Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey

Cathedral City, California, Measure B, Additional Short-Term Vacation Rental Regulations and Limitations (March 2021)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Cathedral City Measure B
LocalBallotMeasures Final.png
Election date
March 2, 2021
Topic
Local property and Local business regulation
Status
Approved
Type
Referendum		Origin
Citizens

Measure B, a measure proposing additional short-term vacation rental regulations and limitations was on the ballot for Cathedral City voters in Riverside County, California, on March 2, 2021.[1]

A “yes” vote supports maintaining Ordinance 842 phasing out short-term vacation rentals that are not home shares by January 1, 2023, except where approved by local homeowners associations and enacting additional regulations on other short-term rentals through January 1, 2023, including:

  • establishing minimum stay lengths of four days and three nights;
  • reducing the maximum occupancy to 10; and 
  • prohibiting the use of outdoor amenities from 10 p.m. to 8 a.m.

A “no” vote opposes adopting Sections 1 and 3 of Ordinance 842, which were designed to repeal existing regulations, phase out short-term rentals except for home shares or rentals allowed by homeowners associations, and establish additional restrictions on short-term rentals.


A simple majority of votes was required for the approval of Measure B.

Election results

Cathedral City Measure B

Result Votes Percentage

Approved Yes

5,006 63.00%
No 2,940 37.00%
Results are officially certified.
Source


Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Measure B was as follows:

“

Shall Sections 1 and 3 of Ordinance 842, adopted unanimously by the City Council to address residents’ concerns such as community safety, neighborhood character, noise, criminal activity, and other impacts caused by short-term vacation rentals operating in Cathedral City, by establishing additional regulations on short-term vacation rentals, and phasing out short-term vacation rentals except where approved by local homeowners associations, become law?

”

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.

Analysis

The following impartial analysis was prepared by the Cathedral City, City Attorney:[2]

“ On September 9, 2020, the Cathedral City City Council adopted Ordinance 842 changing the City’s regulations on short-term vacation rentals (“STVRs”), making them more stringent and phasing out STVRs except where permitted by a homeowner’s association or where the STVR is a home share. Measure B asks the voters whether these new regulations should be adopted or not. A “Yes” vote is a vote for the new, more stringent regulations in Ordinance 842 to be adopted and the existing STVR regulations to be repealed. A “No” vote is a vote to keep in place the City’s existing STVR regulations, and either a) reject the new STVR regulations entirely, or b) adopt only the portion of the new STVR regulations that are “operational requirements.” Measure B is subject to simple majority approval.

Measure B has been placed on the ballot because the City received a petition seeking a referendum on Sections 1 and 3 of Ordinance 842. Section 1 of Ordinance 842 repeals the City’s existing STVR regulations and Section 3 of Ordinance 842 adopts new, more stringent regulations on STVRs. Some differences between the existing and proposed STVR regulations are:

Existing Regulations
  • Allows STVRs anywhere in the City
  • Existing permitted STVRs are allowed to continue to operate indefinitely and with no minimum length of stay
  • Limits the number of occupants based on the number of bedrooms with a maximum occupancy of 18 (daytime) and 14 (nighttime)
  • No limitations on the use of outdoor amenities
Proposed Regulations
  • STVRs will only be allowed within neighborhoods with a homeowners association that allows STVRs or elsewhere if the STVR is a home share (primary resident remains on site during short-term rental)
  • Existing permitted STVRs that are not home shares or in a qualifying homeowners association will be allowed to continue to operate until January 1, 2023; all stays must be a minimum of 4 days / 3 nights in length.
  • Limits the number of occupants based on the number of bedroom with a maximum occupancy of 10 at any time
  • Prohibits use of outdoor amenities between 10 p.m. and 8 a.m.

If a majority of the voters vote “No” on Measure B, it will create an ambiguity in Ordinance 842 regarding the “operational requirements” applicable to STVRs. Section 4 of Ordinance 842, which was not challenged by the referendum petition and is not being voted on in Measure B, requires all STVR permittees in the City to comply with the STVR “operational requirements” contained in one section of the new, more stringent regulations adopted by Section 3 of the Ordinance. A “No” vote rejects the adoption of Section 3 of the Ordinance, but it does not reject the adoption of Section 4 of the Ordinance. Therefore, it is unclear whether the new “operational requirements” mentioned in Section 4 of the Ordinance will take effect even if a majority of the voters vote “No” on Measure B, and if so how conflicts between those new “operational requirements” and the requirements in the existing STVR regulations will be resolved.[3]

”

Support for a "yes" vote

If you know of endorsements or arguments that should be posted here, email editor@ballotpedia.org.

Cathedral City Residents Yes on B led the campaign for a "yes" vote on Measure B.

Supporters for a "yes" vote

The following individuals signed the official argument in favor of a "yes" vote on the measure:[4]

  • Danny Lee, President Cathedral City Residents Committee
  • Stan Henry, Former Chief of Police and Mayor
  • Julie Baumer, Former Cathedral City Senior Center Board Member
  • Bary Freet, Former Fire Chief
  • Dr. Ifthika Nissa, Early Childhood Education Administrator

Organizations

Arguments

The following argument was submitted in support of a "yes" vote on Measure B to the Cathedral City elections division:[5]

“ Here’s why we should vote YES. This ordinance is all about our quality of life. It keeps our neighborhoods safe from strangers and maintains housing for people who want to live here.

Our city is home to thousands of hard working families and retirees. We all want a safe, secure and healthy place to live. We want a community; a place to call home. We want to be able to raise children without having to explain the bad language and drunken brawls at the house next door.

Many residents leave early for work, and don’t want to listen to a party next door until 2AM. We want to know our neighbors. We want a real neighborhood where friends and family coexist, helping and supporting one another.

Short Term Vacation Rentals (STVRs) destroy that dream. Loud, alcohol-fueled parties destroy peace of mind. Every stranger on the block is a new ‘stranger danger’ concern for parents protecting their children. There are no background checks on partygoers. Every pile of trash, every loud argument in a backyard or on the street takes away our feeling of safety and security. Not every visitor behaves this way – but when you’ve lived through weekends of bad behavior, you dread every weekend – never knowing who is going to be right next door.

Ordinance 842 defends us against this intrusion into our lives. By keeping STVRs out of our residential neighborhoods, it ensures our health and safety, and encourages more full-time residents to buy or rent long-term.

Without this ordinance, there will be no restrictions on party houses anywhere in our city. That’s not safe. It’s not secure. And it’s not a place to raise your children. You may not live next door to one now – but all that could change if we don’t vote YES.[3]

”

Support for a "no" vote

If you know of endorsements or arguments that should be posted here, email editor@ballotpedia.org.

Share Cathedral City, No on B led the campaign for a "no" vote on Measure B.

Supporters of a "no" vote

Organizations

Arguments

No arguments in support of a "no" vote on Measure B were filed with the Cathedral City elections division.

The following argument in favor of a "no" vote on Measure B was posted on Share Cathedral City's website:[6]

“
  • STVRs are not a "widespread community issue" or "a threat to affordable housing" as claimed by the local council. STVRs account for 1.6% of the total housing in Cathedral City. In 2020 Cathedral City had a total of 347 permitted STVR properties, which includes home-shares and homes located within approved HOAs. According to Cathedral City's website, there are 21,527 total housing units.
  • In 2020, Cathedral City received 1,811 calls for service (some from the same individual multiple times). Of those calls received there were only 54 citations issued. The remainder were recorded as invalid. In other words, this means that of all the calls for service logged in the past year, 2.9% were found to be valid requests in 2020.
  • According to the City's website, "17,000 residents live in the area for three to six months a year, an 18.5% growth rate over the past 10 years. These "snowbirds" pump significant dollars into the local economy."
  • In the fiscal year 2019-2020, STVRs brought in $756,024 in annual transient occupancy revenue for the city, at a time when the city is facing a $5.2M budget deficit that has forced the city to lay off critical employees within the police, fire and administrative departments.
  • Voting NO on Measure B does NOT eliminate enforcement of STVRs. This enforcement is strictly paid for by STVR permit fees, which are $1950 annually. Those permit fees cover the cost of the dedicated police enforcement team to handle STVR violations and complaints at no extra cost to taxpayers.[3]
 ”

Background

Short-term rental ordinances

On June 26, 2019, the Cathedral City City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 824, which established a 45 day moratorium on new short-term vacation rental permits in the city. The City Council then, on July 24, 2019, adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 825, extending the moratorium indefinitely until repealed; and appointed a citizen task force to study issues related to short-term rentals in neighborhoods and recommend solutions to address the problems identified. The task force presented their report on July 23, 2020, and described incompatibility between short-term rentals and the surrounding residential neighborhoods. In response to the task force's report, the City Council passed Ordinance No. 842 to phase out short-term rentals in residential areas on September 9, 2020, in a vote of 5-0.[7]

In response to Ordinance No. 842, on October 13, 2020, a referendum petition with 3,515 valid signatures was submitted to the Cathedral City Clerk, exceeding the 10% of eligible voter signatures required. The City Council, on December 2, 2020, resolved to submit the ordinance to voters at a special election, March 2, 2021.[8]

Short-term rentals

See also: Local housing on the ballot

Short-term vacation rentals in Cathedral City, facilitated through websites such as Airbnb, are privately owned residential dwellings that are rented for periods of thirty consecutive days or less.[9]

Supporters of the restrictions put in place by Ordinance No. 842 cited noise complaints and safety concerns as the primary reasons for implementing the restrictions. Short-term vacation rental owners, they said, do not live in the community and are not impacted by the issues they describe as widespread.[10] Those opposed to the restrictions put in place by Ordinance No. 824 argued that the problems described by the ordinance's supporters were caused by unpermitted vacation rentals and that the issue was a problem of city enforcement of existing regulations, not vacation rentals themselves. Many short-term vacation rental owners are, those opposed to Ordinance No. 824 said, individuals who intend to retire in Cathedral City, and the restrictions put in place by Ordinance No. 824 curtail their rights as property owners.[11]

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing local ballot measures in California

This measure was put on the ballot through a successful veto referendum petition drive which received 3,515 valid signatures, exceeding the required 2,401.

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named BallotLanguage
  2. ↑ Cathedral City Documents, "Measure B, City Attorney's Impartial Analysis," accessed February 17, 2021
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  4. ↑ Cathedral City Documents, "Argument Supporting Ballot Measure B," accessed February 17, 2021
  5. ↑ Cathedral City Documents, "Argument Supporting Ballot Measure B," accessed February 17, 2021
  6. ↑ Share Cathedral City, No on B, "Why Should You Vote No?" accessed February 17, 2021
  7. ↑ Cathedral City Documents, "Ordinance No. 842," accessed February 17, 2020
  8. ↑ Cathedral City Documents, "Resolution No. 2020-62," accessed February 17, 2021
  9. ↑ Cathedral City Ordinance No. 842, "Definitions," accessed February 19, 2021
  10. ↑ KESQ News Team, "Supporters & opponents of Cathedral City’s short-term rental measure B answer questions," accessed February 19, 2021
  11. ↑ KESQ News Team, "Supporters & opponents of Cathedral City’s short-term rental measure B answer questions," accessed February 19, 2021
v • e
Local ballot measures in California
Counties
California
Analysis
Political topics
Tax measures
Flag of California
v • e
State of California
Sacramento (capital)
Elections

What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures

Government

Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy

Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Cathedral_City,_California,_Measure_B,_Additional_Short-Term_Vacation_Rental_Regulations_and_Limitations_(March_2021)&oldid=8272717"