Napa council wants to reel in vacation rental properties
By KEVIN COURTNEY
Napa Valley Register
11:30 a.m. The Napa City Council wants to bring order to a segment of the tourism industry that allows domestic stays in homes in the city’s neighborhoods rather than in hotels or B&Bs.
“What we have going on here is an industry out of control,” Councilman Jim Krider said at a council hearing Tuesday night on the growing vacation rentals business.
Currently, 49 vacation rentals have city licenses, but possibly several hundred more are operating illegally, paying no bed tax into city coffers.
The city is missing out on hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue, while providing no oversight to make sure that these businesses are operated responsibly, city staff said.
That’s going to change, council members agreed. Vacation rentals will be required to get a use permit that sets standards for operation. Neighbors will be able to weigh in at public hearings.
The city began issuing conditional business licenses for vacation rentals in 2003 even though zoning doesn’t allow it, Marlene Demery, the city’s interim planning manager, said.
Unfortunately, the city is only now addressing this oversight, while 49 operators wonder if they will be allowed to continue and others in the process of opening vacation homes are left in limbo, she said.
The council heard from 28 citizens, most of them vacation rental investors who said they would be financially harmed if the city pulled the rug out from under them. They relied on the city’s willingness to issue business licenses when they made their investments, they said.
Don’t penalize those who followed city procedures, but do go after illegal operators and set standards for new applications, said Michael Strong, representing the North Bay Association of Realtors.
Citing today’s troubled housing market, several operators said renting to tourists is the only way they can afford to keep their homes. Vacationers pay considerably more per night than permanent renters would, they said.
Vacation rentals are increasingly popular, especially in tourist areas like Napa Valley, Demery said. Most cities don’t allow them, but tourist meccas often make accommodation, she said. Yountville, St. Helena and Calistoga don’t allow them in single-family neighborhoods, she added.
Councilman Mark van Gorder said he has heard no complaints about vacation rentals. Noise from ice cream trucks has been a bigger issue, he said.
The one exception, he noted, was the bevy of residents from Bella Drive in north Napa who turned out Tuesday to say they had a rogue rental on their street.
“It destroys our quality of neighborhood,” said Bella Drive resident Mike Butler. “We have limousines. We have buses on our quiet street,” said fellow neighbor Nancy Schulz.
The Bella rental advertises on the Internet that it can sleep 12, said Chris Butler. She has counted as many as 13 license plates, she said.
New city rules should protect those already in business or about to open, but the illegals need to be shut down, council members said.
Using fees collected from vacation rental licenses to hire another code enforcement officer was one of van Gorder’s suggestions. This person would go after illegal operations.
Too many vacation rentals would not be good for a neighborhood, mayor Jill Techel said. With public input, the council may end up capping the number, she said.
When there were 37 licensed operators last year, the city collected $83,000 in bed tax. Like hotel and B&B visitors, vacation home guests are expected to pay a 12 percent tax to the city. With 49 licensed operators this year, revenue should grow to $150,000, staff estimated.
If all the illegal rentals were included, city revenue would likely triple or quadruple, staff estimated. Bed tax revenue from hotels and B&Bs was $7.8 million last year.
Several B&B operators noted their businesses are tightly regulated by the city, while vacation rentals were unsupervised.
Many operators of vacation rentals — defined as rentals of less than 30 days — said they would welcome city regulation. They encouraged the city to crack down on operators who don’t have permits.
Councilman Peter Mott was skeptical about vacation rentals in neighborhoods. “I don’t necessarily think a majority of citizens of Napa want it in their neighborhoods,” he said.
Mott would be willing to allow current operations to continue, but he didn’t want new ones. He favored having city permits expire when a property is sold, but there was no council support for this.
Once staff has developed proposed regulations, the council will schedule another public workshop on rentals.
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our
virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact
online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
4gnapan wrote on Mar 19, 2008 11:43 AM:
For the most part, the clients renting these sorts of properties are familys and it's a boost to the neighborhood.
I'd much rather have the occasional Tourist living next door than the gangbanger / drugdealing / paranoid / floodlights on all night tenant with a 1 year lease that cant be tossed out... (yep. had one of those next door not all that long ago... gone now, thankfully)
But please, dont turn this into a Money grab by salivating over the "potential" income from taxes. "
funnyme wrote on Mar 19, 2008 11:59 AM:
mikeb wrote on Mar 19, 2008 12:11 PM:
Lola wrote on Mar 19, 2008 12:22 PM:
diehard4ever wrote on Mar 19, 2008 12:34 PM:
MyInput wrote on Mar 19, 2008 12:53 PM:
Most of us would like to think that we live in a town where the rules apply to everyone evenly, and no individual or group receives special treatment - especially the kind that provides personal enrichment for the favored at the expense of the general public. Apparently, no such guarantee exists in Napa.
If the interim planning manager is responsible for bringing this abuse to light, she is a shining star in what seems an otherwise dull sky of city staff and elected officials. "
musikluvr wrote on Mar 19, 2008 2:05 PM:
jim.beazleyhouse wrote on Mar 19, 2008 2:18 PM:
It is a FACT that Napa's zoning laws don't allow commercial uses in residential neighborhoods without a special use permit.
It's a FACT that a "Conditional Business License" is NOT a use permit.
It is a FACT some city officials were telling property owners they could legally operate Vacation Rentals if they got one of the Conditional Licenses.
The FACT is that you can't.
A Conditional Business License does not mean you get to ignore Napa's Zoning laws. No matter what you think you heard from a clerk at the Planning Commission or the Finance Department.
But it is a FACT that this mess has been fermenting for nearly 5 years! And the City has made it worse by collecting TOT from these law abiding citizens and NOT from the pirates who just opened without ANY "permissions."
The FACT is this mess will not be solved until the City of Napa begins ENFORCING its rules and regulations.
And, oh yes, decides whether it's legal to operate a Vacation Rental unit in single family residential zoning.
Because the FACT is no such Zoning Use is now legal.
"
hood1234 wrote on Mar 19, 2008 2:40 PM:
14obama wrote on Mar 19, 2008 8:35 PM:
Are you Blind ? Can't you See what's happening around you ? We've been taken advantage of and you sit in your house watchin TV while it goes Down ! Wake Up ! You're Sleepin ! "
bornin74 wrote on Mar 20, 2008 3:37 PM:
I ahve on more FACT that was even printed in our lovely fish wrap.....
One of our esteemd council persons owns one of these "vacation rentals" in the downtown "old town" district.....
What is THAT area zoned....
ALL of the people that currently are given "illegal" permission to run these "vacation rentals" will eventually be grandfathered in, for one simple fact... Because someone sitting on our council is involved...
Did this council person "recuse themselves" during this last round of talks?????? "
NVR Moderator wrote on Mar 20, 2008 3:50 PM:
This line was inadvertently left out of the" online version of the article.
"Councilwoman Juliana Inman did not participate in the discussion. She disqualified herself because she operates a vacation rental on First Street.
thanks for pointing out that it was missing. "
chunk wrote on Mar 20, 2008 6:45 PM:
MyInput wrote on Mar 20, 2008 7:33 PM:
Wonder why the Council is so interested in changing the rules to allow vacation rentals in neighborhoods?
We certainly wouldn't expect any local reporter to ever ask such questions. "