The city of Los Angeles is inching (very slowly) toward regulating Airbnb and other short-term rentals, with hundreds of people flocking Tuesday to City Hall to weigh in on draft rules that would limit hosts to renting their homes to just 180 days per year. According to KPCC:
Hundreds on Tuesday filled Los Angeles City Council chambers to its 350-person capacity, leading police to direct an overflow crowd to City Hall's south lawn, where a microphone at a podium had been set up for speakers.
They spoke passionately to members of the city’s Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Chairman Jose Huizar says the committee will meet again in July or August to vote on the rules. After it does, the City Council, which has the final say, will cast its vote.
Airbnb hosts are urging the city to ease the 180-day cap. “With all due respect, please do not make hasty restrictions that will adversely affect thousands of constituents and divert millions of dollars out of South Central Los Angeles’s community,” host Lynda Mitchell told the committee, according to the Daily News.
But union workers and the hotel industry say a cap is needed to protect hospitality jobs.
“Think about the people who work for housekeeping like my mother,” Yajayra Cerrato, 21, told the Daily News. “For those six months that you guys host ... is she going to be unemployed?”
The rules would also cap the number of rooms a host can rent out, and hosts would only be allowed to rent out their primary residences. Second dwelling units on single-family properties would be banned as would temporary structures, such as trailers and tents.
It’s not just the hotel industry that supports regulations. Others, including the advocacy group Coalition for Economic Survival, say short-term rentals are only making LA’s housing crisis worse. One way that happens? Landlords illegally turn their rental units into what are essentially hotel rooms, which takes sorely-needed units off the market and drives up the cost of rents.
- Hundreds attend LA hearing on regulation of Airbnb-style short-term rentals [Los Angeles Daily News]
- Airbnb, short-term rental restrictions draw hundreds to LA council debate [KPCC]
- How short-term rentals are changing urban neighborhoods [Curbed]
- Landlords Who Booted Tenants From Rent-Controlled Units Face Criminal Charges [Curbed LA]
Comments
This is ridiculous – the big money hotel lobby trots out poor minorities as their poster people, just like the wealthy NIMBY Measure S drafters did. For every AirBnB abuse, of which I am not denying happens, there is also the couple who lost a job or a senior on fixed income, who are able to still make their mortgage payments or living expenses with an AirBnB. Or folks who would not rent out their guest house long-term since they need it open for when friends and family visit – they are not taking any permanent housing off the market because they were never going to rent it on a long-term basis, especially with the insane rent control and other protections that would prevent them from getting rid of an unwanted tenant if they needed their extra space back.
The reason why AirBnB is so damn popular is because hotels are generally way overpriced for what your average traveler can afford. Strengthen the complaint and enforcement system so that problem units get dealt with, and let everyone else keep doing their thing.
Eliminate AirBnB tomorrow and rent prices still aren’t going anywhere until we build a couple hundred thousand more units – the impact of AirBnB is a drop in the bucket for LA’s housing situation.
By disqusted on 06.14.17 10:05am
City of LA hit hotels with min living wage standards that are above the regular min wage. Therefore, hotels are more limited and expensive. Therefore, Airbnb becomes more attractive. At the same time, they hit the rental market with rent control limits, which makes Airbnb more attractive.
By LA Denizen on 06.15.17 9:51am
To the author: Actually, if you attended the hearing or watched it online, you’d know that when Councilman Harris-Dawson questioned the planning commission about whether there should be caps on the number of days an owner can host AirBnB guests in accessory dwelling units ("ADUs" or the "Second dwelling units on single-family properties" in your article), the presentative from the planning commission said that the word "property" as drafted in the draft ordinance would cover ADUs—meaning that a property owner can rent out their guesthouse while staying in the main house, or vice versa, as long as the ADUs are habitable.
By curbedmo on 06.14.17 1:04pm
so living in a main house and renting out the ADU/guesthouse would still be allowed (this article implies otherwise)? What does "habitable" technically mean? Do they have to be permitted?
By dcs603 on 06.14.17 5:47pm
I assume "habitable" means a certificate of occupancy, which means yes, it needs to be permitted.
The draft ordinance is still up in the air, so we can’t say what’s allowed and what’s not at this point. The committee meets again in late July/early August and there may be an updated draft ordinance before that. After the next hearing, they may make a recommendation for the entire city council to vote on. We’ll see what happens.
By curbedmo on 06.14.17 10:52pm
And, for the landlords who are evicting people illegally and turning the units into AirBnB, go after them if it’s illegal! There are laws governing that already (e.g. Ellis Act). Why limit law-abiding AirBnB hosts because the city doesn’t want to enforce its existing laws?
By curbedmo on 06.14.17 1:11pm
There are no "law-abiding AirBnB hosts." NONE.
Short-term rentals in LA are illegal. Period. Full stop. End of story.
By ShareBetter SF on 06.15.17 12:34am
Renting out your spare bedroom is certainly legal.
Period. Full stop. End of story.
By goingup on 06.15.17 6:57am
The government steps in to ‘save’ failing industries at its own peril. When will we learn our lesson?
By MMVic on 06.14.17 2:07pm
I hate this winners and losers regulation junk. Let the free market reign
By stvrr on 06.14.17 2:30pm
if anything, we need more quality hotels, airbnb offerings and housing stock. Let the market/consumers decide their choice. These artificial pressure distorts real demand narrative. Get rid of airbnb, rent control laws that only protects certain class of voters. More offering is always a good thing.
By High Rent on 06.14.17 2:47pm
So many good points on why restricting AirBnB short term rentals is a terrible idea and I agree with them all. One thing to add:
Thousands of housing units are being torn down and replaced with hotels. Look at Hollywood. Hotels are so expensive in LA that this will continue to happen. Why should a developer build new housing when they can build a hotel that makes much more money? If you’re concerned about losing housing stock, then don’t fight ordinary citizens who want to rent out their extra spaces. Limiting restrictions on short term rentals will slightly decrease hotel demand, which will decrease the number of housing units which get converted into new hotels.
By SocalChill on 06.15.17 11:07am
Good point, although looking at all of the hotel projects in Hollywood in the past couple decades (both existing and proposed/under development), the vast majority, if not all of them, appear to be replacing parking lots or business sites (like the shitty Jack-in-the-Box) rather than housing. The Mark Twain "hotel" seems to be one of the few exceptions.
By disqusted on 06.16.17 10:59am
AirBNB should be banned, completely.
By not banksy on 06.15.17 5:52pm
You should be banned, completely.
By disqusted on 06.16.17 6:08pm
180 day cap is such a smart idea! Genius! Why not cap Uber drivers to 180 days and let taxis get a piece of the action too. While we are at it, lets cap Whole Foods because Ralphs is missing out on that business. Lets cap the amount of days you work too because arbitrary government rules are great for our economy.
By Timur Salikov on 06.16.17 12:01pm
It’s insanely arbitrary. What other business is capped as to the number of days it can operate? Are day cares, which operate in residential areas, capped at a particular number of days? How about massage therapists, who operate out of their own homes? No, of course not.
By disqusted on 06.16.17 6:09pm
Thank you for the generally balanced article on the upcoming vote on AIRBNB’S in L.A.. The fact is that many Angelenos, are sharing a room or rooms in their own home to help them make their mortgage payments and stay in their city and community. If it is in their own home then they are not taking any housing off the market and they can also mitigate any disturbance to their neighbors. So why any cap or limits on owner occupied home sharing? Multiple rooms should be allowed with no cap or limit on the days. With fair and reasonable regulation, it’s a win, win for everyone.
However, the current proposed Ordinance, with its severe one-room, 180 day limitations on all home sharing, owner occupied or not, will drive the majority of home sharing out of L.A. That’s hand in glove with what the hotel lobby wants as well; a scorched earth policy that will effectively eliminate 90% of all home sharing in L.A. and force many of those who do home share to sell their homes and leave the neighborhood’s they’ve been living in for decades. That’s wrong and ruinous to the little guy who’s trying to stay in their home and community by renting rooms in their house.
If the Councilmen really wanted to support their fellow citizens, they’d advocate for an ordinance like the one passed a year ago in Santa Monica that bans all non-owner occupied home sharing, but fully allows owner occupied home sharing with no room or time restrictions. THAT’S fair.
By jubb3500 on 07.13.17 2:16pm