Correspondence - Item #15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I many hosts have STRs in Santa Ana residential zones. Indeed, many Rental Alliance members 2 have acquired a business license for each rental unit that they own or manage. And, in addition to 3 paying fees to Santa Ana, hosts have invested other considerable resources to make their homes 4 suitable for STRs. 5 8. The City turned this all on its head when on April 2, 2024, it adopted an urgency 6 ordinance banning all STRs "effective immediately" (the "Urgency Ordinance"). Thereafter, on 7 April 16, 2024, City Council adopted an ordinance permanently banning all STRs in the City 8 ("Ordinance No. NS-3061" or the "STR Ban"). The Urgency Ordinance and the STR Ban 9 prohibited both"home-sharing rentals" (rental of a dwelling unit for a period of less than 30 days 10 while one of the dwelling unit's owners lives onsite through the visitors' stay) and "short-term or 11 vacation rentals" (rental of dwelling unit for a period of less than 30 days without concurrently 12 being occupied by the property owner). Neither provided an exception from these prohibitions for 13 existing operating STRs. The Urgency Ordinance became immediately effective on April 2, 2024. 14 Ordinance No. NS-3061 specified it would become "effective thirty (30) days after its adoption," 15 which was on April 16, 2024. In adopting both the Urgency Ordinance and STR Ban, the City 16 Council's did no real due diligence and conducted no meaningful analysis to determine whether 17 the STR Ban (1) could result in impacts to the environment or (2) would, in any way, aid the City 18 in remedying the issues the ban was purportedly adopted to address. 19 9. What is obvious from a review of the stunningly sparse administrative record for 20 these ordinances is that the ultimate ban was the result of a rushed and ill-informed effort by the 21 City Council to push through STR regulation. Councilmembers gave no meaningful consideration 22 whatsoever to whether the ban would actually address the issues purportedly facing Santa Ana, 23 much less whether the ban complies with state and federal law. 24 10. In adopting Ordinance No. NS-3061 on April 16, 2024, the City failed to conduct 25 necessary environmental review, made unsupported determinations about the impacts of STRs, 26 mischaracterized the lawfulness of existing STRs, and disregarded established California law 27 protecting nonconforming uses. 28 VERTFTED PETTTTON FOR WRTT OF MANDATE 4 AND COMPLATNT