SLT embarks on path to find consensus on VHRs
Several dozen people on Nov. 16 weigh in on vacation home rentals in South Lake Tahoe. Photo/LTN
By Kathryn Reed
Sifting through assumptions and reality. That is the goal of a consulting team hired by the city of South Lake Tahoe to work on the vacation home rental quagmire.
More than 70 people attended a meeting Wednesday night aimed at getting the public’s opinions about these rentals that are usually found in residential neighborhoods.
Reps from Michael Baker International have been in town for a few days gathering data. They are tasked with coming up with ideas of how the city can go forward with VHRs (or not) in order to appease people and the city’s budget.
These whole house rentals pay transient occupancy tax, which is one of the city’s main revenue sources.
But plenty of people are less worried about the city’s coffers and more worried about their quality of life.
People at the Nov. 16 meeting spoke about how these extra people in town are impacting the condition of city streets, some questioned if everyone is paying TOT, and many are concerned with lack of enforcement.
Restricting the number of VHRs was an idea, while others recognize hotels aren’t where people want to stay.
Some said VHRs are already regulated, noting these owners face more scrutiny than those renting to full-time residents.
Others fear the value of their home is lessened with neighboring VHRS.
Three stations were set up in the senior center where people could write comments as well vote via a sticker on what they like-dislike about VHRs, as well as cast a vote related to their perceptions about current conditions.
Most people agreed VHRs are a good source of revenue for the city and the homeowner, that they contribute to jobs, and expand lodging opportunities for tourists. They also don’t believe there has been an increase in commercial enterprises in neighborhoods.
It was a pretty even split on agreeing-disagreeing about whether VHRs put a strain on public services and if they degrade neighborhoods.
The consultants will compare the trends and perceptions of the public against the factual data. The results of the study are likely to be released in the spring, at which time the City Council will address the findings. There will be more time for public comment before then. Taking this survey is another way to have a voice about VHRs.
I just love strangers moving in next door for a few days or a week of whooping it up as they try to get their monies worth of vacation. Noise and disruption occurs all day long often with their cars parked on the street instead of on the property crowding already limited on street parking.
And aren’t the hot tubs a joy to behold as drinking rowdies go for broke. (All hot tubs should be fully enclosed to minimize raucous noise).
The best part is the almost total lack of enforcement by SLT of regulations designed to make these interlopers less unfriendly.
There are several VHR’s in our neighborhood. They are undercontrol because I personally meet any potential problems at the curb when they pull in and EXPLAIN the rules of the “HOOD”, at least our blocks rules about parking, noise, children, animals etc. If they do not want to comply I am personally willing to stand out on the curb and enforce.
VERY inconvenient yes, but and am an OLD Spec Ed teacher and I ALWAYS got yard duty.
P.S. I am more trouble than I am worth;)~
Robin your enforcement of vhr rules is commendable. I wish there was someone with your willingness to stand up for your home and neighborhood on my street, besides myself. But, unless you get law enforcement involved, there is no record of problems and the city/county have no reason to tighten control. The city seems to be trying to improve control and maybe the county will join in, but without “official” vhr complaints from law enforcement, your “yard duty” will never end, call for law enforcement “back-up”. Also, video and sound recordings are a huge plus when making complaints.