South Lake Tahoe open to reducing $2,000 parking fine, ‘softening’ Airbnb rental law

A week after a Reno Gazette Journal investigation published, South Lake Tahoe officials said they are open to making changes to the city’s stricter vacation rental law after a smattering of bad publicity and complaints about the controversial ordinance.

The view was expressed at an April 17 meeting by city council members, who say they still believe that the program is working as intended by curtailing bad behavior by vacation home renters.

City council members also cautioned that an ongoing effort by a neighborhood group to ban vacation rentals outside of South Lake Tahoe’s tourism corridor can render talk of any prospective changes moot if the initiative gets on the November ballot and succeeds.

RGJ investigates: Here's how South Lake Tahoe became home to the $2,000 parking fine for Airbnb renters

A civil war: Airbnb economy, vacation rentals spur fight within Lake Tahoe's neighborhoods

From alternative to mainstream: The rise of Airbnb and vacation home rentals

“I’m definitely in favor of figuring out how we soften some of these edges (of the vacation rental ordinance) and how we look at parking and occupancy,” said Councilmember Jason Collin.

Collin says parking was, by far, the No. 1 issue that he received emails about in the last three months in regard to the city’s vacation home rental or VHR law. The updated ordinance levies a $1,000 fine against renters for parking on the street or dirt and also fines the owner of the property $1,000 as well. Owners, however, typically pass their fines to the renters, turning it into a $2,000 fine for vacationers.

Although the steep fines were designed as a deterrent to nuisance such as loud partying, overcrowding and improper trash disposal, an investigation by the Reno Gazette Journal found that South Lake Tahoe’s updated ordinance has mostly turned into a tool for handing out $2,000 fines for parking since it took effect on Dec. 22.

Parking accounted for 60 percent of all violations cited by the city’s code enforcement officers. These include cases where vacationers did not exceed the maximum number of cars allowed but parked on the street just outside the house or an unpaved surface.

Several members of the public spoke at the meeting about the chilling effect that the strict rules are having on visitors.

“Enforcement is working on the bad guys,” said property manager Michelle Benedict. “But the families that are really sincere here, that are good people, they’re terrified and a lot of them have told me they’re not coming back.”

Accounts of vacationers saying they are not coming back to South Lake Tahoe was echoed by other vacation rental owners and managers during the April 17 meeting. The RGJ investigation also was mentioned, including how it made national news after getting picked up by USA Today. The RGJ article was linked by the Drudge Report as well. South Lake Tahoe’s stricter ordinance received coverage from other media outlets, including the San Francisco Chronicle and CBS.

Melissa Wong, a vacation rental owner who also does marketing work, described the national media coverage about the ordinance as a public relations disaster that “is not anything to be proud of” for South Lake Tahoe.

“This is not good branding and the optics are terrible and the word is getting out that we are a town that doesn’t like tourists, they’re not welcome here and the lake should be for the locals,” Wong said. “We need to rebrand ourselves quickly.”

HEAT MAP: Hot spots for South Lake Tahoe neighborhoods that receive the most complaints against vacation home rentals. Areas that have more concentration of complaints are highlighted by brighter colors. (Data provided by city of South Lake Tahoe. Map by Brian Duggan/RGJ)

---

Parking problem

New data released by the city during the meeting about violations confirmed the same trends found by the Reno Gazette Journal investigation.

The city reported that it received 188 complaints about vacation rentals during the first three months of the updated ordinance, with parking accounting for 105 of the calls. Of that number, 40 were confirmed to be actual violations. The next closest issue was noise, which received 34 complaints but only eight of those were considered actual violations.

The “vast amount” of parking citations caught the attention of Mayor Wendy David, who asked for confirmation if they have seen an increase since the revised ordinance came into effect.

“It has increased mostly due to the fact that it’s the most visible thing to report on,” said Louis Klingelhoffer, a community service officer with the South Lake Tahoe VHR Program. “And it’s the least subjective, it’s either there or it’s not.”

Also tied to parking is occupancy, including how the law prevents tourists from having visitors for lunch, dinner or special occasions. One example is a family or group that rents two houses from Airbnb to meet the occupancy requirements but are not allowed to meet together in just one of those houses for Christmas dinner or risk a fine for going above the occupancy limit.

Collin floated the idea of making an exception for groups that meet the threshold through combined occupancy. Adding an extra layer of gray to the rules, however, would be a challenge for community service officers tasked with enforcing the program, said Police Chief Brian Uhler.

“(We asked for) bright lines because when the enforcement person is standing there listening to variations in stories, it’s just very difficult,” Uhler said. “We like having a clear number.”

Occupancy is especially an issue for vacation rentals in places that do not have assigned parking. The maximum number of occupants under the updated ordinance is based on the number of rooms and parking spaces — two per room plus four or four per car, whichever of the two amounts are lower.

The change is proving to be a problem for vacation rentals in places such as Bavarian Village, where the allowed occupancy just dropped from eight people to four people said property manager Benedict.

“I’m booked solid all summer so I’m not sure how I’m supposed to deal with the fact that my permit renewal that’s up at the end of the month just dropped from eight to four (people allowed),” Benedict said.

The city is aware of the issue and is working with the various HOAs to address it, said Kevin Fabino, development services director.

Typically, condo complexes provide additional space through overflow parking but problems arise when there is not enough to accommodate the overflow of neighbors plus the overflow of vacation rental users, Fabino said. Overflow can also get limited during bad weather when the space sometimes gets used for snow storage.

Fabino, however, says the city will be more than happy to recognize overflow areas designated by HOAs as extra parking spaces to help keep vacation rental units in line with the code requirements, at least until the rules are updated.

“We’ve tried to be as helpful as we can till we get it addressed by council probably next quarter,” Fabino said.

Frivolous reports

As the vacation rental debate splits South Lake Tahoe into two camps, some on the pro-VHR side contend that fines should go both ways.

“If you have people continually call on a daily basis and have complaints that aren’t proven — maybe after five negligent calls, then they get fined $50,” said Shannon Witt, a Tahoe real estate agent. “They should be fined just like everyone else for breaking the rules and they’re wasting our dollars to appease themselves for the fact that they don’t like vacation rentals.”

One issue raised in the RGJ investigation involves harassing phone calls that are meant to cause a vacation rental owner to lose their permit for amassing three violations or “strikes” within two years.

At the meeting, South Lake Tahoe VHR Investigator Maureen Stuhlman confirmed that they have asked the compliance program to track caller IDs so they could monitor if certain people have a history of making frivolous calls about vacation rentals.

“It is something they are working on because it has been a problem,” Stuhlman said.

Councilmember Collin asked Police Chief Buhler if there was any recourse for the city against repeat callers who mostly report frivolous complaints. Buhler mentioned that the city could perhaps add something in the code to penalize the filing of a false report based on a certain number of frivolous calls.

At the same time, Buhler says the issue surrounding frivolous complaints is a complicated one.

“I struggle with that because we do know a few folks that purposefully go out and … maybe are targeting a neighbor and making frivolous complaints,” Buhler said. “But you don’t want to necessarily cut anybody off in the community in terms of calling for help.”

One resident also pointed out that just because a call does not lead to a citation does not mean it was frivolous.

Brandy Griffith, a South Lake Tahoe resident and real estate agent, says she has literally seen renters run up to their vehicles and move them before community service officers arrive. Griffith also claimed that she has seen some vacationers lie to the officers and claim to be the owners of the property in order to avoid being fined.

“I’m not trying to bag on rental companies (but) clearly they’re getting the information to stop whatever the issue is (before) the CSO shows up,” Griffith said.

“I’m sure there are those sticks in the mud and they’re calling and they hate the VHR next to them. I know they exist, I don’t refute that at all, but there are people who really are just trying to enjoy a quality life and you’ve got these VHRs next door and it’s difficult. And if these new ordinances can’t be effective, you’re never gonna get the people to come back onboard in terms of having them on the neighborhoods.”

INTERACTIVE MAP: Complaints and citations against vacation home rentals during the first 3 months of South Lake Tahoe’s updated VHR ordinance. The red points represent complaints that resulted in a citation. Yellow points resulted in no citation. (Data provided by city of South Lake Tahoe. Map by Brian Duggan/RGJ)

---

Balancing act

Griffith’s comment alludes to an ongoing effort by the Tahoe Neighborhoods Group to collect enough signatures to get a petition on the November ballot to have voters outlaw vacation rentals in South Lake Tahoe neighborhoods.

The ballot measure essentially hamstrings the council from making any major changes to the ordinance because a vote in favor of phasing out vacation rentals outside the Tahoe tourist corridor throws everything out the window.

“I don’t know if it’s going to destroy our town or if the town’s gonna be better for it,” said Councilmember Austin Sass. “In any case, from my viewpoint, we’re in a wait-and-see mode. Those ballot measures, especially, are monumental depending on how they go.”

Outlawing vacation rentals would be bad for South Lake Tahoe because they are “a critical part” of the city’s tourism economy, Councilmember Collin said. About $406,000 of the $1 million in transient occupancy tax that South Lake Tahoe collected in December, for example, came from vacation home rentals, according to data from the city.

Collin says one reason the city came up with the stricter ordinance was to satisfy the people who do not like vacation home rentals in the hope that it would be enough to prevent a ballot initiative from happening. The move did not work, however, and Collin had some choice words for the anti-vacation rental crowd.

“The people who do not like VHRs are verbally accosting people to get signatures,” Collin said. “They’re ruthless.”

Collin pointed to newly released data from the city showing that violations accounted for less than a percent of total vacation rental room nights, adding that they are not as huge a problem as some make them out to be.

Sass, meanwhile, downplayed the complaints about the stricter ordinance as well as the media coverage. Sass says he is open to discussing changes, including lowering fines to $500 and changing some of the rules for parking and occupancy. The program itself, however, is working well and shows people that the city is serious about curtailing bad behavior, Sass said.

Sass also believes that the media coverage will eventually blow over.

“I’m sorry that some people feel that the press has been negative of the $1,000 fines and I certainly understand where you’re coming from on that,” Sass said. “But hopefully it’s a one-time thing and that article will be gone in a couple of days and people will move forward with it and appreciate Tahoe for what it is.”