The county’s vacation rental ordinance faces one more hurdle for approval.

Pam Marino here, betting that tomorrow, Wednesday, Aug. 13, there will be a large amount of web traffic from Monterey County to the California Coastal Commission livestream from King Gillette Ranch in Calabasas, where the commission is meeting. Expect a whole lot of public comment, as the commissioners are asked to approve an amendment to the County of Monterey’s local coastal program that would limit vacation rentals.

The meeting will be a fascinating watch for a couple of reasons: one because it’s a contentious subject with already nearly 400 pages of correspondence to the commission for and against; two—and perhaps moreso—because one of the commission’s newest members, Chris Lopez, chair of the Monterey County Board of Supervisors, has already voted “no” on the very ordinance that’s part of the LCP.

The ordinance was approved last September on a 3-2 vote, with Lopez and Supervisor Luis Alejo on the opposing side. Lopez argued there would be unintended consequences to limiting commercial short-term rentals to a 4-percent cap in unincorporated areas of the county and banning them in Big Sur and Carmel Highlands, pushing out families that depend on the rental income to keep their homes in favor of a “professional corps of Airbnb operators.”

The supervisors who supported the new ordinance—Mary Adams, Glenn Church and Wendy Root Askew—contended that STRs were depleting an already pinched housing stock by removing homes from the market that could be used for long-term rentals.

The ordinance creates three rental types: homestays, renting a room in a property that owners are occupying; limited vacation rentals, in which a whole house can be rented out up to three times a year; and, unlimited commercial vacation rentals. 

Coastal Commission staff are recommending approval, after weighing the commission’s mission to provide affordable lodging near the coast with the community’s need for housing. 

The staff estimated that even with the cap, the balance of the ordinance will provide for 334 unlimited commercial vacation rentals in the county. “This is not an inconsequential amount of vacation rentals and would still represent a healthy vacation rental market,” the report states.

“Vacation rental regulation is not an all or nothing proposition, and the key is finding a balance that makes sense for both communities and visitors. Finding that balance can be an incredibly difficult process, including as it played out here in Monterey County, where the County crafted [a land use plan]-consistent compromise between what can be truly competing objectives,” it adds.

“In this case, a meaningful vacation rental market would be maintained in the County’s coastal areas, while also addressing coastal resource protection and community needs and objectives.”

Not so fast, the Monterey County Vacation Rental Alliance argues. Claiming to represent “middle-class homeowners, property managers and small business owners,” the MCVRA contends the ordinance will “severely” limit rentals, eliminating affordable coastal accommodations and doing little to address the housing crisis. The Pebble Beach Company also argued against approving the LCP amendment.

A group calling itself the Big Sur Local Coastal Program Defense Committee, boasting 250 members, urged approval, out of concern for the “preservation of the cultural and natural values of Big Sur and the land use plan that protects them for the public to enjoy,” a letter by the group’s attorney states. There will be enough rentals, including affordable ones, through homestays and limited vacation rentals, up to three times a year, the group argues. The nonprofit Community Association of Big Sur, agrees, as does Keep Big Sur Wild.

Will Lopez be able to sway enough of the 11 other voting members of the commission to block the LCP amendment? It’s likely one of those members, and another local like Lopez, will not follow Lopez’s lead. Ann Notthoff of Carmel Valley, recently reappointed after previously serving on the commission, is also president of the LandWatch Board of Directors, which supports the STR ordinance. 

The meeting takes place at 9am tomorrow. If you want to participate in the meeting, or just watch it, click here for the agenda, instructions and link to the livestream. 

What are your thoughts on where the commission will land? On vacation rentals? I’m interested in hearing from you.