New short-term rental rules in Idyllwild, rest of Riverside County delayed
Short-term rental owners in Idyllwild and other unincorporated parts of Riverside County may soon have to limit their number of overnight guests, install outdoor noise monitors and pay higher fees.
But they — and neighbors hoping for changes — will have to wait a few more weeks to find out precisely what the new rules will be.
The county board of supervisors considered a suite of changes aimed at reining in disruptive partying at vacation rentals during a lengthy meeting Tuesday, but the board’s five members ultimately agreed to delay a final vote until September.
The proposed changes, which have been in the works since early 2020, arrive as the number of permitted short-term rentals in unincorporated Riverside County has spiked in recent years, from 268 in 2016 — the year the county adopted a short-term rental ordinance — to 1,084 in July 2022. County officials have estimated double to triple that number are operating without proper permits.
That growth has brought more visitors into unincorporated neighborhoods, causing a reported uptick in issues such as loud parties, blocked roadways, fire hazards, trash and parking congestion. The effects have been pronounced in Idyllwild and Temecula’s wine country, which combined make up about 70% of short-term rentals registered with the county.
More: New short-term rental rules in Idyllwild, other areas to be decided by county supervisors
The county’s proposal also follows a 2021 grand jury report on the short-term rental landscape, which found the county's current enforcement process to be ineffective, with fines too small to act as a meaningful deterrent. The grand jury recommended increasing short-term rental licensing and renewal fees to fund better oversight.
“Many of the suggestions under that grand jury review have been incorporated into the ordinance as it stands today,” John Hildebrand, the county’s planning director, said during the meeting Tuesday.
The proposal includes mandatory property inspections for those seeking a short-term rental certificate, new fines for violators and what Hildebrand has called a “three-strikes-and-you’re-out” rule where permits could be revoked after a third violation.
The initial fee for short-term rentals would increase from $250 to $740, with annual renewals jumping from $100 to $540.
The provision that has sparked the most discussion during the process is the one on occupancy, according to Hildebrand. The new rules would establish a limit of two people per bedroom, plus one additional person, with a maximum of 10 people, along with an option for larger rentals to apply for a 16-person maximum.
Some changes are already underway, as Hildebrand noted the county has hired an outside company to handle short-term rental applications and tax collections. The county is also establishing a 24/7 call center to handle issues related to rentals and has hired a special enforcement team to work over the weekends.
With the adopted changes, Riverside County joins a long list of governments in southern California that have recently responded to the growing rental market. Last month, supervisors in San Bernardino County approved a 45-day pause on new short-term rentals in Airbnb hotspot Joshua Tree and other communities, while many cities in the Coachella Valley have taken steps to rein in the market.
Some rental owners push back
Before the supervisors unanimously decided to delay their vote, several owners of short-term rentals, as well as neighbors and other stakeholders, pushed back on sections of the proposal during the all-day meeting.
Tom DeCarlo, a short-term rental owner in the Temecula wine country and member of a vacation rental owners’ group, urged the supervisors to delay a decision on occupancy limits, arguing the bedroom count is “totally unreasonable.”
“There also needs to be something in the occupancy (provision) tied to acreage,” DeCarlo said. “There's a vast difference between a small house in a residential neighborhood and some of the sprawling estate mansions that we have.”
DeCarlo, who warned people “will be out of business” due to the proposed changes, also argued most wrongdoers are operating without licenses. In the past 30 days, county enforcement officers inspected 43 short-term rentals in response to complaints and issued two citations, Bob Magee, the county’s code enforcement director, said Tuesday.
“That's not a big number in the scheme of things,” DeCarlo said, arguing unlicensed rentals are responsible for most problems.
Other sections of the ordinance, including one that limits lots with multiple structures to a single short-term rental license and another requiring owners to post a sign on site that includes contact information, also drew scrutiny from members of the public. Laura Stearn, who lives near short-term rentals and runs her own in Temecula wine country, worried the signs would lead to more break-ins.
“If we post signs on the street telling everyone who drives by that the house is unoccupied as per an online schedule that they can look up, we're just asking for trouble: theft, vandalism, squatting,” Stearn said, adding the signage is “not worth the risk.”
Still, some who spoke during the meeting indicated they could get on board with the proposal before the board, which was developed during a pair of planning commission meetings earlier this year.
“Having been through these wars a couple times, I know how difficult it is to try to balance all the factors here — the residents that may be impacted by short-term rentals and those property owners who have a right to do on their property what they would like to — so it's difficult,” said Jeff Comerchero, a former mayor of Temecula who was representing several rental owners from the area.
“I think your staff and the planning commission have really done an excellent job of putting together an ordinance that balances those facts,” he added. “The old adage is generally if everyone is equally unhappy, you've done a good job."
No moratorium for now
After hearing public comment for several hours, the supervisors unanimously decided to postpone a final decision and direct county staff to work on addressing a few areas of concern.
First District Supervisor Kevin Jeffries said he thinks the low occupancy limits, particularly for large estates, are “not reasonable,” and added: “Besides, what government employee is going to walk into the home and count how many people are in bed to see if they're in compliance?”
Third District Supervisor Chuck Washington argued the board should consider creating distinctions between short-term rentals that have on-site hosts and those that don’t, particularly in the Temecula area that he represents. The suggestion drew some pushback from Jeffries, who said he would want to ensure that any non-hosted rentals already operating would still be able to.
The proposal before the supervisors Tuesday also would have directed county staff to study ways to limit the number of short-term rentals in Idyllwild and Temecula’s wine country.
Several residents who testified Tuesday urged the supervisors to issue an emergency moratorium on new rentals while county staff develop proposals. Idyllwild resident Bev McCullough told the supervisors that she has five short-term rentals within 300 feet of her home.
“There's a total land rush going on right now, and investors are calling in from out of state for any house that goes on the market,” McCullough said. “I really encourage you to put a moratorium on while you decide about what kind of cap.”
At least one official, Second District Supervisor Karen Spiegel, was interested in issuing a temporary moratorium. But a county attorney said the board could not do so Tuesday because it had not given public notice it would consider it.
The board will consider the proposed changes for a possible vote during its meeting Sept. 13.
Tom Coulter covers politics and can be reached at thomas.coulter@desertsun.com.
This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Short-term rental limits in Idyllwild and Riverside County delayed
