, retired bank manager Canyon Cove, Palm Desert, CA We Say GoodBye To Sally Fields iflperfecttouch.com htto://thirdpartvoffers.iuno.com/TGL3142/5a2ca02a7f7a4202a051 fst04duc 1 Swartz, Kevin From: Craig Jacobsen <drejacobsen@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2017 7:45 PM To: Swartz, Kevin; Weber, Susan Marie; Kelly, Kathleen; Jonathan, Sabby; Nestande, Gina; Harnik, Jan; CityhallMail Subject: Short-term rental ban in R1/R2 Dear Mayor and Council Members: Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. I am writing you to ask you to reconsider your ban on short- term rentals in R 1/R2. 1 have spoke at the last council meeting and I wrote a letter to you prior to the last council meeting. In both my spoken comments and my prior written comments, I tried to emphasize how we have run our STR properties and suggestions for improved regulations and that we had stricter rules than the city rules. We have had STR properties in Palm Desert since 2012 and have operated without any citations. In this letter I will focus on the reasons we purchased investment properties in Palm Desert and why we believe the new ordinance is unfair to existing STR permit holders. We first visited the City of Palm Desert in about 2007 and at that time our family of four stayed in a STR house in South Palm Desert for 1 week in August, yes August. We loved it so much that we were determined to figure out a way to buy a vacation property here. We bought our first property in South Palm Desert in 2012, as a vacation property and future retirement location for me and my wife. We chose South Palm Desert for our love for the area and the ability to rent it out as a STR, as we are still at least 15 years from retirement and at that time 20 years from retirement. We later purchased other properties as the City of Palm Desert had welcoming regulations for STRs. Over the next 4 years we invested in four more properties to rent out as STRs. When the moratorium was about to come in, we were about to buy our 6`h STR property in the South Palm Desert area, but as the moratorium was coming in and we were unsure if we would be able to get a license for the new house, we backed out of the purchase. Instead we bought a property in Whistler Canada, which is a legal nightly rental property. We have leveraged our house in Vancouver and borrowed to purchase all these properties. We are not rich investors as some make STR property owners out to be, we are just trying to provide an income stream for our retirement. We only purchased properties that we were able to legally rent as a STR as this is the only way that t this investment makes sense. If the ordinance passes and we are not grandfathered, we will he force to sell like many others. I do not think investors will look to the City of Palm Desert as a safe or fair city to invest in, when people like us who invested here in good faith were not treated with good faith in return. I believe the fairest way to handle this issue is to grandfather existing permit holders and continue the moratorium. Please reconsider your ordinance to Ban short-term rentals in R 1/R2 and consider grandfathering existing STR permit holders and putting efforts into eliminating the illegal unlicensed homes which are not providing TOT and are causing the bulk of the problems. 1 believe the vast majority of legal STR property owners are very conscientious neighbors and like us, go to great lengths to keep our guests from disturbing the neighbors. Yours sincerely, Dr Craig Jacobsen v11).CM 4060 Cambie Street Vancouver, B.0 V5Z 2X8 2 December 8, 2017 VIA EMAIL City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: City Council Dear City Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ban I have just heard that the City of Palm Desert voted 3-2 to ban any new short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2 immediately and to even disallow existing permitted short-term rentals in these two zones as of December 31, 2019. I felt compelled to write to City Council as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. I cannot believe that the city would not grandfather the short-term rentais who already have permits now. I am shocked that Palm Desert would ban these rentals. I thought cities always grandfathered? If this ban goes into effect, I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future as I prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities, which is why I came to the El Paseo area in the first place. I do not wish to stay in hotels as they do not provide a large space for our extended family vacations. When I come to Palm Desert, we eat and dine on El Paseo, many times each year. Anywhere from Aimando's to El Pacifica, 2 Wolfgang Puck and so many other places. We shop in the clothing stores. We buy groceries and wine nearby and we use various services. We spend so much money on each trip we make to Palm Desert between our accommodations, food and beverage, recreation and shopping. We will choose to stay elsewhere and not in Palm Desert if you put this ban in place. Please note that we have stayed 3 weeks for the past 5 years and at each time have used restaurants, shops, malls, fitness clubs and more in the area, spending much of a yearly holiday budget worth 20.000 USD. Money that will not go to any of these business anymore where this ban to be implemented. Please do not go ahead with this ban as it will decrease tourism to Palm Desert. There is no way that those tourist dollars will be made up with the new hotel as the people who rent short-term rentals do not like staying in hotels. think that the City of Palm Desert should enforce noise by-laws across all of Palm Desert as noisy, disruptive people should be fined for their bad behavior. Those noisy renters will think twice if they know they'll be fined! Please reconsider this ban before it's too late. Thank you for reading my letter. Sincerely, Van Herreweghe Chris -Kruisstraat 16 2820 Rijmenam Belgium Swartz, Kevin From: Terryl Fried <terryl.fried@impactgrp.com> Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2017 6:35 PM To: Swartz, Kevin Cc: BAMBI BRYANT; Rob Fried Subject: Short Term Rental - voicing my concern with prohibiting STR Hello Kevin, Thank you for your STR letter dated December 1" and allowing us the opportunity to voice our concern regarding prohibiting STR's in our neighborhood — Silver Spur Ranch in Palm Desert. I have been vacationing for over 45 years with my family in the Palm Desert area utilizing STR's. Three years ago, we purchased a house in Silver Spur Ranch with the knowledge it was legal to use our home as a STR, this added value to our property. We bought in Silver Spur Ranch knowing we had a right and freedom to rent our house with city permits. My husband and I hired a professional management company to manage the rentals and have never had a problem with renters in the neighborhood. We value our relationships with our neighbors and have asked them to let us know if any issues arise. We are careful who we rent to as this will one day be our retirement home. During the months of June — September when the temperatures are over 100 we do not have many renters so we use the house ourselves. I can tell you during the summer months the neighborhood is disturbingly quite so I welcome short term rentals and the families they bring. This adds security to everyone living in Silver Spur Ranch. It is important to point out many of the STR homes tend to be some of the nicest homes in the area. We work hard to maintain the yard and employ gardeners, Pool and house keepers. I worry property values will decrease as many STR owners have talked about selling their homes. Lastly, I must say the people who rent our homes are looking for an environment Hotels cannot provide. We urge you to support and allow STR's in all of Palm Desert! Guidelines and enforcement of these rules would be a much better solution for everyone. Thank you for your time and consideration. Terryl Fried 949-632-6075 GROUP NATURAL Please note my new email address! Terry) Fried I Division Manager - Natural, Southern California Direct: (949) 280-4655 1 December 8. 2017 City of Paim Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Dnve Palm Desert. CA 92260 Attention. City Council Membem Dear Honorable City Council Members Re: Short Tenn Rental Ordinance My name is Galina Jovovich-t.oginova I am a local Palm Desert homeowner who responsibly operates a short-term rental out of my home with a licensed permit Since the 2010-2012 recession, short-term rental homeowners have improved the entire city of south Palm Desert It is now beautifully maintained and flourishes with a budding economy. As a contributor to this advancement I am strongly opposed to the recent ban on short-term rentals in the R 1 and R2 zones in South Palm Desert that was recently passed in first reading by City Council. I am very concerned about the impact this ordinance will have on the City of Palm Desert's economy. community culture and local property values Paim Desert is a tourist dependent economy As such. local residents must understand they do not live in a typical residential neighborhood In addition, this ordinance does not solve the problems the City Council stated it was trying to correct. noise, constant new neighbors, and excessive parking, and unjustifiably restncts R1 and R2 neighborhoods from having short-term rental units but permits it in other nearby neighborhoods As an experienced short-term rental homeowner and operator. I consistently take steps to ensure that all my renters abode by the short-term rental rules and regulations Instead of a zone -specific ban that seems unfairly discriminatory, 1 recommend the implementation of stricter regulations They are as follows 1. Increase the minimum nightly rental to 4-7 nights This would eliminate the party houses. The people coming to party want to rent for 2 nights, not longer. 2. Disallow outside music after 9pm on weeknights 10pm on weekends 3 Limit the total number of persons allowed to stay at a house to a maximum of 2 per bedroom up to a total maximum at 10-12 persons with special allowances for small children. 4. Maintain the increased fines and penalties for violations of rules. 5. Increase the cost of the permit to allow tor more rent dollars. 6 Require damage deposits from renters so that they can be fined and those fines can be collected 2 Limit the total number of STR permits in each area so as to avoid large concentrations in one area. Grandfather existing STRs permits and allow attntron to take effect and over time. reach the desired numbers. tf this ban goes into effect, 1 believe these will be the consequences, 1 Vacationers will rent in Palm Springs instead of Palm Desert. taking all their vacation dollars with them Businesses along El Paseo will suffer. 2 Property values in south Palm Desert will decline significantly Many owners will have to sell. Disallowing STRs will drive purchasers to other areas where they are allowed.• 3 The City will lose tax revenues that could be spent on better enforcement of stricter rules for STRs. This ordnance is contrary to the best interest of all of Palm Desert and I strongly urge the Crty Council to reject rt on second reading Thank you for your consideration Sincerely, Galina Jovovich-Loginova Address. 2175 Hercules Dr Los Angeles. CA 90046 EmailBoosrnka1( aol corn Telephone 213-200-3060 Rental Property Address 72890 Homestead Rd. Palm Desert CA 92260 City o/ Palm Desert 73iro Frrd Waring Drive Pare Desert. (A 92260 Attention: City Council Dear City Council Members. Re: Short Terre teute/ Dent December 8, 2017 My name is ' t. t'- < /• lath a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spend tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the City Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the C ty of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental ,n the City of Palm Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and I always follow the rental laws guidelines Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you! Sincerely, L City of Pabe Desert 7;-5►o Fred Waring Drive Pabn Desert, CA 9226o Attentiorr City C01.11161 Dear City Council Mrwcbrn Re: Short Terry Rental Ddn December 8, 201 / My name is • - .1 - . I am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year 1 spend tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, fnends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the City Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. 1 strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the City of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the Gty of Palm Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short•term rentals especially since family and I always follow the rental laws guidelines Please reconsider this ban and keep the Gty of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you Sincerely, • City of Patin Desert 73-5io Fred Waring Drive Paim Desert, CA gzz6o 4ttentiorr City Coenril Dear City Council Members December 8, 2017 Re: Short Term Rental Sao 174,t,6i:; ^ recently heard the City of Palm Desert is planning to ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I felt compelled to write to City Council as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. If it passes, I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future. 1 prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utilize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space tor my extended family vacations. When we come to Palm Desert, we shop and dine on El Paseo, and buy groceries and wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money between our accommodations, food and beverage, recreational activities and shopping. If we are not able to stay in short-term rental homes, we will no longer spend our family vacations in Paim Desert and take our business elsewhere. strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. Instead I recommend the City of Palm Desert enforce stricter regulations and fine noisy, overly disruptive people for any and all troublesome behavior f hank you for your consideration! Sincerely, /' 1 tO City of Pabn Desert 73-5ro Fred Waring Drive Pabn Desert. CA 9226o Attention _ t 4 yj ounci! [)mar City Council Members Re: Short Term ieRtel December 8, 2017 ', am a frequent renter of Galina lovovich's home in Palm Desert. My family and I look forward to our vacations every year and prefer her accommodations over local hotels since they do not provide the space or intimacy that we enjoy so much during our vacations. Galina takes great care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to rent from her. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals in zones R1 and R2 as this ordinance may force my family to vacation elsewhere. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, City of Pala Desert 73-sio Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert. G4 9n6o Attention City (:ouncil Dear City Council Manbers: Re: Short Tenn festal Den December 8, 2017 My name is . • 1 . ► am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spend tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the City Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the City of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If 1 am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the City of Palm Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and 1 always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you! Sincerely, City of Path Desert 73-5ro Fred Waring Drive Pater Desert. CA 9226o Attention: Cik Council Dear City Council Members: December 8, 2017 le: Short Terse Rental Bois My name isra.\‘‘elltk.M crI am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spend tons of money at restaurants an(t'stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental hornes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the City Council might bin short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance wilt have a huge impact on the City of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tounst city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the City of Palm Desert then 1 will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and I always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. t hank you! Sincerely, sa-M-Pf-• Calif of Pate Desert 73-sio Fred Waring Drz r Palm Desert. CA 9226o Attendee City Counicii Dear City CO. Gilled Members lie: Shari Ter Rental Dan December 8. 201 My name is .-• 4. i am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spent tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brough to my attention that the City Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. 1 strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact or the City of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such 1 recommend they stay up to date with the latest trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If 1 am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the City of Palm Desert then 1 will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and I always follow the rental laws guidelines Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you' Sincerely. -ice ti. ^t<1 l I t .. 1• k y J.J . . 1 cih/ erf Palm Desert 75-5to Frrd Waring Deivr Pabn Desert. CA 92260 .4ttrtiiarr City C OSMO, Dear City Council Members: December 8, 2017 Re: Short Ter_ Ream/ Dan i,c am a frequent renter of Galina lovovich's home in Palm Desert. My family and I look forward to our vacations every year and prefer her accommodations over local hotels since they do not provide the space or intimacy that we enjoy so much during our vacations. Galina takes great care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to rent from her. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals in zones R1 and R2 as this ordinance may force my family to vacation elsewhere. Thank you for your time. y I ._ . t �. �, 2 C L. ., !T7Y' rC�c.�L'�, �E ni c . � - e- UN of Palm Desert 73-5to Fred Waring Drive Paba Desert, CA 92260 fittention: City Council De,Qr City Council Member December 8, 2017 le: Short Term Roots! Sip My name is-4 fait -yea 1 am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spend tons of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. It was brought to my attention that the Oty Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R7. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the City of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tounst city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If 1 am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the City of Palm Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and 1 always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you! Sincerely, CAN of Pabu Desert 73-5zo Fred Waring Dive Poim Desert, CA 9220 Attention: City Council Dear City Council Mr wAwry December 8, 2017 Re: Skortt T eatal Ben I, JeMS iiiebif/ , am a frequent renter of Galena Jovovich's home in Palm Desert. My family and I look forwar to our vacations every year and prefer her accommodations over local hotels since they do not provide the space or intimacy that we enjoy so much during our vacations. Galina takes great care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to rent from her. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals in zones R1 and R2 as this ordinance may force my family to vacation elsewhere. Thank you tor your time. Sincerely. ?`13 - foil liWovil Ato City of Pabn Desert 73-5to Fred Waring Drive Peon Desert, CA 9n60 Dear City Council Members: • Re: Attention City Council Skort rerw Rental Sas 9 4C1 POWACIdeci December 8, 2017 uent renter of Galena Jovovich's home in Palm Desert. My family and I look forward to our vacations every year and prefer her accommodations over local hotels since they do not provide the space or intimacy that we enjoy so much during our vacations. Galina takes great care of her home and it would be a shame to not be able to rent from her. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider the ban on short-term rentals in zones R1 and R2 as this ordinance may force my family to vacation elsewhere. Thank you for your time. Sincerely. 1 �10-36s_- �ds City of Pate Dirsert 73-310 Fend Waring Drivr Pate Desert, (A 9226o Attention City Covwcil Dear (:its/ (:os ral Mrsebrrs: le: Short Terse Zeata. Wit; recently heard the Gty of Palm Desert is planning to ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I felt compelled to write to City Council as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. If it passes, I will not be visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future. I prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities and do not utilize hotels since they do not provide a large enough space for my extended family vacations. When we come to Palm Desert, we shop and dine on El Paseo, and buy groceries And wine nearby. Each trip, we spend a lot of money between our accommodations, food and beverage, recreational activities and shopping. If we are not able to stay in short-term rental homes, we will no longer spend our family vacations in Palm Desert and take our business elsewhere. December 8, 2017 I strongly urge you to not proceed with this ban. Instead I recommend the City of Palm Desert enforce stricter regulations and fine noisy. overly disruptive people for any and all troublesome behavior. Thank you for your consideration! Sincerely, City 4 Pain Desert TS-510 Fred Waring Drive Patin Desert, CA 9r226o Attention City Council !)ear City Council Mewtberr December 8, 2017 Re: Short Tern Ientol.Dsw •My name is ; ,_ t -i;' t. 1:1.1 am a frequent vacationer in Palm Desert. Every year I spend torts of money at restaurants and stores on El Paseo. My family, friends and I very much enjoy all the benefits that short-term rental homes offer and prefer them over hotels. tt was brought to my attention that the City Council might ban short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2. I strongly urge City Council to reconsider as I feel this ordinance will have a huge impact on the City of Palm Desert's economy and culture. Palm Desert is a tourist city and as such I recommend they stay up to date with the latest vacation trends. Short-term rentals are my preferred vacation accommodation over hotels. If I am unable to enjoy all the benefits of a short-term rental in the City of Palm Desert then I will take my vacations elsewhere. I see no issue with short-term rentals especially since family and I always follow the rental laws guidelines. Please reconsider this ban and keep the City of Palm Desert an ideal vacation destination. Thank you! Sincerely, 1 % JrWi December 7.2017 VIA L\1AI1. City of Palm Desert 73-510 Frcd Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 \ttention: City Council Dear Honourable Council Members: have been informed that the City of Palm Desert is planning to ban short-term rentals in its residential areas as of December 31, 2019. As a frequent visitor of the City of Palm Desert. 1 am extremely concerned about this potential ban. My family and 1 travel to the City of Palm Desert annually and we find short-term rentals arc best suited for our family needs. We often travel with my dear grandmother who is 74 years old and requires the privacy, amenities and the comfort provided by short-term rental homes. Hotels do not provide the privacy, space and quiet that our family needs. am also concerned about and empathetic to the current short-term rental owners. If I were to make a long-term investment in the City of Palm Desert. I would hope that the ban would only apply to new short-term rental owners. This is extremely unfair and the ban will have a negative impact on all those investors who have committed to the City of Palm Desert. The existing short- term rentals should be grandfathered! If this ban goes into effect, my family and 1 will no longer travel to the City of Palm Desert. Having the ability to choose an accommodation that suits my family's needs is crucial to my deciding where I travel. Such lack of consideration toward the existing short-term rental owners disappoints and mystifies me. I recommend that the City of Palm Desert resort to les, disruptive and damaging measure, to deal with noise complaints. "Thank you for time and consideration. Sincerely. Alina Chekh 105 3083 West 4"' Ave Vancouver. 13(' V6K 1R5 Stanley, Jane From: Michael Epstein <mepstein@shaw.ca> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2017 6:31 PM To: CityhallMail Subject: Short Term Rental Ordinance Your Honour the Mayor and Honourable Council Members: Re: Short term Rental Ordinance Our family has been following the development of the above ordinance and I understand the City of Palm Desert voted 3-2 to ban new short term rentals in residential zones and to even go to the extent of disallowing existing permitted short term rentals as of December 31,2019. If this ban goes into effect, I strongly urge the Council to consider the economic ramifications which will follow. With the passing of the proposed ordinance, my family will not be visiting the Palm Desert area. We prefer to stay close to friends who own near El Paseo, close to shopping and dining amenities. Each vacation to the Desert, we choose to rent a home for 1-3 weeks as hotels do not provide a large enough space for our family. We are also considering retiring in Palm Desert and choose home rental over hotels to get the true sense of neighbourhood living. During our Palm Desert stays, we frequent restaurants in the area, buy groceries daily and enjoy the boutiques and shopping offered in the El Paseo area. Many of our friends also rent short term in Palm Desert and subsequently enjoy the shops and services that we do. We spend thousands of dollars during our vacation time which includes accommodation, food and beverage, recreation and shopping. If this short term rental ban comes into effect we will choose to stay elsewhere. strongly believe that not allowing short term rental in the Palm Desert area will reduce tourism and affect the economy. Please reconsider this ban. If the community concern is one of noise or disruption, please focus on penalizing those who are at fault and not those who choose beautiful Palm Desert to vacation in responsibly. Thank you for you consideration. Sincerely, Michael Epstein, M.D. 5586 Barnard Place, Richmond, BC Canada 1 Swartz, Kevin From: Patrick Percoski <Patrick.Percoski@Clarks.com> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2017 3:36 PM To: Swartz, Kevin Subject: Short Term Rental Ordinance Dear Kevin Swartz; This letter is written to express my support for Short Term Rentals in the city of Palm Desert. Since the recession, I have seen many homes in my neighborhood just behind El Paseo, remodeled and rented out, bringing tourism dollars into the local economy. Not to mention the many small businesses that are supported by the home rental market. Since renting my home in 2012, I estimate that I have poured over $150,000 into local businesses like Renova Solar, Desert Vacation Leasing, ABCO home remodeling services, Ace Hardware, Tidy Clean Services, JAH Landscaping, Leslie pool supplies, William Hayes pool services, and various other independent contractors; all to keep the home looking and operating better than the other homes in the rental area. This competitive environment to keep rental properties at their best, elevates the neighborhood and the home values. All the rental properties I am familiar with in my area are better maintained than many of the homes occupied full time by owners, this not only increases property values of all homes in the area, it brings much needed tax revenue to the city, and it makes the area more desirable for current home owners, future home owners and renters. As a homeowner in Palm Desert since 2012, I have complied with all the city laws of Palm Desert. I have a current permit issued by the city to rent the home on a short term basis and have done so for 5 years, while paying all city and hospitality taxes and not once having a complaint from any of my neighbors. I strongly disagree with the City's current stance on banning all STR's in my neighborhood. I believe in doing so, the City of Palm Desert exposes itself to a long, costly, and protracted legal battle with the homeowners that have complied with all laws and have posed no threat to the lifestyle of the residents in the Palm Desert community. An un intended consequence for making short terms rentals illegal; may hurt some current long term residents, if in the future they need to rent their homes due to financial hardship, as many are elderly and may have health issues. This could cause some to go into foreclosure and lose their life savings. Other cities have made adjustments to accommodate both STR's and permanent residents, without any city to my knowledge, out right shutting down STR's altogether. I think that move would have more serious ramifications legally and economically to the city of Palm Desert. However, I do believe that there should be better constraints and controls to help preserve the quality of the neighborhood and the lifestyle of the residents. I believe those home owners not permitted or professionally managed as to stay compliant with all laws; or those home owners that have consistent issues with law enforcement should be banned and lose their permits. The City of Palm Desert should require ALL property renters to be permitted through the city, and for ALL rental contracts to require the Palm Desert City laws regarding noise and nuisance ordinances, with penalties imposed to the renters for violation of any of these City Laws. All penalties collected should go directly to those in need that live in the community. Any home owner who rents their home and does not comply, risks losing their permit and steep fines. I believe this is a sensible approach to all home owners in the city of Palm Desert. I look forward to meeting you all at the December 14th City Council meeting. i Patrick Taylor Percoski Alerts South \Vest Territory Manager for Clarks Companies of North America C 951-218-2848 1 866-281-4731 ['attack perc oskt(rr Clarks cons This e-mail. and and files transmitted with it, is intended solell fur the use of the recipient(s) to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information If you are not the intended reuprent, please notify the sender immediately and delete the record from OUT computer or other device as its contents may he confidential and its disclosure, copying or distribution unlawful Clarks takes prey autions to prevent the transmission of electronic viruses but responsibility for screening incoming messages. and the nsk of such transmission. lies with the recipient Clarks. Registered in England number 141015 Registered office 40 High Street. Street. Somerset BA 16 OM Q Where the term Clarks appears it refers to C&J Clark Limited, C&J Clark International Limited. The Clarks Companies N A its Subsidiaries and Associate Companies This message has hero scanned for yrruses by RLuIC onirol 2 Stendell, Ryan From: RTPLocalInput <RTPLocalInput@scag.ca.gov> Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2017 9:10 PM To: Information Mail; Aylaian, Lauri Cc: Stendell, Ryan; 'tkirk@cvag.org'; Cheryll Dahlin; Klassen, Rachelle Subject: Bottom -Up Local Input and Envisioning Process for the 2020 RTP/SCS and RHNA Attachments: City of Palm Desert.pdf Dear Ms. Aylaian, Collaboration with all 197 local government partners within the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) will be essential for developing a vision that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental, and public health goals through the 2020 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and upcoming Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). To this end, SCAG staff are working to ensure that all jurisdictions are fully informed of the planning process and have clear and adequate opportunities to provide input. Please see the attached letter and associated work plan, which outline the road ahead and serve to initiate the Bottom - Up Local Input and Envisioning Process for the 2020 RTP/SCS and RHNA. We look forward to your ongoing participation in this effort. Should you have questions, please contact Kimberly Clark, Project Manager, at RTPLocalInput@scag.ca.gov or 213-236-1844. Sincerely, Ark KOME AJISE Director of Planning Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 1 }z Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: City Council Dear Honourable Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ordinance RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PALM DESERT "A 2011DEC -7 PM2:0I I understand that the City of Palm Desert is considering a ban on existing short-term rentals in the R1 and R2 zones as of January 1, 2020. I am writing to express my concern over this ban for the whole of Palm Desert. I am particularly concerned that the City would consider not allowing existing, permitted short-term rentals to be grandfathered, as one would expect. My family and 1 have stayed in short-term rental homes in south Palm Desert on several occasions in the past few years. We particularly enjoy the area because of the amenities, for shopping and dining that are within walking distance. We prefer to stay in a home so that we have sufficient room, privacy and areas for us to be together in a relaxed setting. We do not wish to stay in hotels as they do not provide a large space for our extended family vacations. We also do not like to stay in communities away far from commercial amenities. Therefore, if this ban goes into effect, I do not see us visiting Palm Desert as a tourist in the future. We prefer to stay in homes near shopping and dining amenities, which is what drew us to the El Paseo area. When we come to Palm Desert, we walk along El Paseo for breakfast, lunch and dinner several times per stay. We shop in the nearly clothing stores. We buy groceries nearby and we use various services. We spend thousands of dollars per trip between our accommodations, food and beverage, recreation and shopping. We will choose to stay elsewhere, perhaps in Palm Springs, Arizona or Florida where short-term rental homes are not prohibited. I strongly believe that Palm Desert will suffer a sizable economic decline if this ban is put into place. It likely will be unable to recover from such a decline. I urge you to reject this ban as it will substantially reduce tourism in the area, which as you know is a critical component of the local economy. While I understand that the residential neighborhood around El Paseo accommodates long-term residents, Palm Desert is a tourist destination where residents must expect a certain degree of visitor traffic. I suggest that the City of Palm Desert turn its attention to enforcing noise by-laws across all of Palm Desert as noisy, disruptive people should be penalized for their behavior. Please reconsider this ban before the economic damage caused by it is irreparable. Thank you for considering my position. Sincerely, cLal Name Address 2 s 17 ct l� 1. A-w"Pv--46 4 Al a c' 5 3 i Contact Information COPY TO F 1Q-7-17 ce•<A-Sv-AiNcLe0010 Stanley, Jane From: sarahjones [sarahjones@shaw.ca] Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2017 11:58 AM To: CityhallMail; Swartz, Kevin; sharepalmdesert@gmail.com; Aylaian, Lauri; Harnik, Jan; Nestande, Gina; Jonathan, Sabby; Kelly, Kathleen; Weber, Susan Marie; Stendell, Ryan Subject: Short Term Rental Ordinace proposed for Palm Desert City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: City Council Dear Honorable Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ordinance We understand that the City of Palm Desert voted 3-2 to ban any new short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2 immediately and to even disallow existing permitted short-term rentals in these two zones as of December 31, 2019. We are writing to inform the City Council that Palm Desert as a whole will suffer as a result of this short-sighted ban. We are particularly concerned that existing, permitted short-term rentals are not being grandfathered, as one would anticipate. If this ban goes into effect, thousands of short term rental guests will no longer be able to stay in this area of Palm Desert. These vacationers provide much needed dollars to the local economy: from gas stations, to restaurants, to golf courses, to retailers, to domestic workers and local services. We strongly believe that Palm Desert will suffer a sizable economic decline if this ban is put into place and ALL residents will suffer. We urge you to reject this ban as it will substantially reduce tourism in the area, which as you know is a critical component of the local economy. While we understand that the residential neighborhood around El Paseo accommodates long-term residents it is, also, a tourist destination that helps stimulates the local economy. We suggest that the City of Palm Desert turn its attention to the enforcing noise by-laws across all of Palm Desert as noisy, disruptive people should be penalized for their behavior, as happens in the majority of all types of neighborhoods across North America. Please reconsider this ban before the economic damage caused by it is irreparable. Thank you for considering our position. Sincerely, Sarah and Rob Jones 267 Castellana North Palm Desert, CA 92260 i Stanley, Jane From: Tammie Baker [tbaker@eckharttolle.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2017 11:55 PM To: Nestande, Gina; CityhallMail; sharepalmdesert@gmail.com; Aylaian, Lauri; Harnik, Jan, Stendell, Ryan; Kelly, Kathleen; Weber, Susan Marie Subject: [SPAM] - Support of STR in Zones R1 and R2 Dear Palm Desert City Council: I am writing to ask you to reconsider the ban on the existing Palm Desert STR permits in zones R-1 and R-2. At the very least, we ask you to allow existing permits be grandfathered in. In mid -October we learned through other homeowners via e mail (not the city), that our existing permit was at serious risk of being taken away. This came as a shock to us since we had not received any notification from the city of such a drastic proposed change to our livelihood. As permit holders, why didn't we received notification so that we could begin to garner support and make the necessary plans to attend meetings? The impact that this has on my family and many others must be taken into consideration. We want you to know that AFTER we were granted a permit from The City of Palm Desert, we decided to make a career change that takes us out of the desert for extended periods of time. We did not make this decision lightly and we would not have considered it without an STR permit. We tried to live in Palm Desert full time but the slow season from May -September proved difficult and challenging to us financially. We weren't able to make enough money to survive living there year-round. We made adjustments and the STR permit allowed us to keep our family home and work out of town when needed. Without the income from the STR we will most certainly lose our home. We love Palm Desert, our friends, church and neighborhood and we had no plans of permanently leaving but with this ban we are forced to consider this reality. We want you to know that after we were granted a permit, we invested over $100,000 dollars in improvements and renovations to ensure that our home was suitable and appealing for STR guests. We invested in remote pool controls, 'smart home' systems, security system, linens, dishes, furniture, safety gates, a website, advertising, maintenance, decor, landscaping and the list goes on. We would not have spent all of this money on these items if we would have known that the city had the power to strip us of a permit only two short years after being granted one. It will take us years to pay this initial investment off and does not increase the value of our home since most of these features are unique to STR home ownership. Granting a permit to a homeowner should come with bedrock assurance that we are not being played. To grant a permit, and then revoke it disgraces the concept of Rule of Law and creates unnecessary hardship to the Palm Desert homeowners/taxpayers. Occasionally disputes arise between neighbors because of a Short -Term Rental in a community. These disputes can best be handled individually and not with the heavy hand of banning them altogether and destroying our livelihood. We fail to understand how we are being punished when our home has never received any complaints. Additionally, we have paid thousands of dollars in TOT taxes, we employ a management company that is available 24/7, our neighbors have the contact information of our management company and they know who to call if there are any concerns. Each of our neighbors has provided us with their blessing and they support us because our home is beautiful and our guests are respectful of them. We have never received a noise complaint. We screen and vet all of our renters and wouldn't allow anyone irresponsible to put our home at risk. Most of our renters are retired Canadians/American Snowbirds who spend thousands of dollars in the desert during their stay. They want a place for their families and hotels with single rooms simply don't meet their needs. In May of 2011 the Palm Desert Country Club was in complete disarray, the home values plummeted and the golf course was bankrupt. There were a lot of homes in foreclosure and it was a very bleak situation. We invested in our neighborhood and since that time, house prices have increased and the city is thriving. For those that argue that STR's lower house prices must look at the facts. The evidence proves that having STR's in a resort community brings about a healthy economy and strong/thriving housing market. It is the job of clear sighted decision -makers to consider all involved and we are relying on you to do just that. Thank you for time and consideration. Tammie Baker 76574 Florida Ave Palm Desert, CA 92211 Warm Regards, Tammie Baker Executive Assistant to Eckhart Tolle tbaker(@eckharttolle.com cell: 604-440-4707 2 December 4, 2017 To: Kevin Swartz Associate Planner, City of Palm Desert Re: Short -Term Rentals To Whom it May Concern, Nearly three years ago my husband and I were able to fulfill a lifelong dream, purchasing a modest Palm Desert home for weekends, vacations, and potential retirement. Because we are not wealthy, this extraordinary lifestyle would not be possible without the ability to offset expenses with rental income during part of the year. We believe everyone is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of their home: we certainly value that experience ourselves, and carefully screen our vacation rental guests to ensure nothing about their stay(s) will disrupt the neighborhood in any way. Our house has NEVER been the subject of neighbor complaints. But while I empathize with my neighbors who are disturbed by so-called "party houses," -- and am privately horrified that any responsible homeowner would be so cavalier about such a valuable asset -- 1 worry deeply about the divisive conversation currently taking place regarding short-term rentals in Palm Desert. I believe STRs are an important part of our local economy, and welcome stronger enforcement measures on the city's part. I feel a few "bad apples" (especially investors who own multiple properties for the sole purpose of operating year-round STRs) are spoiling it for everyone. It disturbs me that numerous neighbors demonize EVERYONE who operates an STR, without differentiating those of us who operate legally, respectfully, and out of financial necessity. Speaking of finances, the city benefits greatly from responsibly managed STRs. We compliant owners collect and remit TOT taxes, and our upscale properties offer a lodging alternative that draws visitors to Palm Desert, rather than staying in other desert cities. The guests we rent to are given a list of host -recommended restaurants, shopping and activities that ALL lie within city limits, and increase tourism revenue for Palm Desert. We employ Valley residents for year-round maintenance of our home, at a far greater frequency than would be required for mere personal use. I strongly feel the proposed ban is not an effective solution. Eliminating ALL STR units will unfairly penalize law-abiding residents, part- and full-time. The Coachella Valley has, for decades, been supported and largely defined by its seasonal residents and visitors. An outright STR ban creates a dangerous precedent that would radically change the economic engine driving our region! Vacation rental permits should be based upon a HOMEOWNER'S ABILITY TO RESPONSIBLY MANAGE THE PROPERTY. Stronger enforcement, including additional code enforcement officers and harsh penalties, is key to protecting our quality of life. **Please remember, disruptive behavior is the problem, and is just as likely to be committed by long-term renters and owners. I urge you to consider measures, that, for example 1) Create a minimum stay requirement that eliminates the one- and two -night stays that account for disruptive weekend parties, and 2) Enforce stringent penalties based upon the number of substantiated (i.e. documented in -person by police) violations. I want the city to have the tools it needs to shut down the bad guys. I do not want the city to take property rights away from those who have done nothing wrong. Thank you for your time, Sincerciw Se'pliarY1�a les ii,769 01 December 5, 2017 City of Palm Desert Jan Harnik- Mayor Sabby Jonathan — Mayor Pro Tem Kathleen Kelly — Council Member Gina Westande — Council Member Susan Marie Weber — Council Member RECEI CITY CLERK VSEOFFICE PALM DESERT 2017 DEC -7 PM 2: 00 Dear Members of the City Council, I have been a part time resident of Palm Desert for the last 15 years and will be making my Palm Desert home, my permanent residence in 2018. I attended last month's council meeting as an interested citizen of this community who is not a permitted STR owner. However, I support their right to rent their homes on a short-term basis. During the meeting, I learned many things that I and some of my neighbors were not aware of. Many of my neighbors were not aware that before 2012, STR's were not allowed but that the prior members of the city council passed an ordinance that allowed it and at that time there was no time limit on the length of those permits. I agree that there should be no more permits issued until this major conflict among our neighbors and city is resolved. I appreciated the two current members of the council who felt that the permit owners should either be allowed more time (longer than 24 months) to end the rentals or allow them to exist/ be grandfathered in. The permit would end when the house was sold and the new owners would not be allowed to rent short term. From the comments made by many residents on both sides, it was apparent that the STR permits and non -permitted STR's have not been enforced properly and that there is not a dedicated office, officer or position in the city to handle the issues that have arisen. The STR's in my neighborhood have not caused any problems. The owners of these homes have strict rules that the tenants must adhere to and are there (or a representative) for any issues that should arise. I believe these are permitted STR's and that most of the problems are arising out of STR's that are not permitted. The fact that the city has not gone after those who are operating illegally is baffling. I find it troubling that the STR permit holders were not advised prior to the city council meetings that this was an upcoming issue that would be voted on. The businesses/restaurants that rely on the tourist dollar and the brick and mortar businesses on El Paseo, were not aware of the STR vote. Most troubling was the council member who made the statement (which I am paraphrasing) "Hotels do not want to build in Palm Desert because there are too many STR's." Does the city of Palm Desert prefer the revenue of the hotels to their citizens right to use their property as they see fit under the existing law? I am not discounting those homeowners who have a problem with unruly renters, they should be heard also and a fair compromise reached. Giving the STR's till December 2019 and not encouraging proper enforcement of the permit requirements and noise ordinances, is not fair. I urge the city council to go back to the drawing board and start this process over. You rt ly, B.rbara Marx 73-290 Desert Rose Palm Desert, CA 92260 1 4461il The Salon RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PALM DESERT. CA 2011 DEC . 7 PM 2: 01 HAIR CARE • SKIN CARE NAIL CARE MAKEUP SERVICES December 6 2017 Palm Desert City Council 73510 Frd Waring Drive Palm Desert , Ca 92260 To Whom it May Conctrn: Re: Short -Term Rentals... /760.341.4641 meg®jrussellthesalon.com The Salon MEG FIRESTONE OWNER/MANAGER 72-996 EL PASEO PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 www.jrussellthesalon.com My name is Meg Firestone and I am the owner of J Russell The Salon located at 72996 El Paseo Palm Desert, Ca. My city license number is 00-00000682. I represent 51 additional Palm Desert City Licenses that do business in my beauty salon as independent contractor beauty salon professionals. We have all experienced a great increase in our business these past 8 years and noticably during the quieter summer months of May thru October each year when the winter visitors have returned to their homes. I track our guests and ask them where they come from and where they are staying. I have been very pleased to see that they are staying throughout Palm Desert in Short -Term Rental Locations that give them the opportunity to experience Palm Desert and all that it has to offer. I notice that a great many of them are finding their locations thru VRBO and Home Away as well as a very popular word of mouth. I have never had any problems with these guest and am thrilled to see them come back annually for their family vacations and quick get aways. I do believe that enforcement of the rules that are currently in place is the answer to the problems that some neighborhoods have experienced. These landlords should receive fines and loose their privileges while not penalizing the "good landlords" that have invested in real estate and beautified their properties to enhance these neighborhoods in Palm Desert. Being a local Palm Desert business I realize that if these guests go to cities other then Palm Desert we, the business owners and entrepreneurs will be the losers to new and growing business opportunities. On December 14 2017 Please vote to enforce the current laws and not to BAN short-term vacation rentals in many Palm Desert neighborhoods. Y TO eterin 7-- Sincerely. Meg Firestone, Salon Owner •J 72-996 EL PASEO • PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 P 760.341.4641 • F 760.773.4756 • www.jrussellthesalon.com To: PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL; City Attorney From: Lesley Miller, Esq. resident & property owner December 5, 2017 Re: Present Controversy re Short -Term Rentals My input to present controversy follows meetings with Tracey Jackson, Esq. (licensed in Canada) and other homeowner/landlords in R1 & R2. (I have been licensed in the State of California for 35 years and am a resident of Palm Desert since 2007. 1 own three single-family homes in South Palm Desert, two of which are rented to a "master" landlord for management. I participated in formulating the 20-year City Plan and have served and currently serve on the Art in Public Places Commission as Vice -Chair. I have expended volunteer energies in favor of the current effort re the undergrounding of poles/wires that remain in the City. Foremost, I have the interests of the City in mind and have minimal economic interest in the outcome of the controversy i.e. I did not purchase with the intent to rent and will probably simply sell my two extra properties if the Council imposes the Ban.) 1. As you most probably know, Cities are required to impose the "least intrusive means" upon their residents to address their regulatory objectives. Here, I understand that the "blue shirts" complain of Noise and extra new people "next door". Noise ordinances with appropriate enforcement should address the issue adequately. (i.e., set a decibel level and enforce it; set a maximum person per bedroom limit and at least see what happens?) Try e.g. a one year experimental "maximum City effort" plan? Ask the "blue shirts" to itemize their issues and formulate a regulation to address each issue with the experimental enforcement period to see what happens. 2. You might inquire of the blue shirts: "Exactly how do you propose that the City compensates for the lost revenue and visitor dollars?" (Tracey has the stats.) 3. "Equal Protection." The HOA's are NOT exempt from City regulation, in my opinion. The appropriate inquiry is: Do the more intrusive City ordinances 1 "Trump" the HOA's lesser -restrictive rules? This is an "equal protection"/ Constitutional law argument. Why should the single family owners be treated more restrictively than the owners within the HOA's? Treat all homeowners within City limits equally. The fact that the City does not collect the tax from the HOA's should not impact the fact that the HOA owners are subject to same ordinances as all others in the City. (Also, of course, when imposing fines, all owners should be treated the same for the same offense and STR's in R1 & R2 should not be targeted for "disparate treatment".) Similarly, it is always wrong to single out certain classes of owners for especially - restrictive rules (especially if they result in severe economic loss to those singled out as they do in Palm Desert. (Here, the R1 & R2 non-HOA owners) unless the City (1) has tried and has exhausted Least Intrusive Measures and has (2) very persuasive reasons for imposition (of the Ban). "Blue Shirt" requests will not satisfy those standards insofar as I am aware. 4. My understanding of the enactment of our "20-year Plan" is that it includes City policy to encourage Diversity (all ages, all types, all levels of education, entertainment venues, etc.) as well the goal to encourage tourism. I particularly like the fact that we wish Palm Desert to become a "central" place in the desert community, literally, a "hub" for tourism, perhaps with a central plaza at some future date (my suggestion). We are gaining on all fronts, to my understanding and thanks to you. (My sister in Massachusetts reports that she hears the name Palm Desert as much, or more, than she hears "Palm Springs" mentioned these days as an alternative to Palm Beach!) In 2016-17, Desert X focused on more than one site for public art installation here in our City and, to my understanding and with my participation, will do so again in 2019. STR's are ENTIRELY compatible with this philosophy. I urge the Council to re -consider the "Ban" and suggest that the Council impose a time frame (e.g. one year) during which clear rules and clear enforcement and uniform fines and uniform rules for everybody in the City, without singling out STR's in R1 & R2 and non-HOA's. ("equal protection"/ "due process" / "notice") 2 Then re -visit the issues at a noticed date. "Table" the "Ban" issues until the least intrusive measures have been tried and constitutional challenges have been fully vetted. I am available for conference if you wish. Sincerer Lesley Miller 3 December VIA EMAIL , 2017 ' r E u!r,ac:cr i�= , y; c ty c,: iharnikacityofoalmdesert.orq anestandeCC�cityofoalmdesert.orq; City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Dear City Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ban I am a visitor to the City of Palm Desert and I am writing to inform City Council that I am very opposed to the city's recent vote to ban any new short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2 immediately and to even disallow existing permitted short-term rentals in these two zones as of December 31, 2019. I felt compelled to write to City Council as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. I cannot believe that the city would not grandfather the short-term rentals who already have permits now; that is most unfair. If this ban goes into effect, I feel strongly that Palm Desert will suffer an economic decline as tourists who stay in short-term rentals in these R1 and R2 areas do not wish to stay in hotels. I am concerned that the City will be turning tourists away who may never return. Palm Desert will lose the dollars that those tourists spend on dining, groceries, wine, retail and recreation. Palm Desert should be looking to improve its tourism, not weaken it. Please do not go ahead with this ban as it will decrease tourism to Palm Desert. I think that the City of Palm Desert should enforce noise by-laws across all of Palm Desert as noisy, disruptive people should be fined for their bad behavior. Those noisy renters will think twice if they know they'll be fined! Please reject this ban before it's too late for Palm Desert. Thank you for reading my letter. Sincerely, Name Address 7 3 kL a 0 /"/`�;��, Contact Information / December , 2017 VIA EMAIL .. y ,:,; !:(1, :•'i aplute',erI „i; a .0 (: •:} ). Iharnikcitrofoalmdesert.orq anestandeacitrofoalmdesert.ora: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Dear City Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ban I am a visitor to the City of Palm Desert and I am writing to inform City Council that I am very opposed to the city's recent vote to ban any new short-term rentals in residential zones R1 and R2 immediately and to even disallow existing permitted short-term rentals in these two zones as of December 31, 2019. I felt compelled to write to City Council as I am so concerned about the future of Palm Desert with this ban. I cannot believe that the city would not grandfather the short-term rentals who already have permits now; that is most unfair. If this ban goes into effect, I feel strongly that Palm Desert will suffer an economic decline as tourists who stay in short-term rentals in these R1 and R2 areas do not wish to stay in hotels. I am concerned that the City will be turning tourists away who may never return. Palm Desert will lose the dollars that those tourists spend on dining, groceries, wine, retail and recreation. Palm Desert should be looking to improve its tourism, not weaken it. Please do not go ahead with this ban as it will decrease tourism to Palm Desert. I think that the City of Palm Desert should enforce noise by-laws across all of Palm Desert as noisy, disruptive people should be fined for their bad behavior. Those noisy renters will think twice if they know they'll be fined! Please reject this ban before it's too late for Palm Desert. Thank you for reading my letter. Sincerely, Name Address Contact Information Lk_ ve-1r December , 2017 i_',,. < n -�: �� h •r _ ',K1F}l<, tlis,:.,' gnestande@citvofpalmdesert.org City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: City Council Dear Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ordinance I own a local business in Palm Desert. I am very concerned about this proposed ban on short- term rentals in the R1 and R1 neighborhoods. I am concerned about the future of Palm Desert and in particular, El Paseo, if this ban is in effect. I am in support of Short Term Rentals throughout the City of Palm Desert, in every neighborhood, not just in planned residential communities. 0ur business will suffer immense losses if this ban goes into effect. Much of our business comes from the short-term rental guests who stay in homes in the R1 and R2 neighborhoods. El Paseo is already experiencing a decline with many empty spaces. We need these visitors to short-term rentals in R1 and R2 to keep El Paseo and other Palm Desert businesses alive. Short-term rentals have revived the City of Palm Desert and keep the economy going year-round. These renters spend their money in the city of Palm Desert and sustain local businesses. This ordinance is contrary to the best interests of all of Palm Desert and I strongly urge the City Council to reject it on second reading. Thank you for your consideration. Name 7Att(0-nej7 , � �C Address 1 � � ) {`CWC) (( • `` Phone number-->Z-7 .2 cP ? 1 �(pA Email ?D9t('(K- SICOvIA Name of business NC--A� December 2017 gnestande@citvofoalmdesert.org City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: City Council Dear Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ordinance I own a local business in Palm Desert. I am very concerned about this proposed ban on short- term rentals in the R1 and R1 neighborhoods. I am concerned about the future of Palm Desert and in particular, El Paseo, if this ban is in effect. I am in support of Short Term Rentals throughout the City of Palm Desert, in every neighborhood, not just in planned residential communities. Our business will suffer immense losses if this ban goes into effect. Much of our business comes from the short-term rental guests who stay in homes in the R1 and R2 neighborhoods. El Paseo is already experiencing a decline with many empty spaces. We need these visitors to short-term rentals in R1 and R2 to keep El Paseo and other Palm Desert businesses alive. Short-term rentals have revived the City of Palm Desert and keep the economy going year-round. These renters spend their money in the city of Palm Desert and sustain local businesses. This ordinance is contrary to the best interests of all of Palm Desert and I strongly urge the City Council to reject it on second reading. Thank you for your consideration. Namebps clec6u141A �� 2 Address 3S�S �i4'16WA bk. Phone nujiber 4O • l�' Email c2.-t'ol2 . cm''`'.„ Name of business pow/5 y L" L1 Picion b£ s £ gc-T, CA December 2017 • gnestande(citvofoalmdesert.om t•• City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: City Council Dear Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ordinance I own a local business in Palm Desert. I am very concerned about this proposed ban on short- term rentals in the R1 and R1 neighborhoods. I am concerned about the future of Palm Desert and in particular, El Paseo, if this ban is in effect. l am in support of Short Term Rentals throughout the City of Palm Desert, in every neighborhood, not just in planned residential communities. Our business will suffer immense losses if this ban goes into effect. Much of our business comes from the short-term rental guests who stay in homes in the R1 and R2 neighborhoods. El Paseo is already experiencing a decline with many empty spaces. We need these visitors to short-term rentals in R1 and R2 to keep El Paseo and other Palm Desert businesses alive. Short-term rentals have revived the City of Palm Desert and keep the economy going year-round. These renters spend their money in the city of Palm Desert and sustain local businesses. This ordinance is contrary to the best interests of all of Palm Desert and I strongly urge the City Council to reject it on second reading. Thank you for your consideration izvi Ar 7c.7 ee, CX_ Name /1 1 C 0 ,0, j2( K 1-7 Address ZA c ll � a l� Phone number (7) 776- � S Email / Name of business ��4 r \ (,'yQ 12 I /S 4/j December , 2017 gnestandePcitvofoalmdesert.ors City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: City Council Dear Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ordinance I own a local business in Palm Desert. I am very concerned about this proposed ban on short- term rentals in the R1 and R1 neighborhoods. I am concerned about the future of Palm Desert and in particular, El Paseo, if this ban is in effect. i am in support of Short Term Rentals throughout the City of Palm Desert, in every neighborhood, not just in planned residential communities. 0ur business will suffer immense losses if this ban goes into effect. Much of our business comes from the short-term rental guests who stay in homes in the R1 and R2 neighborhoods. El Paseo is already experiencing a decline with many empty spaces. We need these visitors to short-term rentals in R1 and R2 to keep El Paseo and other Palm Desert businesses alive. Short-term rentals have revived the City of Palm Desert and keep the economy going year-round. These renters spend their money in the city of Palm Desert and sustain local businesses. This ordinance is contrary to the best interests of all of Palm Desert and I strongly urge the City Council to reject it on second reading. Thank you for your consideration. Name ehk,MSC<` Address y2-2yo c aN % �r n W 4 Sk G ?Q i✓ r� De s c--4- C A 9 2.7- �� Phone number 7 L6 — 1-7 $ Email M.cv(,A. C+I-Au vcrz2ov .^JC4- Name of business 04-y-4�,,��} 41/A 55 a fl th""''�"`�� December , 2017 gnestande@citvofoalmdesert.ora. City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: City Council Dear Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ordinance I own a local business in Palm Desert. I am very concerned about this proposed ban on short- term rentals in the R1 and R1 neighborhoods. I am concerned about the future of Palm Desert and in particular, El Paseo, if this ban is in effect. 1 am in support of Short Term Rentals throughout the City of Palm Desert, in every neighborhood, not just in planned residential communities. Our business will suffer immense losses if this ban goes into effect. Much of our business comes from the short-term rental guests who stay in homes in the R1 and R2 neighborhoods. El Paseo is already experiencing a decline with many empty spaces. We need these visitors to short-term rentals in R1 and R2 to keep El Paseo and other Palm Desert businesses alive. Short-term rentals have revived the City of Palm Desert and keep the economy going year-round. These renters spend their money in the city of Palm Desert and sustain local businesses. This ordinance is contrary to the best interests of all of Palm Desert and I strongly urge the City Council to reject it on second reading. Thank you for your consideration. Name W c5 t0o0\D h .f Address ),l I L Adze S�'s Phone number (j S 7 _ p 3 Z7 Email pCSei k.)n,1-eZ V'\ Levp , Covh Name of business Dt s et k k i, 00n6 i►tii December , 2017 1:I.y•Ca'y�' i y? .'iC1. !. `_ :f:?ti ''f1C ;C_ _?, t! �<'�iil(�.S'.` �'f` ;i,'ii .Cnl tvc'1'.1:rrOt•-rrt org, gnestande@citvofpalmdesert.org, �iU.iJl�l<3!�'l.!i �•,).,lf.)< 'i�:._ '_?' ,i n(J�'.. 1_?,. . _• .. Lb C:i:".1 .!l'J�_l,ii..?�?„�\ ' .� 2• O1r, City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: City Council Dear Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ordinance I am employed by a local business in Palm Desert. I am very concerned about this proposed ban on short-term rentals in the R1 and R1 neighborhoods. I am concerned about the future of Palm Desert and in particular, El Paseo, if this ban is in effect. 1 am in support of Short Term Rentals throughout the City of Palm Desert, in every neighborhood, not just in planned residential communities. Our business will suffer immense losses if this ban goes into effect. Much of our business comes from the short-term rental guests who stay in homes in the R1 and R2 neighborhoods. El Paseo is already experiencing a decline with many empty spaces. We need these visitors to short-term rentals in R1 and R2 to keep El Paseo and other Palm Desert businesses alive. Short-term rentals have revived the City of Palm Desert and keep the economy going year-round. These renters spend their money in the city of Palm Desert and sustain local businesses. This ordinance is contrary to the best interests of all of Palm Desert and I strongly urge the City Council to reject it on second reading. Thank you for your consideration. Name Address Phone number Email Name of business to o RJO fr- -I1� C� ► A !CIA w AV w o R,U 40 V4(Lc 410 Q . u et - ALL vL.D 11P auc�' December , 2017 '. gnestande@cityofpalmdesert.org City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Attention: City Council Dear Council Members: Re: Short Term Rental Ordinance I am employed by a local business in Palm Desert. I am very concerned about this proposed ban on short-term rentals in the R1 and R1 neighborhoods. I am concerned about the future of Palm Desert and in particular, El Paseo, if this ban is in effect. I am in support of Short Term Rentals throughout the City of Palm Desert, in every neighborhood, not just in planned residential communities. Our business will suffer immense losses if this ban goes into effect. Much of our business comes from the short-term rental guests who stay in homes in the R1 and R2 neighborhoods. El Paseo is already experiencing a decline with many empty spaces. We need these visitors to short-term rentals in R1 and R2 to keep El Paseo and other Palm Desert businesses alive. Short-term rentals have revived the City of Palm Desert and keep the economy going year-round. These renters spend their money in the city of Palm Desert and sustain local businesses. This ordinance is contrary to the best interests of all of Palm Desert and I strongly urge the City Council to reject it on second reading. Thank you for your consideration. Name •3PhSUS v."� �y Address ( D (� GYP c� W a ✓� Phone number �� 0.) � 1 3 l 9 Email Name of business—.(G,i,\,��- 0 p �b I S � � i£l S)I l o6e Pl PIayfSaM'(/60L8lStiZ/elgo 010041ZWIII0X0) _J t 3 lUe411 )IUe41 le ro PL fip aS UV $ 1 Iun , N .. � ,,, - V: jM ki )M A c 2c U/) 5 - t A 3 YR ►H w o $ J 3. x 3 a C o. q A p a C Y N 2 ? in n c tRw i42 =`yvV A o - g_ a V O Y Y ] • 2 $ R33 N r. o y R 5 a 3 2 ! � t aiz Y N Y N 32 g 3 O Fe _ -- ? o o as o 3E, ag aRt I Nr O 341 I3 a§ 1 n 41 3 N r w • 05 r'1 W. ✓ A c_s`gn lie youea uo/ueo dead • 06e yZ JoopIxaN yoJeac IS pooMalpueO i. z. v f cD al 0 N r N Y 0 A Y i A Z Z m C ` 3 r' 0 aa 4 rlii w ro X 4 0 t� 9 3 n 4 4 I-7 $R33� N M :, 3.i h ' � t � n N 1( v o - E `- l i AWE- Zc Ct+: , 333 our M4 g V 3 3 a J M ��" Y ')I N �3 (�, W Y i l b, -r-- "IuG41 L iluc.`11 aiow aes "' I *splq aw anl6 0l lno 8W0O sa!ue woo luaJaipp peg pue Jos!npyawoH uo luk/6019grptfaifticeS yy pey Janeu RI -o6e gluow a l.un Mau a Ilelsu! JVAH uoldweyo 40 Aal laegollN pey I !H P6 4 IV 94- o 0)o o CD -v VC c ' ryTn%S 0 A s 3 o- o- o) o-ft - ) �- V j -c N .15 w' *L O tl)Q t�D CDa) n6.0 C ? c=-.G 0 W G ro 7 N• Q 7 0 ro r« o ro w ca O 3'°v,ZI o al to -, :+ V 0 clip o ° -4 a, Q, 0 7 0 ° �,3 0 -it', o ro ° -t a) 0° n 7 7 ° o o u o v 0- � 3 = 7 'Von o o et ° 00 5 .. Pt d_ c D ro o 0) ta �/�� O CD -. 7 V+ .� d ro n er lf, ro C 0° s o ao "° c 7 co1 CO 7 O C 0 oro 7 9,D tat . 7 3 o 0 A. p CO —1 r 0 % +' .� 13 Q 0 �, 73 off, la ca (0 3i v ro cW CO o. N W 0. CO �ro auaeN paluiad c 1 • iN, ','j\ ,) -- i -3 r :g0 v—,y .v 'ct 11 r --?, _ .1.., N °`;1 ---. t`A '1. ' 'c' I ` P i N N r 0 4 to l^ \ 1 CD a (D tn tit rn 3 CD EMI • ♦5 V ) V O co CD CD 3 r+ cet ralk 3 N CD Q -v t 13 el CD et irt d 3 i• -0o 14C • e+ 3 0 c. 2 °- N D s = N lD a, _ v+ D ro r 3 w —0 go,-....) ro .4 0 ro w O d c 3 n 0_ ` 7 (5- 0 (2 O n. 3 no vv. 3 — ..�+ n �� , 0 c -i1n1QNO:o; 0 03 04�3 3,3-0 a)fp 0 0440i co O co, O O O e, O (D fiu' n CL O O N CD cnD O O O 1% a aao . r3. c o 7 oa U � O h fD N 0)° 3 3 of D 0 in. C; VA "0 al O O 41 sago O. G CO -1 CIO 3 fi Ve O n 0 ? tD cv c o c \ --)e, CV -i l O 0 0 oat n3 a = �� to 3 3 N at 0 'n co v, ,-, N O 0) 0- 7 O- to N O. co rn N c9 � O ? -c) O 3 Co O (D N to O 3 ?co o N 00 0 CO3c t CO o d o N m `u. c nCO co -3 VI e r 0 °ov O G �v+ tD 3 O 7 5 4 .O tO �' + -4 co c 3 0 o V %° t CO ° a- N 0 to3 =• 4 v, 0 3 u" =+ o 3 fro s � v+ O O ea iDv+ N FeO 0- O N et 5 Si -o N S- 3 O a COco 3 tri co gw °o co 0 3cp 3: re s + - ,.c' CI\ i"'vt....- 13 5 .G. i‘ I su C� t. r (-4 t r~ p CD er` i� - IV "` tii y • 3 n ��� 130 12- d *. C • r* o CD 3 . . 0- o 0 c. 0 kr,.„2- D — � • ° - (0 o�� o ° °7 Z. 3 70 -0 cp 3 0 fp o os o nz Go c: • a 004 O ^ ? S. CD c O Cla C C 'CI f9 • O W 'V 03 o C w t 0 3 3 (I)o Z o p p N.Q =�( n 0) _ ▪ -G on 0 N CS ^� — iul '. d • Z O +R 0 % ''. t ,I 0 1 3 C - -• 3wN r);*9 0 O -o 1 0- wall I_ --+ O) AA'' //� 5- a V c �V� Nro, p n L'co 9() 0P & 3 - CD It �- r . A P_. c� 'c C?IQ F _ rta- 8 col Z? o • ra a,, ra a, .� ,may, z �- o Q o a, 0 0 -T Q} rD rp ^ v y a tD 0 \n ° 3 .D��ma "A • a "0 N a, - COD;Y° - 3r4 '. 0 1 a �12 • �' = �13 = Q (D n CD i Z = *N 3 CO = 3 Oft O• m a a� = ofa MO.. i a. o 0 3 c A .-. fD 3 rn ,„��=ten -o +0 54. co C> > i• �� 3 0 - 0 0-. to 4 co �� -0 • C o a) co m 3 0 0 N ^ ro • O G 0 tD %5 t!� . 03 % i c Dc . t v c") �0 '" N O 7 rr ' CO G i 1/4 0 CD O N 3 O� N al p f- N N O' co O- --r. e 3. O <D % , 0- O coi S O 0 0 G ig, cD VI O 3. 7 3 O" �? L O ICI Ij r-t v+CO O W 033O X • Q p't .4 el CI 0et0�. O t 0> %, 'O CD Ua O .VA et tfl L C12.5 et ? fD OA \3 vim+ % O O O d O d - 'Q - p 0 L � S 5 �Q C. O 4 .S.- rt.t ;`Pc co d • �� o �. SD o ev co 0 co I o s d 0 1 -o •Q to �. 03 n v+ o.• fro O et 3 3 0- m -' 0- N O 10 N ? m o i ro ? n 1A' o, o o 0 O rt ro - CD -a trig a)�.n 3a Nor'o) 0►3 0 IPP \ o- rr et.D.)0 cuo O L 7, ^la ^ a)ro O 0 Nor 3 • cow co'G 'O0.U° I_ O� Cl. v+ Cl. (o� o a -0 o 0 0 = o i o). o v+ to 0 0 CD er COI N °' �' ill two 3 u, o 0 0 '� o 0 �o 0 C. 0 4 ) ro ro�� CJ t� rr 5 if, tT 3 -, o 5 o C. z, a' o o `'.. et O 0 u+ '7p 6 CA O O N� O o -o 0 L 0 O m '3 y _•• sa \ Pe. st (1) 1 '� C tD es 0 et tlp 0 iZ 0- C 0 co t 4- 'D a2 z N 3 o 0. N co o .fit w 73 0 cO 5 '0 N ` n 3 f O ', v' . -G 3 O �I 1 O O -t fD N 0- N 0) lAk ° O (D co cD = O 3 0 Oa .3 Cra o00 1 =% W Q 3 3 ; o 'Z p ° p o X. o ent cO co c m k �' ca cf' coo 5 o- °a0o s3 3 Ooc 733 0 � ro - 0 N 0 ro ,3O- O N O 0 0 Q 13 73, � I N Q- G ON v+ v CO -� 0 CO 3'� (D 00 co i• 0 N C' c-' tD m o 3 n. '� 01? ro.-t 0 ov+ o (D v o n �► n (D N 0- 0> ?, . ( Dm . A : . 4 a r lk! a • • : f. . -36) • 0,20 ��30-offco 0 co lAw o- - GA 0 % 0 cD (D O -' (o ;�_ C.0, 0 O -(D-.0 50.- 3 m ° \ e,4' O Q o- O r Q eD v+ �+ 1• -o - ro � Ca O ? p 04 v O L oa ill (moo 3 rc ` m e w 0 : o o (rD o' o o ,.'r et o `0 o , °V '7p 6 • la N cc. O kIN co -o 0 N CO 0 N 0 N 0 1 0 t m o o (.0° ca 0 13 "' a • n o t0 ro G f 3 G-a - tee, S 0-� v` '` -o CO 13 Ca o O 3 et • O. Ca „ .a cs C. O u 3 0 va tP Ca 1 i• 0 N 0 A 0 13) A 6.0 tck C. -o Q to re i C "a �� °Z�� ?- 3 co yr m co r / -4) C. ti -- '� 0 5 g Co . 1 r \N V1 'A Z �' _ S r -4 - r-'5 r— �1 N V. d) \/ s C. — ,I, .r 1:1 aup et; CD O • a 0 a. m • ro o 0 3 Z Q 2 _. T - O 0 r� V• —1 N I.-('NOOa Q. (1) 3 a FP o ro (1 n CD 3 co a v+ a. -• = r�+h • ��"0 (1) 0 ro —a ao w o at, 0 3 4. `° °-' �� von 17,..p. Z. 5•\ n � 0 Q .4, ,0Oo ro vi -4, co 7 =" --I rr �' to o 13. ro r 3 73 c N ro o v n. 3 3 m n y et Z 7 2, c _ zS „ cfp A O 7 -.c t 4 ; N i --•A Y -:.. € Czt, j,, a, ' �' -�1 r` 0 c.� --.3O in 0. 73 ?, "% rv0 U.-1 e+N o� 0ii, I 0 ‘.N.; 30)3 al CI- _C- N (9 -- rib ~ P. 3 7 LA 13 l� O. o no 73 G 3 (03 ro !in) Q; @.)� �� N0 4 I ?�3ti) es CD - 0 ter• et. coo G f? °rt " y .v 03 `VI 33 oe,p °f:-1'et � 3 et CO 0 co Si- 3 c; c 5 d- u. • a. f co i• O 5 o - o 94. - i 130 N A tO 0 et S 0 co co co ( rA) er CQ (L\ 17 v g iIID a. NI V 9 CD d z I - 3 i• C O• ^S. 0iv !.• * c w c G A F IT2 .R.• rs al 3 N c 3 S0 (A) g -4 or tow a a 0o3a m� g t 3 ,vzi x a, aCO .g ( A 3 ss c ;y o �,� 0 Off. m '' o CD ggg.^ mo r.o0.� -c� gii c -T 373 � in ri. tu Ai 0 0 3 3 Iv 0) p 'a,IDco�. o CDG M .cN • o Ai S a 5.8_9 in s-1 ire �. 3 OD ds y Ito y33 a a ""i -4 w �i N C O ,t ? "c. C 3a;3 � � C N //� ri a Ise 3 S (0 o 38 0 d p�j 3 a irl la a 230 Er to ID 3 3 -c 0w 4 W OJ� a N � coo a d L.) ° ek o eirto A v. 0 co 0 s O. o 0 o ;00 . r. a0 o o SS ° to t'D d -0 co 33 er 'n 4 N ¢ O 3.03 cQ u+ o � .14 CA 3 "3 o CO d ° v+ 0 n o cr fi N -vtD co CP, o co 3Q 4' 91 re co ,o7 '•! "ew1s• \ 49L fT d6/7 f f Ab, 1( L �) l,Cy "Lio-)• 1 ,)914/ Co r3?i_7119 1. -m ,.d 2J7LZZ_ / f /cfcnpUn w �` L i, ,roS /, oJ� ( 1 1 s. yeW3 auoyd ssaappd aamuamS •sleluaa WJal Boys aeuew Alalel of salmi luawaz.iolua pamequa luawaldwl •Z pue `uasap wled ul sluedn»o pue sluaplsaI Ile iol Awouoaa ayl ulelsns Aagl se za pue to sauoz u! AIie'jnnllied pue uasap wled lnoyanoigl sleluaa weal lao4S molIV t :ol liasaa wled 3o A310 aql uollnad'paualsJapun agl'am .6tOZ 't£ Jagwa3aa Jo se pasaa ailed ul Za pue to sauoz ul sleluaa weal- Jogs 2ullslxa IIe aleulwlla of pue Alalelpawwl sleluaa wJal boys aininj ueq of a3ueulpao ue uo gallon sl lJasaa wled jo Haunop AID au auleN pawu!ad a}ea JOJ pauoimad u0131/ punoi pee pue tiewwns uor;ad pesaa wied ;noyf noi41 siqued waal VoLS jo 1ioddns ui uomad n 3. co 0, -fl • 3 o co ,fin vi o 3 v'a CO 7 9, a N (D o Q o- N OP i o 3 0 CO N co 92* two N_ c"93 SA) 01 e 3to A S a 3 2 13 !t• 0 z N 8 0 0 3 zA O 0 1e 3 a tD a e. 4 g 0 els • O Quo t el ro co rotcl et 03 VI a o 0 ro o 3 0 (3) " 0 al 3 t3' c3p .G ro " d 0 0 O O tD°• 3 � tD o O m eta Sit y 01 ro Ve N\ G r -• -2 3 2_ z Q , i f 279i%09Z N 'e Q N- 4- oc_f�� SO�d6 2)02.4"‘ t.J\N3 1- 1, etN 1 J /o S ; n Z � OQ_�l o C_� aweN paluud 0. a, CD cn cn 0 3 0 .io j pauon ad uo!pV N 1--1 C N N -1 ID C O S N D a m -o * 0 m m d. f c = n mVI 7 S O rD • 3 c m m t" .- n ria_z CU 00 3 - m x m a < m m ,13 ter 3 m O o r! D▪ ID =. to O N to o w ,* = =- s 0 fD m 0 m 4 N• to aDo n c < • a3 : c r o, o0 O 73 • 03• 3 cu' n F. O -- . c m (D 5 Q ID m Na j j N of • a d o N n 7 m 3 O 70 ,m-r � a� 0Q. s 3 C- 4 m C N c 3/3 - m 5 c d 5 m CA m Q. 0 3 0 O rn ID 0�1 N ttn • "" ,m� g 3 N • Z7 0- o m rpm, 0 m of m to to m J. S 3 m Crrn < m Q. W .0r ~ m volw MIME VI 0 2p, O CD • CD rt cn 0 to 0 W 3 0 cn D t, G Z ir_S- ea n 1 �r L ---) ir —5 \/ &() S rDa r 'rt .,--..z..., 7 1 J t r i •J 6- G 1 ..---` � iF ,c. L -. .,<-\ ,c: t... C7„ " C r-, awe palU!Jd c O rn 3 OEM .ioj pauog ad uo!PV co a 13) 0 3 CL N o' N — S no CD a) 0 m vi ((DD d • n (D - O = co O� ,p D o < 3 5• ,;; c CD c cn 1. 0 CD 3 CD E to c 0 3 CD vg 3 co, a m3 r i o q co' ro cD 0 CD so Z �o c a a3 C M a' CO N w -IC, N !"' C7��p t!t CO 0 3 - d,i c 3 0, C co ? o m ?; . 74 N. a, O a, ...1 Il at`° a) at 41 3 3 0- X. m c � 0 C?_ 0- • -+., R A ob �9 O� m p crl tto p d .. O . ..5 .4 .may ? '+ N CO A �. G n O "i o o No Z n o o 5 a r+ tO Z W itA 3 7 Co r, (1) N '5° o V T to = n. n nil 3 3 n 73 _., 0 7i a a tD D C7 c N r` y. til -3 A- ?IV a, 0- COa to egP N N 61 N rp 0)Q . O 0) I.)1 ° N co C73 3 s. ro ¢ v ..< \ wi▪ r;CO \ - z \ L v1 a_ 0 a) L Ts c a) ce E L 0 H t Q t 0 0 N ■3 CD 0. 4-0 tF3 .45 E E a- 0 CR7 s71 0 9i U CC C 0 G3 .to u C.1 0 w 0 ea t tU N 9.1 co CI CV -0 ea 1-1 ce QZ 0 N N co lam 0) ray t 0 as a1 ftS 715 E 0) 0 0 ra cri 0 Ur t tv 0 ea 1 C C' a RS ❑ 0. Pe vt VT col o E E 0 a 0 4 L >. 0 c ..� s ) 0 U afl4/7 E (1)a,0 4.4 -, Q. E E 0 m 9.1 c r 0 C CJ c (,(\ 0Q, (,\ to r-, Petition in Support of Short Term Rentals Throughout Palm Desert Petition Summary and Background Action Petitioned For Date Printed Name stwir Moor- 11-4►7r-114 LuKc dvi tr(4 J1I W/-041411'9- i t 5 6'44) .0a(gP Vier Le Si The City Council of Palm Desert is voting on an ordinance to ban future Short Term Rentals immediately and to eliminate all existing Short -Term Rentals in zones R1 and R2 in Palm Desert as of December 31, 2019. We, the undersigned, petition the City of Palm Desert to: 1. Allow Short Term Rentals throughout Palm Desert and particularly in zones R1 and R2 as they sustain the economy for all residents and occupants in Palm Desert; and 2. Implement enhanced enforcement rules to fairly manage Short Term Rentals. Signature Address c u1 1L$j° MIoeD Phone -6077L! 256 6 146 -115-2yrI5 ru eNs tv 1. Email 43402(V1 r n!U LPv D1020 -3S� 1 0,C 0.L .11`A.(11R 0neCt;D I & II Cal c60«2c tc;-- at/2i ly( 4cI (;) �l:>J// p �,r 1Zo3c,{{-0/^e V`-� C►�fi ��r.�,�,��n� tS� '` "' (6`764d/ D(0�d O4), `pr, es,7d/Pial 00 -CO M, i�r"C �Ic�cia(al,/(PLc:e ice • /;4°L CD 3 c j o ¢.2 co o oCP r•J�, C. o o ro 'a i ;.-) `,C 4 D GPI �� 0 0d c 3 0 73 3 S m e-- O co (moo co 0 "+•h/� ro 00 N (i • m1. '3Q- N3 o ti c'• G Q Ai, 0% 0 t l 1 J \o •% s �\ tD \:; ro :� -, 0 -a 0 73 a 3 3 oI(0 to -' w % 5 t ° ©\ .4 c)-0` 0 c. �. e�n/� i 'U cif, 3 N v 0 ;.o 0 e N 77 70 t- 3 ,c Ci co g ca IS 3 O > r- -z m Q, CP , 5-3 c 0 9to c O- S f' ft -, 0 > c?o ^' o ..h con N to 0 0 c O +' N n Si).)3 713 c ta -aU) �� 0 m N > to cet t (f} 3 54 O e.0 1 > 3 ii y cT ro d• Cl. O 3 o c n ' c •,mod. v �r�C. !� a { d ? .10 (2 v 3 0.' 3o •0 C. o o 3 0) 73 13 Cr it \Y4 i \CO ill o n & q $ k $ IDo \ ® u) CD A atr tt Z. , 5 0.. °\ / \ 7 t kk 5 ..-..- ,e s"M tO -4 m -4 W f ° 0 0 % k % % let et » 5 13 y $ a 0 3 ro to 3v, z 3 0 G } CO .& (0 $ » Petition in Support of Short Term Rentals Throughout Palm Desert Petition Summary and Background Action Petitioned For Date Printed Name 544 The City Council of Palm Desert is voting on an ordinance to ban future Short Term Rentals immediately and to eliminate all existing Short -Term Rentals in zones R1 and R2 in Palm Desert as of December 31, 2019. We, the undersigned, petition the City of Palm Desert to: 1. Allow Short Term Rentals throughout Palm Desert and particularly in zones R1 and R2 as they sustain the economy for all residents and occupants in Palm Desert; and 2. Implement enhanced enforcement rules to fairly manage Short Term Rentals. Signature tet f 4 ress Phone 040 Gtktr/Ye rz 16d )6° 'G ; .�� <e/r"-- 4/013gs rr"er. Bv5"--9.07-yyiy y,12 wcvrted••7d- 76a-F �ZeIV/ 7730-0 09 P -7(6 e-4 7,4 h61 °8z 772o4" m► +-541► 7'es 9a-uuo S.c u '7(f0 aa'l 177 Email %.\.1V4015*,(VMSeArt•Cnin 0 • is O 3' Q i l es ,\ & , v., , , .c, .., ,... . . 0. 4, ‘ :• . .. r^t . O Yec. G'O ti It C \ a G ? \ v. 4\ f r 4 n 4 o �\ n .+ n -4 pp l (Pop. 7 O ti n C. \� i i 9- ✓` a O .+ n a :A eir 1' 0 o� ? ` � n tq fl A \ �i j cf \tom 11' 0.0 • � L� +�13 G, v '• a 33. a i '----a ':... ncn t r7to-C,o o c r, •,• ,`••• 'a a W S \ 4* .et tfok y f:,. y 0 v y •r, •,,-- tic w • 4 7 to '� iro �.', t O C G. Is.) • - 0 7 % LO .+ or ./` b - ? i p . —� ''`t3 a o ' c r C \ • CA"? v,�" ~�\� a ? ' t N . -, ....., , 1 ; 0 ft L9 a 1 rD H 0 fD raj pauoi411ad uoipy N 1--� N 4) —i (D 1-, O 3 7 Q !D 3 0 ,� s Q • c cu rD rD A.cia in m n T rD fp o 3 a ( c c� a < con m xi at, o °' `" m n 3 �* 0 y o m �Q�O mo n rD 0 < _+ xi 0 •rt 3 c u, ,c(D ., o a° -, vi rs) CO 3 su w. Q r7 o o 3 3 °' 1 c NcL N ro 7 Z d' DJ = p N A Q ,. 3 cu cm F-+ rD cofp -El w n) a = 3A. n O 0 c -�. cri rD N •--r m5. v m Iv xi 0 0 3 0 `") f --I N4. ID LA rD rD rD n) n) 3 o N0)) 0,(D rn n rD G rD a)-1 Q W 133 W ..G in Support of Short Term Rentals Throughout Palm Desert December 12, 2017 City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 RE: Dec 14, 2017 City Council Meeting STR Permitting for Residential Single -Family Home Dear Mr. Swartz, As a home owner in Palm Desert at 44565 San Jose Ave, Palm Desert, I am not able to attend today's meeting to determine if the existing Short -Term Rental (STR) Ordinance should be amended. Otherwise the sunset clause would affect our ability to utilize short-term rentals past December 31, 2019. Therefore, I am definitely opposed to any change in the ordinance prohibiting STRs. 1) In the last several years since we have had our house in the short-term market, we have never had a single complaint regarding our renters or management company regarding our home. Note: property managed by ACME House Co on our behalf. 2) Additionally, I have made a significant investment in this property so I can retire in 5- 8 years to Palm Desert. Any change of status prohibiting our ability would have a severe negative financial impact on us. 3) We feel if the STR ordinance were changed to prevent our ability to continue with STRs, the change would devalue our home based on the new ordinance. This would be viewed as the City of Palm Desert illegally "taking" under the law and would have to consider a legal remedy. Respectfully we request a continuance in order to continue renting our home in the short-term market, especially when we work hard to be good neighbors and not disturb anyone in our neighborhood. Sin w rge M Peace 44565 San Jose Ave, Palm Desert email: gpeace10@gmail.com Swartz, Kevin From: Christel Prokay <rcprokay@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 7:50 PM To: Swartz, Kevin; Aylaian, Lauri; vangtanner@gmail.com Subject: [SPAM] - Fwd: Kevin and Lauri, Would you be so kind and send this copied letter for me to all the council people. I think it is important for council to read this before the hearing. This lady is circulating this letter to people who have our yard signs in front of their house. Besides putting our council officials in a bad light. Her letter is also filled with erroneous facts. Unfortunately, there are people who are easily influenced and believe everything... depends how many of those letters are circulated. I hope it does not affect our turnout tomorrow evening. Christel Here is the letter, I do have an original. I will drop it off with Jane tomorrow morning. written by Nancy Brier. I couldn't help but notice your signs supporting the ban on short term rentals, and I want to share information I just learned this week. In 2016 the city Council quietly passed and established the down town edge transition overlay just south of EL Paseo. This was to allow more hotels like the Hotel Paseo to develop on Shadow Mountain drive between Portola and Hwy 74. It lets developers buy up and combine lots to be developed into 2 and 3 story hotels on either side of Shadow Mountain. But I believe this deal wasn't enough for developers, so they pushed the city council to squash competition from Short Term Rentals in the immediate area. That's the real story here. I feel that your group may have been played. If developers had fought STR's themselves, the neighborhood backlash would have been fierce - but as it happened, your group did all the work for them and they are setting back, watching this go down with the full support of the city council. We will loose property rights, and hotels will be build that will forever change the face of South Palm Desert. It's something a few Short Term rentals would never do. It's hard for me to imagine why we would hand over our property rights, while simultaneously creating a new layer of bureaucracy for a problem that appears to be non existent. This ban will hurt local businesses and crush property values. It limits our property rights, eats up TOT revenues, and creates big government. In 2017, according to Palm Desert City Hall, there were only 22 city issued STR citations in R-1 and R-2 zones and 15 of those were for administrative violations. That means only 7 were for noise. Think about it...clearly this ban has nothing to do with noise, traffic, or trash --there just aren't enough complaints. Why would the mayor and council members support a ban that would rob the city of a million dollars in TOT tax? It doesn't make sense --until you follow the money and power. I hope you'll consider your position. It's your future and you might want to do a little research before you support a ban that will impact our own property rights and empower those with the real power behind this ban. Nancy Brier South Palm Desert nancy@nancybrier .com 1 Stanley, Jane From: Jordan Armitage <jordan.m.armitage@icloud.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 11:18 AM To: Stanley, Jane Subject: Short -Term Vacation Rental Ban December 13, 2017 Dear Mayor Harnik: I moved to the great city of Palm Desert when I was 4 and lived here until I was 18 and graduated from Palm Desert High School as the valedictorian. Throughout my childhood Palm Desert was a dust bowl, and I couldn't wait to get out. There was no culture, no beach, no sports teams, no concerts except once they had a Beach Boys concert at Oasis Waterpark and Starship at the Angels Spring Training Stadium. Whoop dee doo! I eventually left for college and what has happened over the last 25 years has been extraordinary to say the least! I have watched the City grow and transform into a very strong and prestigious city, one that I would have liked to grow up in, and I am concerned all of that growth may be in jeopardy because of this short-term rental ban. After losing both of my parents a few years ago, I now own the home I grew up in and with the help of a great team, I manage a thriving short-term vacation rental which has had zero complaints and all 5 star reviews while at the same time being 90% occupied all year long. I care about my home, because I use it myself and I take all necessary precautions to protect this invaluable asset. If this ban passes I will need to sell it. So why am I and so many others like me being punished? After reading various media and having various conversations with community members and short-term rental operators, the decisions being made by each Council Member seem to be based on a mix of emotions and misunderstandings. Following are the issues as I understand them and why I feel much more research is necessary to arrive at a proper decision. Perhaps the ultimate decision results in banning short-term rentals, but as of now I have seen no good arguments in support of that very Draconian and baseless decision. • Community Impact o Stakeholders: Who is really impacted here? ■ Retirees or Young, Hard Working Families? • Are we catering to the future of Palm Desert who are responsible for the amazing growth we have seen and are providing the infrastructure we need or are we catering to the retirees and what the community used to be 25 years ago, i.e. dust bowl? ■ Next Steps: We need to define the community we want in our future and make sure we are listening to those who are working and don't have time to spend all day at a City Council Meeting. (These should be scheduled after 5PM by the way.) o Noise Disturbances: Who is really the cause? ■ 75 complaints out of 1,200 properties over 365 days? That equates to a 0% annual disturbance rate • How many of the 75 complaints occurred during the Coachella and Stagecoach timeframe (April)? This will likely reduce the scope of the problem even more. t • How many of the 75 complaints occurred at the same property or under the same bad operator (eg. if the 75 complaints originated from 4 properties and 2 operators then these complaints seem to be more isolated)? • While disturbances from a party are a nuisance, I'm not sure that even a worst case of 75 families losing one night's sleep even remotely compares to taking the livelihood away from hundreds of property owners who were already permitted to do business with the city and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars preparing their property for rental. ■ Next Steps: We need more information to understand who really are causing the disturbances and how significant these disturbances are to Everyone in the community not just the squeaky wheels who go to bed at 8PM and have nothing else to do but complain. o Community Remedies ■ We need to understand stakeholders and who really is causing the problems. If there really is a community problem here, then we can significantly reduce these incidents in the future by taking the following steps: • Improved Tenant Screening o Large Security Deposits: Require large deposits ($1,000) and tie these to the rules and number of occupants (this gives the guest a vested interest in considering the property and neighbors) o Driver's Licenses of all Tenants and Guests: Require a list of attendees and driver's licenses of each o Do not Allow Insurance Option: When a tenant signs up for $50 insurance, the guest thinks they can have a party and destroy the house and someone else will pay for it. o Require Greeter: Requiring that someone check in your tenant tells the tenant you care about your property and that someone is there watching you so you better behave. o House Rules: Require the lease to include a list of rules tied to the large deposit that specifically includes not disturbing your neighbors. o Random Visits: Require the lease notify the tenant, that you may drop by at any time. You don't have to drop by, but again it lets them know this is your house and they are guests and they should treat your property and the neighbors with respect. • Enforcement o Fines: ■ This is as simple as increasing the fines in the very unlikely event that a properly screened tenant causes a disturbance. You will need to contact the operator right away to ensure they take the fine out of the tenant's deposit. • Economic Impact o Now it's possible that the short-term rental ban has nothing to do with noise complaints and disgruntled retirees. There is speculation in the community that there may be some kind of hotel lobby promising to pay higher taxes to the City, build more hotels and help in community redevelopment efforts. If this is the case, then this needs to be disclosed to the public AND an independent economic study needs to be completed and communicated to the public. The independent study needs to account for the following: 2 ■ Loss of revenue from short-term vacation rentals and local businesses including measurement of the impacts discussed below ■ Increase in revenue resulting from the new developments. ■ Cost of class action litigation that will likely begin shortly after the ban is finalized. o Short -Term Rental Impacts ■ Where has our City's Growth in the last 20 years come from?: • Tourism o Who houses a majority of these tourists? ■ Short -Term Vacation Rentals! ■ Ban impacts 100% of Short -Term Vacation Rentals not 10%: • HOAs will quickly follow the City and initiate bans in areas under their control so this impacts all short-term vacation rentals. ■ Short -Term Rentals Attract Families Not Partiers: • A majority of the tenants want to gather with other family members in a homelike setting. Large suites and adjoining hotel rooms do not offer the same comfort as a single family home and so the City will lose this group which makes up a significant portion of the short-term rental tourist population. • Many of the tenants are also made up of Canadians seeking shelter from the cold. They are usually very friendly and nice and actually nicer than the local residents. ■ All Local Restaurants and Businesses will be Impacted ■ 28 Day or more Monthly Rentals Not Sustainable: • The reality is operators cannot find tenants who will rent for 30 days or more from May - September. So if you take away the ability to rent on a short-term basis for 5 months out of the year, most of the short-term rental properties will quickly fail as the loss of income over this 5 month period will be significant enough to create heavy net operating losses and the properties will eventually have to be sold. ■ Impact of the Eventual Sale of Short -Term Vacation Rentals: • Significant Housing Price Decline: A higher supply of available homes for sale will lead to a sizeable decline in Palm Desert housing values. • Significant Decline in Winter/Spring Tourists: The short-term rentals that do survive the loss of summer revenue will not be able to meet the demand for the monthly rentals during the October through April season. If visitors during this season can't find a house to stay in for a month are they going to go to a hotel instead? No because the cost would be prohibitive during the season and it wouldn't offer them the same size and comfort. So where will they go? They will go somewhere else like Scottsdale, AZ. • Significant Decline in Summer Tourists: Short-term rentals bring in a lot of travelers and business during the hot summer months from May through September. These individuals want to enjoy the pool with family and friends in a larger space which hotels cannot provide. If there are no short-term rentals they will likely head to Big Bear or Lake Arrowhead instead. • Significant Decline in Property Expenditures: : o Since property usage will decline so will the need for the following services: ■ The initial and very extensive remodeling efforts to prepare the property for rental ■ Employment of individuals to greet guests ■ Employment of cleaning crews to keep the house sparkling clean ■ Employment of on -call plumbers, electricians, HVAC technicians, and handymen to address repairs and maintenance I generally find it prudent to have all the facts before making a decision in everything I do, and I think that is generally the expectation of our elected officials. There appear to be a lot of questions that haven't been answered and it appears this decision is being rushed. Are we reacting to community members who have been negatively impacted by short-term vacation renters or are we trying to incentivize or cater to developers and hotel operators whose returns have been damaged by the short-term vacation rentals or who may not to invest here because of the presence of so many short- term vacation rentals. As of now there hasn't been sufficient disclosure and the facts are vague across the board so before this ban is made official we need our City Council to answer these questions and explain their arguments more clearly. Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. Please contact me with any questions. Jordan Armitage 714-791-5228 4 Stanley, Jane From: Gorde Edlund <edlundmedia@shaw.ca> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 6:27 AM To: Harnik, Jan Cc: Stanley, Jane; tracey@dunnawayjackson.com Subject: Please read this - my wife and I may lose our home Dear Mayor. May I please have 5 minutes of your time for you to read my email? My wife and I bought our future retirement home in the Palm Desert Country Club, back in 2010. Since then we have invested our time, effort and money in revitalizing our home so that when we can retire (in about 4 years) we will have a beautiful home here in Palm Desert. We are not wealthy and cannot afford the upkeep on 2 houses at once: short term rentals have made our desert home possible. Once we can retire, we will no longer be tied to our other home by our jobs and the issue will be resolved. I have 2 points to make about the proposed ban - 1. I believe that perhaps the 'math' has been misinterpreted. There are approx. 1200 STR homes, with approx. 270 of them in R-1, R-2. There have been 73 'disturbance' complaints. At first glance, this looks like 73 of 1200 have created a problem, but you need to look deeper. Each of these homes is rented, say, 15 times during the year. This means that there were 18,000 different groups of tourists/renters that could have created a problem. Yet just 73 complaints (I agree it should not happen at all but we are humans). That means that only .4 percent of renters caused a problem. Less than half a percent! Yet the ban will affect 99.6% of the good renters and responsible owners. This seems so unfair to all of us who are responsible neighbors. We have rented our home since 2010 with not one complaint. 2. In regards to disturbance and noise complaints - myself and 2 neighbors have made complaints to the city several times in the last year and a half about 2 neighbors and there barking dogs. And these dogs don't just get together for a Friday night barking party. They bark on and off most every day of the week. Neighbours leave them out when they go to work and the dogs bark at shadows: a car door closes - gardeners arrive on the block - pool service people arrive - the mail man/woman stops by. This can go on for 20 or 30 minutes with high pitched small dogs going crazy barking. Then at night, the owners must be inside with the tv loud while their dogs are in the back yard barking up a storm. But we do not ban dogs! We use enforcement to address the issue. That's all we responsible owners are asking for; a chance to let enforcement work. Please, please reconsider the ban and go with strict enforcement instead. 99.6% responsible owners should not be penalized for .4% bad apples. This is not fair or just. Thank you for your time. Gordon Edlund 77271 Ohio Circle Palm Desert 760-636-1215 1 Stanley, Jane From: Debra Vogler <debravogler@me.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 3:20 PM To: Kelly, Kathleen; CityhallMail; weber Cc: Swartz, Kevin Subject: [SPAM] - Additional inputs re: the STR ordinance; please distribute to the entire council and the City Manager Dear City Council members/Mr. Swartz: My name is Debra Vogler and I am a full-time resident and homeowner on Shadow Mountain Drive in Palm Desert. I am against short-term rentals in R-1 and R-2 zoned areas. If you are serious about growing the economy and increasing the value of people's homes, work even more closely than you have been with CVEP to get our infrastructure ready for high-tech companies. This area couldn't compete for the Amazon bid because it doesn't have the required infrastructure. Bill Gates — who apparently owns a home in this area — recently announced an $80Mn investment to build a smart city in the Arizona desert. Why not here? Steve Case recently established a "Rise of the Rest Seed Fund" that will invest $150Mn in startups that promote entrepreneurship outside of Silicon Valley. Is this area going to pursue such an investment opportunity? In 2015 there was a $1 Bn investment by Pegasus Global Holdings to build a testing ground for smart cities in the New Mexico desert near White Sands. Why not here? High-tech companies are the true growth engines and wealth generators of the U.S. economy, and indeed, worldwide. This region not only has a golden opportunity to become a tech hub, but it has an advantage: the benefit of hindsight. The leaders here can avoid the pitfalls that can come from too rapid growth and affordable housing challenges. When you attract high-tech investment, you bring in young people who will be earning high salaries, which means they will also have plenty of discretionary money to spend in the local stores and restaurants. They are eager to either begin or continue their careers and they will not care that it's over a 100 degrees in the summer. High-tech companies hold lots of conferences and business meetings that draw professionals from around the world, so those who own resorts and hotels should be pleased. Ms. Christel Prokay actually went up and down El Paseo counting the number of empty street -level store fronts vs. the total number. She came up with approximately 50 empty street -level store fronts out of a total of about 258 (street -level store fronts). During the height of the holiday shopping season, and probably the tourist season as well, that's a vacancy rate of almost 20%I Just once, I would like to be able to walk up and down El Paseo and see every single store front occupied with a booming business open 6-7 days a week and not closed in the summer. When that happens, I will know the local economy is healthy and vibrant. incidentally, I was so concerned about the vacancy rate on El Paseo and the local economy in general when I first moved here in 2012 (from Silicon Valley) that I wrote a Valley Voice column for the Desert Sun to address it (see "Coachella Valley should embrace 3D tech," published online 9/9/15; also in print; httr ://www.desertsun.com/storv/opinion/contributors/2015/09/09/vallev-voice-orintino-economic- boost/71977330/). 1 Party houses masquerading as single-family homes do not belong in residential neighborhoods where homeowners expect to have peace and quiet. Property taxes, local taxes and fees paid by residents and homeowners should not be used to support a specific business segment. After all - residents do not share in the income and profits of STR owners, so why should we bear their business expenses? Other home -based businesses, such as consulting, do not add to the burden of extra police enforcement and do not need intensive or extensive code compliance monitoring interactions. Those who run STR businesses should be charged a transient accommodations excise tax sufficient to enable the city to hire the requisite number of full-time code compliance officers. This expense should be seen as a cost of doing business, and therefore, borne solely by the STR owners. Residents who use their own funds to correct or mitigate issues arising because of STR disturbances should be reimbursed from a fund that uses fees and taxes paid by STR business owners. Thank you. P.S. Additionally, the email addresses that popped up on the city's web site seemed to be the same for several of the council members (a generic city hall address). Therefore, I can't tell if my email will actually be sent to all of the council members, so I would appreciate it if my email were forwarded to all of the city council members and the City Manager. Thank you. Sincerely, Debra Vogler Palm Desert, CA 92260 2 Stanley, Jane From: Gary <gtrippeer@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 4:10 PM To: Harnik, Jan Cc: Stanley, Jane Subject: [SPAM] - STR Jan Harnik, I am disappointed by the city council's stance on STR's and your support of this unnecessary ordinance. You are creating a new layer of government bureaucracy and rules that will devalue our properties for ourselves, our kids, and future residents. I believe it will crush home values and hurt local businesses. Bottom line is that I don't want to give up any of my property rights and neither should you. I find it amazing that the "pro ban" contingency has so easily handed over the rights to their properties for what appears to be a relatively non-exisent problem - fewer than 30 noise complaints in 2016 and under 50 in 2017. How many total noise complaints does Palm Desert receive every year from all residences? If there is a problem, why can't a neighbor just call the police and have them give the offenders a citation on the spot. To levy heavy and unrealistic fines on homeowners is not going to stop a loud party. If the rules you are supporting were applied to the rental car industry, it would mean I could rent a car, get a speeding ticket and the rental car company would pay the fine and in the end I would just keep on speeding. The same goes for what could happen with the enforcement of a large party under this new proposed policy. A $150 fine to a noisy offender would probably stop a loud party on the spot; a $1,000 fine sent to a property owner 3 days later who lives in distant city probably would not. I live next to a vacation rental and across the street from another one. I have never had any trouble with noise, parking, or trash. I'm also surrounded by neighbors with the "pro ban" signs in their yards and although I'd never complain about anyone's noise level....oddly, the most noise comes from a home that has a pro ban sign prominently displayed. Can they receive a $1,000 fine or is this just going to be a discriminatory act against STR owners? And discriminatory is just what this ordinance is. What is next for Palm Desert? - Special rules based on your age, background or skin color? To ban a group of homeowners from using their property as they see fit and excluding another group from renting is a slippery slope. My wife and I moved here 2 years ago from Northern California and purchased a house and a rental. We have a daughter in school, support local businesses and had hoped to 1031 exchange into more properties here. We had also considered opening a small business in Palm Desert. Our investment would have been just under 5 million dollars. These plans are now on hold. Our future in Palm Desert is not certain because of this shortsighted ordinance and the shocking support of the ban by the Palm Desert City Council. We had invited two other families to move here as well. Although neither would have operated an STR they both, to our disappointment, cancelled their plans to move to Palm Desert and purchased i elsewhere because of the proposed STR ordinance. People don't want to give up their property rights. This community needs more fresh and motivated families like us to live and work here, to support local schools and businesses and to spend money and invest here. The pro ban supporters I've seen don't seem to fall into that demographic - they are organized, they have lots of signs, and probably enjoy an occasional early bird special. But I believe that they are just a vocal minority. Which begs the question - who is really behind this ordinance and why are you supporting them? I guess we will have to follow the money. I urge you to drop your support of this restrictive, discriminatory, and unnecessary ban, and make Palm Desert an open and free community for all of us who live here. In the event this is ratified by you and the City Council on the 14th, I would expect that the city will be hit by lawsuits, and I will strongly support any lawsuit that seeks to overturn this ordinance. Sincerely, Gary Trippeer Full time South Palm Desert Resident 2 Swartz, Kevin From: Rob@Elworthy.bc.ca Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 12:47 PM To: Swartz, Kevin; Aylaian, Lauri; Harnik, Jan; Nestande, Gina; Jonathan, Sabby; Kelly, Kathleen; Weber, Susan Marie; Stendell, Ryan; sharepalmdesert@gmail.com Subject: Palm desert short term rentals As a Palm Desert vacationer, I am shocked to see the City Council vote to ban all short-term vacation rentals in R-1 and R-2 zones. We have been renting a home in Palm Desert for several years and are responsible guests. We do not make noise or in any way annoy the neighbours. Without the ability to rent this home (77271 Ohio Circle) we would find it much more expensive to vacation in your city and would likely opt to go elsewhere. We love Palm Desert but you would force us to choose another destination. Please consider removing the ban and give enforcement a chance to work. Sincerely, Rob & Kerry Romaniuk New Westminster, BC, Canada Regards, Rob Romaniuk rob @elworthy.bc.ca Elworthy Electrical Services Ltd. 2360 Douglas Rd. Burnaby, BC Canada V5C 5B2 604-299-4341 office 604-299-1717 fax 604-671-3427 cell www.elworthv.bc.ca The information contained in this communication is confidential and/or proprietary business or technical data. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this communication, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this communication, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone (604-299-4341) or electronically by return message, and delete or destroy all copies of this communication. 1 Swartz, Kevin From: Douglas Bruce Clement <dclement007@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 10:43 AM To: Faye Brownlie Cc: Weber, Susan Marie; Harnik, Jan; sjonathan@cityofpalmdesert; kkelly@cityofpalmdesert; Swartz, Kevin; Nestande, Gina; Carl Savage; Marg Compo; Kim Young Subject: Re: Short Term Rentals, Palm Desert City Counsellors, My wife and I had the pleasure of being part of this group of Canadians on their wonderful visit to Palm Desert. Faye Brownlie has described the details of this visit in detail. In the past, we have rented a house in Palm Springs on two previous occasions for a week. This recent trip exceeded our expectations and would consider in the future to rent in Palm Desert. We encourage the city counsel to continue to support the rental policy now in existence . Diane and Doug Clement > On Dec 13, 2017, at 8:53 AM, Faye Brownlie <favebrownlie@gmail.com> wrote: > City Counsellors, > In November of this year, we had the opportunity to spend a week in a short term rental in Palm Desert. For my husband and I, although inveterate travellers, this was our first trip to the Desert. We enjoyed a tremendous visit and left, thinking of others who would appreciate and enjoy this form of travel. We were most fortunate to stay in a spacious home with a deluxe yard and pool, less than a 5 minute walk from El Paseo Drive. This worked to our great advantage as we walked in the morning for latter, every second evening to dine, and several times to shop. We were with a group of 6, one of whom is a chef, so we also grocery shopped frequently, leaving between $600 and $700 in groceries alone in the local stores. > Of our group of 6, only my husband and I had not visited this area before. (He is a retired school superintendent and I continue to work in staff development in education, throughout British Columbia, western Canada and internationally.) One of the couples, a retired sports medicine doctor and his wife, a renowned Canadian chef, (both Olympic athletes), had been previously and stayed in a short term rental. They were enthusiastic to return. The other couple, a retired high school principal and international school director, and his wife, an international school administrator had been to Palm Springs previously and commented frequently on how much more enjoyable this experience of shared living accommodation in a quiet, residential neighbourhood was. It was a shared history of coaching in track that brought this group together. We are a quiet group who conscientiously abided by the noise rules: quiet by 10, drove only one vehicle, and were amazed at how peaceful the neighbourhood was, as we ventured forth on daily walks. > Using our rental as our home base, allowed us to hike in Indian Canyon, tour Jericho Hills National Park, visit La Quinta, shop in the local market at the sculpture garden, attend a movie at the local cinema, and as mentioned, avail ourselves of the opportunities in art galleries, shops, restaurants, and coffee shops along El Paseo. As we toured locally, it seemed to me that at least half the shoppers and tourers we met were Canadian. I wonder how many of these would continue 1 to visit if short-term rentals were banned? What would that ban do to the local economy? If we are a representative group (and we definitely hit the age group visible on the streets!!!), then we would also be a group of non -returnees. > > While we appreciate your desire to maintain the beauty and the peace of your neighbourhoods, we wonder 'at what cost'? If the tourist dollars were removed or significantly decreased from Palm Desert, what would the impact be on the town? Would the businesses survive? Who would be spending? Even at our one rental, employment was significant: pool and yard maintenance, window upgrading, cleaners, all came and went throughout the week. If short-term rentals were banned, what employment opportunities would these people have? > > The ability for us as a group of 6, to rent one car and have walking access to such opportunity was outstanding. We followed the patterns of the neighbourhood. We spent money in your community. We felt safe. We came home, wanting to return. Surely, this is a win -win situation for Palm Desert. > > Regards, > Faye Brownlie > 2 Swartz, Kevin From: Faye Brownlie <fayebrownlie@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 8:54 AM To: Weber, Susan Marie; Harnik, Jan; sjonathan@cityofpalmdesert; kkelly@cityofpalmdesert; Swartz, Kevin; Nestande, Gina Cc: Doug Clement; carl savage; Marg Compo; Kim Young Subject: Short Term Rentals, Palm Desert City Counsellors, In November of this year, we had the opportunity to spend a week in a short term rental in Palm Desert. For my husband and I, although inveterate travellers, this was our first trip to the Desert. We enjoyed a tremendous visit and left, thinking of others who would appreciate and enjoy this form of travel. We were most fortunate to stay in a spacious home with a deluxe yard and pool, less than a 5 minute walk from El Paseo Drive. This worked to our great advantage as we walked in the morning for lattes, every second evening to dine, and several times to shop. We were with a group of 6, one of whom is a chef, so we also grocery shopped frequently, leaving between $600 and $700 in groceries alone in the local stores. Of our group of 6, only my husband and I had not visited this area before. (He is a retired school superintendent and I continue to work in staff development in education, throughout British Columbia, western Canada and internationally.) One of the couples, a retired sports medicine doctor and his wife, a renowned Canadian chef, (both Olympic athletes), had been previously and stayed in a short term rental. They were enthusiastic to return. The other couple, a retired high school principal and international school director, and his wife, an international school administrator had been to Palm Springs previously and commented frequently on how much more enjoyable this experience of shared living accommodation in a quiet, residential neighbourhood was. It was a shared history of coaching in track that brought this group together. We are a quiet group who conscientiously abided by the noise rules: quiet by 10, drove only one vehicle, and were amazed at how peaceful the neighbourhood was, as we ventured forth on daily walks. Using our rental as our home base, allowed us to hike in Indian Canyon, tour Jericho Hills National Park, visit La Quinta, shop in the local market at the sculpture garden, attend a movie at the local cinema, and as mentioned, avail ourselves of the opportunities in art galleries, shops, restaurants, and coffee shops along El Paseo. As we toured locally, it seemed to me that at least half the shoppers and tourers we met were Canadian. I wonder how many of these would continue to visit if short-term rentals were banned? What would that ban do to the local economy? If we are a representative group (and we definitely hit the age group visible on the streets!!!), then we would also be a group of non -returnees. While we appreciate your desire to maintain the beauty and the peace of your neighbourhoods, we wonder 'at what cost'? If the tourist dollars were removed or significantly decreased from Palm Desert, what would the impact be on the town? Would the businesses survive? Who would be spending? Even at our one rental, employment was significant: pool and yard maintenance, window upgrading, cleaners, all came and went throughout the week. If short-term rentals were banned, what employment opportunities would these people have? The ability for us as a group of 6, to rent one car and have walking access to such opportunity was outstanding. We followed the patterns of the neighbourhood. We spent money in your community. We felt safe. We came home, wanting to return. Surely, this is a win -win situation for Palm Desert. Regards, Faye Brownlie 1 Swartz, Kevin From: Ted Thomas<teded5oclocksomewhere@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 8:50 AM To: Swartz, Kevin Subject: Short Term Rentals We bought our house 2015 in the Palm Desert Country Club as an investment. Our thoughts were to be able to rent it out and use it when it's not rented, then to retire there in 5/6 years. STR's are a good way to do that, long term renters are to hard on houses and the cost to fixed them back up is to much. Driving through the PDCC you can tell the full time rentals, even the full time residents from the STR's. Even though this area is governed by an HOA some of the houses are not kept up very well. Taking away STR's in this area would just add more full time rentals, and the houses will turn into eyesores. The PDCC has a nice golf course and club house facilities. It stays busy in winter months with the snowbird crowd. Summertime is a different story. Nobody rents for more than 3 to 5 days, its to hot for most. We need those people to support the golf course and clubhouse in the summer, this course has closed before. On social media you can see a lot of private courses opening up there memberships to avoid closing. We need every vacationer we can get. On the city website it describes Palm Desert as a Resort Destination, not a half resort destination. Enforcement and fines need to be put in place. If there are problem houses then they need to be dealt with, not eliminate rentals that follow the rules. It's very unfair to R1 and R2 areas to vote yes in 2011, then after people invest, take it away. I noticed that this does not effect the area around the Desert Willow golf resort, palm desert city owned. Sent from space 1