Monterey County Vacation Rental Alliance

Supporting Visitors, the Economy & our Neighborhoods

Regulation by Local Cities in Monterey County

WHAT REGULATION(S) AFFECT YOUR VACATION RENTAL?

If your STR is in an incorporated city, Monterey County regulations do not apply. Cities enact their own regulation which varies considerably from town to town.

On July 8, 2017, the Monterey Herald summarized the status of short-term rentals in Monterey peninsula cities. Click on "Different cities, different approaches to short-term rental issue on Monterey Peninsula."

More recently on September 13, 2017 the Herald summarized the status of the City of Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove. See  Monterey to enforce daily fines on short-term rental operators.
City of Monterey 
The City simply bans any rental for less than 30 days. An STR operated in Monterey is illegal! The City has now adopted an ordinance that prohibits ADVERTISING short-term rentals in the City’s residential zoned districts. The City has contracted with  Host Compliance to scour the internet looking for violations. The city claims to have put over 100 owners on notice. See:
Carmel-by-the-Sea 
The town also simply bans any rental for less than 30 days. An STR operated in this town is illegal! 

Carmel-by-the-Sea is cracking down on short-term rentals. See the Monterey County Weekly article dated December 15, 2106. The town has also contracted with  Host Compliance to scour the internet looking for violations.  Ignoring Carmel's ban can result in very large fines! One owner settled with the town for $25,000 after facing an even larger amount. See  Carmel settles short-term rental lawsuit while announcing amnesty period for other scofflaws.

Pacific Grove

Since 2010, Pacific Grove has had an STR ordinance allowing homeowners to get an annual STR license to rent for fewer than 30 days a month. The current version of the ordinance caps the total STR licenses at 250, limits licenses to no more than 15% of the homes per block, and restricts homes whose boundaries are within 55 feet of each other from both being licensed. See https://www.strongpg.com/about.


In 2017, when the City Council decided to combine STR licenses that operated year-round with licenses that only operated 90 days out of the year--bringing the total number of licenses up to 289--and notifying every homeowner within 300 feet of a licensed STR, pandemonium ensued. The combination of an inflated 289 licenses and 25,000 individual notices prompted PG residents to call for a ban on the entire program. In response, City Council adopted the 15% density limit per block, the 55-foot "Zone of Exclusion, and a Lottery to thin the herd.


At December 2017 Community meeting, an overwhelming number of STR owners showed up to convince the Council that attrition could reduce the cap to the desired 250. Council agreed to hold the Lottery in abeyance until March 31, 3018, the start of the annual license renewal period. However, Council changed their mind in February, 2018, and initiated plans to hold the Lottery.


As of March 31, 2018, only 256 STR licenses were renewed. A group of Pacific Grove STR owners called STRONGpg sued the city asking for an injunction to stop the Lottery. See STR owners sue city. Stating that STR owners had no right to expect their licenses to be renewed, the court ruled against an injunction. See P.G. lottery will move forward.


The Lottery indiscriminately eliminated 51 STR licenses, far more than the City Council or Staff had anticipated. Two schoolteachers lost their license. So did a local family whose ex-army father is handicapped. Ditto for the family who uses the income to support a bedridden sister with multiple sclerosis. Owners with pages of complaints lodged against their rental got to keep their license. Owners without a single complaint lost theirs. Newcomers to the STR program kept their license. Old timers lost theirs. Properties losing their licenses will be given a one-year “sunset period” (until April 30, 2019) to cease short-term rentals. See Lottery leads to disappointed owners.


We are deeply saddened that PG Council’s radical measures to appease the anti-STR contingent will hurt so many homeowners as well as the local labor force that helps maintain these homes. The City’s budget will also take a hit at a time of looming pension obligations and upcoming capital expenditures on infrastructure improvements like sewers, roads, street lights, and children’s programs like youth recreation, baseball fields, and playgrounds. City Staff will be calculating the loss of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) from the 51 STRs, estimated at several hundred thousand dollars.


Beginning March 31, 2019, 40 licenses will be available for properties that don’t exceed the 15% density limit and are not next door to an already licensed home. Homeowners operating an STR in Pacific Grove without a license are subject to very large fines. See Carmel Pine Cone article.


But it gets worse! A group of Pacific Grove opponents have obtained enough verified signatures to put a complete ban on STRs in all but the coastal zone on the November 2018 ballot. See Pacific Grove moves STR initiative to November ballot. We will need the support of owners and neighbors to defeat this initiative.

Seaside

Seaside currently has no regulations affecting STRs but the city council intends to create an ordinance. On November 16, 2017, the Seaside city council heard a second draft of an ordinance. This second draft resolved MCVRA's biggest concern about the first draft that would have not permitted second homes to be rented to visitors. At the hearing, the city council approved and forwarded the second draft to the Seaside planning department to be formally written as an addition to the city’s code. Next, it will return to the city council for another hearing.  For the details click on second draft ordinance

Marina

The Marina Planning Commission considered short-term rentals at their July 27, 2017 meeting. Here is the link to the staff report and two draft ordinances. http://www.ci.marina.ca.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/8187

The biggest difference between the two drafts is one has a requirement that the owner be present on site (homesharing).


The meeting showed how government can work well. It was the best example we have seen of how government is supposed to work. The Planning Commission held what they called a "study session," on STRs, which entailed a staff report, public comment, and Planning Commission discussion/questions with the public being invited to come to the podium whenever they wanted to comment on something that was being discussed. The public comment was respected equally with the Commissioners' comments. The Commissioners had all read the information the staff had given them on the subject, and they asked intelligent questions and made relevant comments.


This is not an action item at this time, but staff is asking for direction from the community and the Commission. We are working with them to get them on the right track!


Take the time to read the ordinances they are proposing and comment on them either to boardmember@mcvra.org or directly to the City of Marina at chopper@cityofMarina.org.

Salinas 
This city has no regulations affecting STRs.