County seeks public input on short-term rental ordinance revision
By JP Crumrine
Correspondent
Riverside County’s Board of Supervisors and its Planning Department are taking steps to revise the current county ordinance and procedures for regulating short-term rentals in the unincorporated areas that include the Hill.
While many disruptions and life changes have occurred during the past 18 months, this effort was initiated before the COVID-19 pandemic began.
In February 2020, before masks, closures, shutdowns and vaccinations, Riverside County supervisors Chuck Washington (3rd District) and Kevin Jeffries (1st District) proposed that county staff review and revise Ordinance 927, the policy overseeing STRs, as well as the ordinances governing land use and penalties for violating county ordinances.
However, implementing the STR ordinance is integrally related to two other ordinances — noise limitations (847) and Transient Occupancy Taxes (495). Both are referenced in STR Ordinance 927.
The item was approved 4-1, with Supervisor Robert Hewitt (5th District) the lone opposition.
During the discussion, Washington noted that the STR situation was creating “… a number of disruptions to the quality of life and to the business community.” His intent with the revisions was to increase “accountability and responsibility.”
During fall 2020, the Planning Department did make public a revised Ordinance 927.
While the board has not yet taken action to approve revisions to this or the other ordinances, two other major steps have occurred that will influence the final policy changes.
At the board’s May 25 meeting, supervisors Washington and V. Manuel Perez (4th District) recommended that the board establish an ad hoc committee to review the proposed changes to the STR ordinance, and to encourage and seek comments from residents throughout the county, especially the affected areas such as Idyllwild.
Besides the supervisors proposing the committee, its members include representatives of the involved agencies and several county residents. It has met twice and currently no future meetings have been announced.
According to Yaoska Machado, public information specialist in the county’s Executive Office, “County staff is reviewing the comments and recommendations that resulted from this committee and is considering additional changes to the draft amendment.”
The second major step occurred in June. The Riverside County grand jury issued a report on the administration of the STR policy and commented on the October proposed revisions to the ordinance.
The report noted problems with implementing the current policy and, consequently, recommended changes to the proposed policy. Several of the proposals were based on comparisons of the Riverside County policy with the policies in San Bernardino and Ventura counties.
The current STR ordinance was adopted in January 2016. Its purpose was “… to minimize the negative secondary effects on surrounding properties and to ensure the collection and payment of transient occupancy taxes.” The grand jury report raised some skepticism about the success of its implementation.
Current policy
The process begins when the county Planning Department issues an STR Certificate. The County Treasurer collects a 10% TOT based on the issued certificates.
Owners of STR facilities are required to obtain the certificate and pay a fee for its issuance, besides the TOT. Also, they must provide the name and phone number for a local contact. Both the renters and neighbors should be able to contact this person if they believe there are problems at the rental or in its adjoining neighborhood.
Prospective changes
The draft revised STR policy, which the Planning Department has circulated, is 12 pages long compared to the five pages for the current ordinance.
Nevertheless, the grand jury report recommended several modifications to the proposed revisions for Ordinance 927. These include property inspections, increased fees, a signed agreement holding the county and officials harmless, proof of insurance, an expanded complaint process and visible outdoor signage.
Both San Bernardino and Ventura counties require STR property inspections before issuing this use approval. The inspections would focus on the number of eligible bedrooms and available parking. Also, the grand jury believes these inspections will “… give the public a degree of confidence that all entities are following county codes and can safely accommodate renters.”
The grand jury report noted that mogst homeowner insurance policies do not provide coverage for use as an STR. Consequently, it recommended the county require some proof of insurance for the protection of renters and recommended the insurance value at least equal $500,000.
While the draft revised Ordinance 927 expands the complaint process, the grand jury recommended using a “self-reporting” process, where “the STR owner is required to report to the Planning Department any complaint and the action taken.” There would be a two-day requirement to acknowledge the complaint and explain its resolution.
Also, similar to Ventura County, a Neighbor Complaint Form would be developed and employed. Its purpose would be “… a means to formally report STR activities that adversely affect them [neighbors] and may be ordinance violations as well.”
The report also recommended outdoor signage that would provide the local contact’s 24/7 phone number, maximum occupancy and parking space allowed as well as a county code enforcement phone number.
Finally, the grand jury recommended increasing the original fee and the renewal fee for the STR certificate. The higher fee should reasonably cover the cost of both administration of the certificate process and its enforcement. According to the grand jury, Code Enforcement “indicated they have insufficient personnel available to investigate complaints.”
The current initial fee is $250 and its renewal is $100. In San Bernardino County, initial fees and renewals are respectively $667 and $244.50. Ventura County fees are $1,195 and $200.
Current situation
In 2016, when the STR policy was approved and initiated. Riverside County issued 268 certificates and collected nearly $600,000 in TOT. Five years later, in 2020, the number of STR units more than doubled to 567 and the TOT nearly tripled to slightly more than $1.6 million.
The grand jury is awaiting responses to its report from the Sheriff’s office, the board of supervisors and the County Transportation and Land Management Department (essentially, the Planning Department).
Within the county agencies, Machado replied in an email, “Based upon the ad hoc committee results and the grand jury recommendations, staff is in the process of making some additional changes to the Ordinance, which will be made available online, when completed. This amendment has not gone to a public hearing yet. Also, the County is also concurrently working on an amendment to the Temporary Events Ordinance, but this is a different Ordinance than short-term rentals.”
With the exception of the grand jury report, beginning in 2016, any discussion of the county’s STR policy has always mentioned Idyllwild and the Hill as areas where STRs would benefit from regulation.
To access the ordinance, proposed revised ordinance and the grand jury report on STRs, visit:
http://www.rivcocob.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/927.pdf
for the current ordinance;
http://planning.rctlma.org/Portals/14/Ord_No_927DraftforPublication_1.pdf
for the October 2020 revision. (To provide input, send an email to Principal Planner Steven Jones at [email protected] with the subject line “Ordinance 927.1.”
The grand jury report on STRs is online at http://rivco.org/sites/default/files/Past%20Reports%20%26%20Responses/2020-2021/Short_Term_Rentals_Report_v2.pdf
