►
From YouTube: Quality of Life Meeting for October 21, 2020
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Thank
you
at
five
o'clock
on
the
dot.
We
will
call
the
quality
of
life
committee
to
order
and
if
we
can
get
a
roll
call,
that'd
be
great.
B
I'm
here
as
well
great
terrific
if
we
could
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
agenda
assuming
there
are
no
changes.
C
D
A
B
B
C
A
Jennifer
jennifer
you're,
saying
me
and
councilwoman
cassie
sanchez,
sound
alike,.
C
No,
I
just
heard
two
at
the
same
time,
I
don't
know
who
I
should
assign
it
to
I'm
just
kidding.
Yes,
counselor
chris
rivera.
F
G
D
B
G
D
D
B
That's
item
6d
a
request
to
publish
notice
of
a
public
hearing
on
december
9th-
and
this
is
an
ordinance
amending
section
14-6.2
to
adopt
an
ordinance,
a
maximum
of
1
000,
short-term
rental
permits
in
the
city
to
prospectively
limit
the
number
of
short-term
rental
permits
to
one
per
natural
person
to
prospectively
limit
the
proximity
of
short-term
rental
units
to
require
a
local
operator
for
short-term
rental
units
to
adopt
record-keeping
and
reporting
requirements
for
short-term
rental
unit
owners
and
host
platforms
and
to
clarify
other
provisions
of
the
short-term
rental
ordinance.
B
Amending
the
land
use
code-
definitions
in
section
14-12.1,
as
they
relate
to
short-term
rental
units
and
amending
section
12-2.3,
to
clarify
that
a
short-term
rental
unit
is
not
a
group
r1
occupancy
for
purposes
of
fire
inspections,
and
we
have
tonight
sally
payas
with
the
city
attorney's
office
and
director
isaacson
with
the
land
use
office.
So
sally,
are
you
gonna
start
this
off
sure.
H
B
Yeah,
I
think
so
this
this
this
bill.
This
is
its
first
appearance
before
any
of
the
council
committees
and
there
are
two
sponsors
of
this
bill
who
sit
on
this
committee
counselor
via
real
and
myself.
So
I
I
do
think
for
the
benefit
of
the
rest
of
the
members.
We
need
to
take
some
time
and
and
just
kind
of
maybe
walk
through
what
this
does
and
then
we
can
go
from
there
sure.
H
Absolutely
thank
you.
So
this
legislation
was
originally
introduced
back
in
june
and
it
was
part
of
two
companion
pieces
of
legislation.
The
other
piece
was
the
amendments
to
the
land
use
code
enforcement
provisions
that
adopted
civil
penalty
options
for
allied
use
code
violations.
H
Both
of
those
bills
were
introduced
at
governing
body
and
they
were
taken
to
the
planning
commission
in
june,
and
I
could
talk
about
the
specifics
of
the
bill,
but
some
of
them
have
changed
so
I
think
I'll
start
with
kind
of
the
procedural
overview
of
kind
of
what
happened
there.
The
planning
commission
did
conduct
a
lengthy
public
hearing.
H
So
the
there.
I
think
there
was
around
almost
30
people
who
spoke
at
that
meeting
and
there
were
quite
a
lot
of
written
comments
that
were
also
submitted
and
your
packet
here
tonight.
I
know
it's
incredibly
long,
but
I
wanted
to
give
the
members
of
the
public
sort
of
the
opportunity
to
start
to
to
be
heard
and
for
you
to
see
sort
of
the
amount
of
input
that
we've
already
received.
We
got
a
lot
of
very
high
quality.
H
I
think
input
from
our
stakeholders
and
constituents
on
the
bill
and
a
lot
of
really
good
feedback.
So
that's
why
I've
attached
it
and
given
you
this,
you
know
almost
300
page
document
and
after
the
planning
commission
hearing
the
sponsors
met
and
they
looked
at
the
input
from
the
planning
commission.
H
The
civil
penalties
bill,
as
I'm
sure
you
recall,
proceeded
through
the
council
committees
and
was
adopted
by
the
governing
body,
so
that
is
actually
in
effect,
and
this
isn't
the
time
to
give
updates
on
that,
but
we're
working
on
hiring
some
hearing
officers
and
and
moving
towards
really
being
able
to
implement
that.
So
that's
really
exciting.
H
Meanwhile,
we
took
the
short-term
rental
bill.
The
sponsors
did
make
quite
a
few
changes
and
it
was
determined
that
it
would
be
easier
to
just
reintroduce
a
new
bill
because
sort
of
creating
a
red
line
for
a
substitute
bill
or
an
amendment
sheet
was
going
to
be
pretty
hard
to
look
at
because
part
of
what
we're
doing
here
is
a
lot
of
cleanup
on
the
existing
bill.
So
even
changes
that
really
aren't
substantive,
there's
some
rearranging
and
things
like
that,
so
the
amount
of
redlining
already
in
there.
H
It
is,
as
I'm
sure
you
noticed,
a
little
difficult
to
get
through
everything.
So
for
simplicity,
the
sponsors
have
reintroduced
a
new
bill
and
that
draft
is
what
went
back
to
the
planning
commission.
Last
week
they
held
a
public
hearing
on
the
second
draft
of
this
legislation
as
a
new
bill
last
thursday,
the
15th
they
did
receive
again
over
20
people
spoke
at
the
meeting.
H
H
I've
asked
miss
fabian
to
attach
that
to
primegov.
So
hopefully
I
think
that's
in
here
somewhere,
I
never
followed
up,
I
trust
her
and
if
not,
it
will
be
provided
for
subsequent
council
committee
meetings
in
a
governing
body,
so
we
did
compile
those
written
comments.
We
assured
folks
that
you
know
we
didn't
get
your
written
comments
to
the
planning
commission
in
time,
but
come
speak
at
the
meeting
and
send
us
your
stuff
and
we'll
forward
it
on.
H
So
all
of
that's
in
your
packet,
so
that's
kind
of
the
procedural
posture
the
planning
commission
ultimately
did
recommend
approval.
They
also
decided
to
submit
additional
comments
on
the
second
draft
and
I'm
working
with
them
right
now.
I
should
be
able
to
present
for
the
next
council
committee
in
subsequent
committee
meetings.
There
are
a
memo
with
three
areas
where
they
wanted
to
provide
additional
comments,
and
I
can
sort
of
mention
those
as
I
sort
of
go
through
the
substance
of
the
bill.
H
We
do
a
separate
category
of
registrations
for
short-term
rental
units
on
non-residentially,
zoned
properties,
so
part
of
I
think,
what's
important
in
sort
of
understanding.
The
legislation
is
that
there
is
a
distinction
between
the
permits
on
residential
and
the
registrations
on
the
non-residential,
so
for
residential
we
do
have
some
permit
limits
in
the
draft
legislation.
One
of
them
is
a
cap
of
1
000
permits
city-wide,
and
that's
actually
our
current
cap-
that's
currently
in
place,
but
right
now
it's
in
a
resolution.
H
However,
we
have
clarified
in
this
draft
that
the
underlying
property
can
be
owned
by
a
business
or
in
a
legal
entity
such
as
a
trust.
It's
just
that
the
permits
that
we
want
to
issue
those
directly
to
an
individual
person
in
their
own
name
other
permit
limits
in
this
draft.
Let's
see
those
are
the
main
limits
on
the
permits.
We've
added
some
limits
on
density
and
proximity.
H
We
have
a
current
rule
that
says
you
can't
have
more
than
two
short-term
rental
units
directly
adjoining
on
a
residential
street,
but
it's
a
little
difficult
to
apply
and
interpret
our
current
provision.
We're
looking
to
move
towards
a
radius
restriction,
so
if
there's
already
a
permitted
short-term
rental
unit
within
50
feet
of
your
property,
you
cannot
get
a
permit
unless
you
fall
into
one
of
the
exceptions.
There's
exceptions
for
folks
that
can
comply
with
our
accessory
dwelling
unit,
I
think,
is
the
most
notable
exception
to
that.
There's
also
limitations
to
on
residentially
zoned
property.
H
Let's
see
other
items
of
note,
the
the
draft
legislation
would
retain
the
existing
limitation
that
a
short-term
rental
unit
cannot
be
rented
more
than
once
in
a
seven
day
period,
and
that
applies
only
on
the
residential
zone
property
in
this
draft
and
we're
retaining
an
existing
rule
that
short-term
rental
permits
cannot
be
transferred.
So
it's
more
of
a
license
similar
to
a
business
license
it's
personal
to
that
one,
individual
human
being
who
has
obtained
the
permit,
and
it's
not
transferable.
H
We
have
clarified
that
you
can
still
put
your
property
say
into
a
trust
or
something
like
that
without
that
being
a
change
of
ownership
that
would
trigger
the
loss
of
the
permit,
but
there's
no
transfer
provision
and
then,
for
the
most
part,
we're
retaining
existing
rules
on
the
non-residential
property
that
are
pretty
consistent
with
what
we
have
now.
H
Those
are
the
kind
of
the
main
rules
in
terms
of
the
operators
and
the
owners.
Oh
and
also
some
new
reporting
requirements
in
terms
of
the
types
of
records
right
now,
we've
said
you
have
to
keep
records
for
three
years,
but
we
haven't
said
what
they
are.
So
we've
tried
to
provide
a
little
more
information.
H
B
Yeah
one
one
more,
the
the
you
have
to
be
accessible
by
telephone
or.
H
H
H
What
we've
changed
this
to
is
a
local
operator,
who's
available,
24
hours
a
day,
seven
days
a
week
to
respond
to
issues
and
who
can
be
physically
present
at
the
short-term
rental
unit
within
an
hour.
So
that
is
a
good
one.
Thank
you
chairman
worth
eli.
Am
I
missing
anything
else,
sponsors
huge
important
things
that
I
forgot,
rambling
off
sort
of
the
general
overview.
H
All
right,
oh-
and
we
are
oh,
I
one
more
thing
that
I
should
mention
is
that
we're
grandfathering
existing
permits
and
registrations
for
the
most
part.
So
if
we
do
have
some
people
in
santa
fe
who
currently
hold
more
than
one
permit,
I
think
we've
got
a
pretty
decent
handful
that
maybe
have
two
and
a
smaller
number
of
folks
that
hold
more
than
two
permits
and
those
people
will
be
allowed
to
timely,
renew
those.
So
if
they
continue
to
file
their
renewal
applications
file,
their
annual
fees
pay,
their
taxes
stay
out
of
trouble.
H
Those
will
be
renewable,
so
I
think
that's
kind
of
a
very
important
point,
including
and
also
including,
if
they
don't
meet
our
new
proximity
rules.
So
even
if
they're
too
close
together,
I
own
three
and
they're
all
within
50
feet.
I
can
keep
those
and
annually
renew
those
as
long
as
I
own
the
property
and
comply
with
all
of
the
rules,
so.
B
B
I
don't
know
what
four
to
six
months
is
that
right,
oh
god,
time's
a
blur,
so
I
think
from
there
unless
director
isaacson
has
more
to
add
we
and
at
the
pleasure
of
the
committee.
We
can
go
to
questions
if,
if,
if
everybody
is
ready
to
do
that,
so.
J
J
I'm
not
sure
if
folks
on
this
committee
have
had
a
chance
to
review
that
meeting
yet
or
not,
but
you
know
we
received
sort
of
from
as
sally
mentioned
earlier,
we
received,
I
believe,
21
or
so
individuals
providing
public
testimony
at
planning
commission
a
couple
of
those
individuals
expressed
some
concern
about
the
200-foot
buffer
for
properties
that
are
zoned
non-residential.
J
I
think
it's
important
to
explain
what
that
actually
means
so
the
one-stay
percentage
period.
It
does
not
mean,
as
some
as
some
people
have
mentioned,
that
you
must
stay
for
seven
days.
It
does
not
mean
that
it
also
does
not
mean
that
you
know
you
have
sort
of.
J
What
it
means
is
that
if
you
were
a
short-term
rental
host-
and
you
rented
your
unit
say
on
a
thursday
through
a
tuesday,
you
would
not
be
able
to
rent
that
unit
again
until
the
following
thursday,
but
it
also
means
that
if
you
were
to
rent
your
short-term
rental
unit
for
one
night
on
a
friday,
you
would
not
be
able
to
rent
it
for
the
rest
of
that
week
until
the
following
friday,
and
so
that's
there
was
some
concern
by
folks
who
own
and
operate
short-term
rental
units
that
that
was
limiting
their
ability
to
operate
and
generate
income
from
their
units.
J
The
third
comment
came
actually
from
the
planning
commission.
Commissioner
satania
had
some
questions
about
whether
or
not
it
would
be
possible
to
create
a
carve
out
in
the
transfer
ability
of
the
short-term
rental
permits.
In
the
event
that
say,
a
spouse
were
to
die
the
short
term.
The
property
is
owned
by
both
spouses.
J
However,
the
permit
is
held
by
just
one
individual.
If
that
individual
was
to,
you
know,
unfortunately
pass
away,
could
we
then
transfer
that
permit
to
the
surviving
spouse,
and
so
those
are
the
sort
of
the
three
big
ideas
that
came
out
of
the
planning
commission
meeting
last
week.
B
H
Chair
romeroworth,
they
did
suggest
further
consideration
of
those
three
areas
and
in
fact
I
guess
their
draft
memo
is
pretty
much
final.
Now
I
asked
them
to
contact
me
by
the
close
of
business
today
with
any
edits,
so
I
should
be
able
to
circulate
that
to
you,
and
I
know
what
it
says
at
this
point
and
they
are
recommending
that
the
one
stay
per
seven
days.
Provision
should
probably
be
removed
that
the
transfer
provision
should
be
maybe
reconsidered
altogether,
but
maybe
just
tightened
up
to
sort
of
at
least
protect.
H
Maybe
a
spouse
in
the
situation
of
an
untimely
death
as
eli
was
speaking
of
things
like
that,
and
then
they
raised
some
anomalies
and
concerns
with
a
rule
about
the
the
retinal
units
within
200
feet
and
said
that
should
probably
be
removed
as
well.
So
there
were
two
things
that
they
kind
of.
They
said
you
should
reconsider
it
and
maybe
get
rid
of
it
and
the
transfer
provision
they
said.
H
Maybe
you
should
revise
this
further
so
and-
and
I
can
distribute
that
to
the
full
governing
body
as
long
as
it's
not
discussed
by
email.
So
I
think
that's
something
that
I
can
go
ahead
and
provide
to
y'all
really
soon.
But
I
do
have
pretty
much.
B
A
final
draft
at
this
point
great-
and
I
would
just
add
that
the
sponsors
are
discussing
those
three
items,
and
so
that's
under
consideration.
So
with
that,
I
think
we
are
ready
to
go
to
questions.
Am
I
is
everybody
all
right
to
go
to
questions?
Okay,
counselor,
garcia?
I
see
your
hand
is
up.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
to
the
land
use
team
and
the
three
councillors
for
putting
this
together.
As
everybody
knows,
district
2
has
been
deeply
impacted
by
the
short-term
rental
kind
of
vigilantism.
That's
been
going
on,
and
hopefully
you
know,
some
of
these
changes
will
have
some
positive
effects
on
the
communities
so,
but
I
still
have
the
mindset
we
need
to
key
number.
One
is
enforcement
enforcement
enforcement,
and
hopefully
this
will
allow
for
some
additional
tools
in
the
tool
belt
for
enforcement.
D
First,
I
I
guess
I
I
as
well
have
concerns
about
the
rental
once
per
seven
days.
I
I
can
understand
where
the
concerns
came
in
and
and
looking
at
to
limit
traffic
potentially
in
communities,
and
I
guess
my
question
is:
why
wasn't
a
shorter
time
period
maybe
looked
at
three
days,
because
I
think
you
gave
a
great
example
eli
when
you
said
if
somebody
rents
it
on
a
friday
they're
out
on
a
friday
or
let's
give
a
better
example,
somebody
rents
on
a
tuesday
night,
they're
out
by
thursday.
D
So
maybe
somebody
wanted
to
rent
it
on
saturday
with
this
potential
change.
That's
not
it's
not
an
option,
whereas
you
know
if
we
limited
it
to
maybe
every
three
days.
Every
two
days
I
mean
I,
I
have
the
mindset,
let's
not
take,
let's
take
it
out
in
general,
but
if
we're
looking
at
a
timeframe,
I
would
say
no
no
more
than
three
days
just
because
I
don't
think
you're
going
to
see
increase
in
traffic,
it's
not
going
to
bring
much
more
traffic
than
a
normal
residency
would
have
yeah.
D
So
I
guess
maybe
that's
a
question
for
the
counselors
or
land
use.
Why
seven
days,
why
not
a
shorter
time
period
and
if
folks
are
open
to
just
eliminating
that
in
general,.
J
So
so
I
think
it's
it's
a
it's
a
very
good
question:
counselor
garcia,
and
it's
one
that
I've
had
bear
with
me
because
it's
sort
of
difficult
to
explain,
but
so
the
the
reason
why
the
one
per
seven
day
makes
sense.
In
my
mind,
is
because
we
definitely
have
days
of
the
week
that
are
sort
of
the
the
primary
days
where
people
want
to
rent
their
units
right
and.
D
J
Are
pretty
much,
I
would
say
you
know,
thursday
or
friday
through
sunday,
monday,
tuesday,
and
so
if
we
were
to
start
putting
less
than
a
week
interval
on
things,
I
think
sort
of
the
spacing
between
stays
would
start
to
overlap
with
those
primary
days
where
people
really
want
to
rent,
and
I
think
that
that
would
lead
to
many
of
the
same
concerns
by
our
permit
holders
that
we
have
now
in
terms
of
hey.
I
can't
rent
this
when
I
really
when
people
want
to
stay
in
my
unit,
and
so
I'm
not
sure.
J
I'm
not
sure
if
that's
actually
a
better
solution
or
not,
I
think
really
what
it
comes
down
to
is
is
do
we
think
that
we
want
to
moderate
the
frequency
in
which
we
people
are
visiting
and
staying
and
coming
and
going
or
do
we
not
and
and
if
we
decide
that
we
do,
then
I
think
we
should
keep
the
one
for
seven
day
provision
in
place
and
if
we
feel
that
we
shouldn't
be
moderating
the
frequency
of
visits,
then
I
think
we
should
remove
it
but
to
try
to
fine-tune
it
less
than
at
a
smaller
interval
than
we
have
now.
J
I
don't
think
we'll
make
a
a
significant
improvement
and
we'll
also
present
implementation
and
enforcement
issues
moving
down
down
the
road.
B
Eli,
the
only
thing
I
would
add
to
that
counselor
garcia
is
that
it
is
current
law,
so
that
doesn't
mean
we
can't
change
it,
but
just
so
you
know
it
it
that
that
provision
is
actually
in
the
law
right
now,.
G
Right
here
on
that
point,
yes
counselor,
I
was
actually
gonna
say
the
same
thing
that
wasn't
something
we
changed.
It
was
already
in
the
ordinance
and
it's
just
coming
to
light,
because
people
have
been
paying
more
attention
to
this
particular
ordinance
and
the
changes
so
and
also
we've
asked
about
that
and
it's
complex,
because
if
somebody
lives
right
next
to
a
short-term
rental
and
it's
changing
consistently,
it's
very
disruptive,
and
so
what's
the
happy
medium
I
don't
know,
but
in
some
cases
people
feel
like
having
constant
turnover
and
new
tenants.
G
Every
few
days
is
is
just
not
it's,
not
okay,
so
yeah,
I
just.
I
just
wanted
to
note
that
and
also
it's
hard
to
well
it's
hard
to
enforce
anyway.
This
piece
is
a
bit
hard,
but
I'm
wondering,
like
you,
said,
eli
about
how,
if
you
change
the
number,
then
it
ends
up
being
even
more
complex
to
try
to
enforce.
That's
all.
Thank
you.
D
Yeah,
thank
you,
madam
chair
and
yeah,
and
on
that
point
I
don't
know
how
much
disruptive
I
mean
most
of
the
folks
that
are
renting,
aren't
coming
into
their
wild
parties
and
especially
with
this
ordinance
it's
not
allowed.
So
I
think
I
would
strongly
encourage
us
to
to
remove
that.
I
mean
it's
obvious.
We
weren't
enforcing
it
in
the
past.
We
don't
have
the
capacity
to
enforce
it.
Let's
just
say
in
a
perfect
world
we're
maxed
out
at
a
thousand
rentals.
D
So
I
think
if
we
had
the
capacity
I'd
say
sure,
but
I
know
that
unfortunately,
we
don't
have
the
capacitor
to
do
so
so
that
I
would
highly
encourage
us
to
to
re-look
at
that
that
once
every
seven
days
I
was
had
a
quick
question,
because
I
know
it
was
in
the
ordinance
in
the
past,
but
I
times
are
changing
and
it
prohibits
recreational
vehicles
being
parked
on
the
property.
D
Given
the
current
pandemic,
we're
facing,
we
are
seeing
an
uptick
in
recreational
vehicle
purchases
folksville
that's
their
most
comfortable
and
safest
way
to
travel
and
given
that's
how
we
saw
a
lot
of
our
guests
come
into
santa
fe
anyway,
which
was
vehicles
and
maybe
they're
gonna
now
bring
a
recreational
vehicle.
So
I'm
wondering
if
that's
going
to
be
prohibitive
in
some
senses,
where
there's
a
certain
faction
of
the
tourism
industry
is
changing
and
we're
not
we're.
D
Now
telling
folks
you
have
to
find
an
rv
park
to
park
your
vehicle
and
on
top
of
that
rent
a
vehicle
to
get
around
the
city
of
santa
fe.
So
I
don't
know
if
the
sponsors
would
be
open
to
that.
Maybe
discussion
I'd
like
to
hear
more
about
that,
just
because
I
know
that,
like
I
said,
I
know
that
recreational
vehicles
have
become
somewhat
of
a
blight
issue
in
general,
but
it's
allowed
and
I
want
to
ensure
that
we're
not
doing
anything,
that's
going
to
prohibit
some
tourism
so.
H
If
I
may,
just
as
a
prelude
member
garcia
that
just
in
terms
of
what
was
in
the
ordinance
and
what
is
in
the
ordinance,
it
is
in
our
current
ordinance
and
there
has
not
been
a
proposal
to
remove
it.
So
the
current
draft
bill
says
an
owner
or
operator
shall
not
allow
guests
to
park
recreational
vehicles
on
site
or
on
the
street,
so
it
would
prohibit
them
either
on
the
property
or
parked
in
front.
So
that's
that's
what
it
says
as
to
whether
it
should
change.
D
No
that-
and
I
understand
it
was
in
there
that
my
point
was
that
our
tourism,
the
way
folks
are
traveling,
is
changing
and
it's
evident
you're
seeing
we're
seeing
an
uptick
in
recreational
vehicle
purchases
across
the
country
and
given
the
current
situation
with
the
pandemic,
that's
not
going
to
change
the
for
the
foreseeable
future.
D
Is
that
something
we
really
want
to
do,
given
that
our
current
portfolio
for
the
city
relies
heavily
on
tourism
dollars
and
if
we're
prohib,
not
allowing
folks
to
come
in
and
they're
having
to
do
other
means,
like
I
said
park
it
in
rv
park
or
just
not
come
to
santa
fe,
I
mean
I
didn't
just
tossing
it
out
there.
What
are
other
counselors
ideas
on
this.
G
Well,
I
I
hear
you
about
the
traveling
changes
and
yeah.
I
think
more
people
will
be
traveling
in
that
way,
but
I
think
about
some
of
the
narrow
streets
and
in
my
district
and
there's
no
way,
rvs
are
gonna
fit,
and
so
I
don't
know
if
there's
another
provision
that
prevents
that,
because
I
think
it
just
is
kind
of
a
case-by-case
basis.
G
Some
streets
might
be
appropriate
if
there's
space
and
there's
others
there's
no
way
that
people
would
be
able
to
utilize
airbnbs
with
rvs
parked
on
the
street
or
even
in
the
driveways.
So
I'm
not
sure
how
to
tackle
that
one,
because
it,
I
think
it
just
depends
on
what
part
of
the
the
city
people
are
considering
bring
bringing
rvs
to
airbnbs
or
vacation
rentals.
So
did
you
do
you
have
an
idea
about
that?
Because
it's
kind
of
it
depends
on
where
you're
looking
at
and
accessibility
factors.
D
Right
no-
and
I
completely
agree
you
know,
but
but
I
I'm
trying
to
have
some
foresight
in
the
sense
that
we
are
going
to
see
an
uptick
in
recreational
vehicles
coming
to
santa
fe,
and
if
that
means
that
those
individuals
are
going
to
now
have
to
rent
hotels.
D
Well,
then,
so
be
it,
but
I'm
just
trying
to
put
that
out
there
in
the
sense
that
these
are
challenges
that
are
going
to
be
coming
our
way
and
do
we
want
to
look
and
be
proactive
versus
reactive,
because
it
also
then
comes
down
to
once
again
the
enforcement,
because
our
you
know,
somebody's
gonna.
If
they
roll
into
town
on
their
rv
and
the
the
property
person
who
owns,
runs
the
property
most
times,
they're,
not
there
to
check
them
in.
D
They
have
a
little
lock
box,
give
them
the
code,
they
get
the
keys
and
they
don't
really
interact
with
the
person
face
to
face.
And
so
I
think,
then,
that
becomes
incumbent
of
the
property
owner
to
ensure
that
a
rv
is
not
on
their
property
or
the
neighborhood.
To
then
let
city
know
that
hey
this
rmb
has
an
rv
on
their
property,
and
when
that
happens,
do
we
have
the
capacity
then
to
manage
that?
D
What
I
want
to
do
is
I
don't
I
want
like.
I
said
I
want
us
to
begin
to
be
proactive,
because
I
a
lot
of
what
I've
heard
in
regards
to
the
challenges
with
strs
is
there's
just
not
enough
people
power
to
enforce
what
we
have.
We
can
have
all
the
greatest
laws
and
ordinances
on
the
books,
but
if
we
don't
have
enough
staff
to
enforce
it,
then
what's
the
purpose.
D
So
with
that,
I
want
to
be
ensure
that
we're
being
proactive
that
way
where
we
have
enough
people
to
enforce
what
we
have
on
the
books
and
the
neighborhoods
happy,
because
I
I
I
surely
know
that
if
we
have
folks
that
are
out
of
compliance,
we're
going
to
hear
from
them
as
the
counselors
we're
going
to
hear
that
you
guys
at
the
city
aren't
doing
anything
about
this,
and
it
just
becomes
that
challenge.
D
D
I
know
that
when
this
was
introduced
earlier
this
summer
there
was
a
lot
of
challenges
from
the
business
community
in
regards
to
the
the
capital
business
district
being
treated
the
same
as
residential
area.
So
has
that
changed
in
this
ordinance
and
how
has
it
changed?.
B
That's
been
fixed,
who
wants
to
who
wants
to
address
that
eli
or
sally?
I'm.
J
Happy
to
that
might
be
a
better
question
for
sally.
H
Sure
so
the
the
previous
draft
of
the
legislation
would
have
subjected
short-term
rental
units
city-wide
to
the
permit
cap
and
the
permit
limits
of
one
per
person
and
the
no
transfers
provision
and
the
permits
cannot
be
transferred
provisioned.
So
it
would
have
gone
to
a
sort
of
one-size-fits-all
permitting
regime
with
all
of
the
regulations.
City-Wide
and
currently
we
do
have
the
distinction
I
described
at
the
beginning
of
the
permits
versus
the
registrations
and
the
different
rules,
depending
on
whether
you're
in
the
business
capital
district
or
in
a
residentially
zoned
area.
H
So
that
has
been
changed
in
this
draft
and,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
I
think
the
only
real
significant
changes
for
the
capital
business,
the
business
capital
district
and
the
non-residentially
zoned
areas
would
include
the
no
more
than
12
units
in
a
single
building.
This
the
the
fees
now
would
match
the
permit
fees,
the
registration
fees
and
permit
fees
are
the
same
and
sort
of
the
general
record-keeping
local
operator,
fire
inspections,
kind
of
requirements
that
have
largely
not
drawn
objection
from
the
business
community.
B
Can
you
talk
to
the
so
the
one
thing
that
I
think
is
still
causing
heartburn
and
I
I
I
think,
because
for
for
the
counselors
who
haven't
been
living
this
for
the
last
six
months,
I
think
it
would
be
useful
to
talk
about
the
the
buffer
zone
and
what
what
that
is-
and
that
has
not
been
changed,
and
the
planning
commission
has
asked
us
to
look
at
that.
So
I
think
we,
a
little
bit
of
time
on
that
particular
provision,
would
be
a
good
idea.
Thank.
B
B
F
H
We
would
have
applied
the
same
proximity,
the
proximity
limitations
of
20,
no
more
than
25
of
a
development.
That's
a
fourplex
or
larger
could
be
short-term
rental
units.
We
would
have
applied
that
all
the
way
across
the
city,
no
matter
where
you
are,
and
in
re-evaluating
this
we
looked
at
well.
What
are
our
purposes?
What
is
the
intent
of
the
ordinance?
We
want
to
protect
residential
neighborhoods
and
the
quality
of
life
for
folks
in
residentially
zoned
areas,
and
so
you
know,
how
can
we
help
folks
that
are
maybe
right
at
the
edges?
H
H
H
The
main
thing,
I
think
that
folks
are
saying,
is
that,
if
I'm
on
property
that
allows
as
a
permitted
use
a
hotel,
a
motel,
a
bar,
a
restaurant,
almost
any
type
of
relatively
disruptive
commercial
activity,
there's
no
rule
that
I
can't
do
that
within
200
feet.
Of
course
we
have
rules
about
like
no
liquor
within
200
feet
of
a
school.
There
are
some
certain.
You
know
protective
things
like
that,
but
in
the
case
of
sort
of
conducting
these
types
of
businesses
we
allow
hotels
and
motels
within
the
200-foot
buffer.
H
We
allow
you
know
any
other
permitted
use,
we're
not
putting
this
extra
restriction,
and
so
folks
were
arguing
that
it's
really
not
fair
or
maybe
kind
of
anomalous
to
create
a
special
role,
targeting
short-term
rental
within
that
sort
of
buffer
zone
that
we
were
trying
to
create
with
the
idea
that
it
might
help
protect
those
residential
neighborhoods.
So
that
is
in
the
current
draft
of
the
bill.
It
is
something
that
the
planning
commission
was
recommending,
reconsidering
and
something
that's
kind
of
been
under
continued
discussions.
So.
D
Okay,
thank
you
so
much
sally.
I
really
appreciate
the
thorough
review
and
so
from
what
I'm
understanding
is
that
it
would
have
an
impact
on
businesses
that
had
been
operating
in
a
certain
manner
prior
with,
what's
being
proposed,
I'm
seeing
some
head
shaking.
So
how
does.
D
Because,
let's
I
know
that
you
know,
for
example,
there's
we
have
some
properties
that
are
condos
for
lack
of
better
words
and
whether
they're
singleplexes
duplexes
quadplexes
a
lot
of
folks,
whether
they're
in
town
or
out
of
town
purchased
them
for
that
purpose
of
either
renting
amount
or
short-term
rentals
or
keeping
them
as
an
investment
property.
D
And
so
how
does
that
affect
those
those
kind
of
more
so
investment
properties
that
aren't
usually
occupied
by
permanent
residents?
It's
more
so
short
term,
whether
it's
somebody
renting
them
out
for
30
days
or
two
days?
How
does
that
impact
them?
And
I'm
thinking
more
so
you
know
like
places,
there's
a
right
on.
You
know,
federal,
and
I
think
it's
grant
avenue
right
around
there
there's
a
kind
of
somewhat
of
a
complex
that
has
a
lot
of
short-term
rentals
there.
So
how
does
that
impact?
J
So
counselor,
I
think
one
of
the
big
things
to
keep
in
mind
as
we
discuss
all
the
provisions
in
this
in
this
draft
ordinance
is
that
the
changes
would
be
prospective
not
retroactive,
and
so
anyone
who
currently
has
a
short-term
rental
improvement
and
maintains
that
permit
good,
standing
and
renews
in
a
timely
fashion
every
year
we'll
be
able
to
continue
to
have
that
permit
and
operate
the
way
they
are
operating
previously.
J
So
this
would
only
apply
to
new
multi-family
properties
in
a
non-residentially
zoned
area
within
200
feet
of
a
residential
new
zealand
area.
D
And
so
I
guess
the
answer
to
my
question
is
yes,
they'd
be
impacted
because
that's,
for
example,
I
have
a
rental
and
I
want
to
get
out
of
it,
and
I
want
to
sell
it
to
one
of
my
colleagues,
I'm
going
to
sell
it
to
counselor
via
real
and
she
wants
to
buy
with
the
intention
hey.
This
is
a
great
property.
D
Before
I
was
alive-
and
you
know,
I
think
we
want
to
ensure
that
similar
to
the
rv
situation
that
we're
being
proactive
and
we're
not
we're
not
in
some
senses
prohibiting
a
certain
faction
of
our
economy
from
from
thriving,
I-
and
I
think
this
more
so
impacts
those
like.
I
said
those
kind
of
communities
where
there
are
more
they're
kind
of
compound-ish.
It's
not
neces
they're,
not
residential
neighborhoods
in
that
instance.
D
So
I
think
I
just
don't
know
the
solution
to
that.
For
that
another
quick
question,
because
I
know
that
there's
been
you
know,
lots
of.
B
B
I
can
take
a
try
or
I
can
or
I
can
or
I
can
say
what
I,
what
I'm
hearing
that
might
need
to
be
understood.
B
Okay,
all
right,
so
I
think
you
have
to
think
about
these
in
two
different
ways.
So
there's
the
non-residential
strs
though
there
is
no
cap
on
those,
so
if
you're
operating
in
the
bcd
in
that
circle,
there
can
be
as
many
as
you
know,
there
are
properties
there.
We
don't
have
any
limits
on
that.
So,
if
you're
in
the
beast,
I'm
sorry
excuse.
B
Right
so,
but
but
in
terms
of
whether
you
can
buy
a
property
and
turn
it
into
an
str,
all
you
have
to
do
is
register
it.
You
don't
have
to
have
a
permit
to
operate
it.
The
thousand
the
thousand
permit
cap
only
applies
in
the
in
the
residentially
zoned
areas.
So
I
just
want
you
to
understand
the
distinction,
because
I
think
it's
an
important
one.
D
I
appreciate
that
the
clarification
counselor
and
I
do
I
think
that
covers
a
lot,
but
there
might
be
some
outliers
where
there
are
these
and
I'm
just
trying
to
think
of
more
on
the
north
end
of
town
as
you're,
even
getting
out
of
town
side
of
town.
You
know
zokolo,
for
you
know
something
up
that
direction
where
once
again,
just
trying
to
think
be
proactive,
because
I
hate
for
us
to
keep
coming
back
to
this
ordinance
to
modify
and
change
it.
But
but
thank
you.
I
appreciate
the
clarification.
J
Is
that
if
I
could
just
add
one
one
other
comment,
sure,
sir,
you
know,
I
think
you
know
just
to
make
sure
that
we
understand
that
we're.
Not
you
know,
people
who
who
are
invested
in
operating
the
short-term
rental
permits
we're
not
changing
the
rules
on
that,
and
so
anyone
who's
coming
in
to
purchase
a
potential
vacation
home
would
know
before
the
time
of
purchase
whether
or
not
that
property
was
eligible
to
be
a
short-term
rental
property.
Whether
or
not
there
were
any
permits
available
for
them
to
obtain
if
they
needed
one.
J
So
I
think
we
wanted
when
drafting
this
legislation,
we
were
really
wanting
to
be
very
aware
and
sensitive
to
the
fact
that
people
have
have
made
investments
under
a
certain
set
of
rules
and
that
we're
not
changing
the
rules
for
those
individuals.
We're
only
changing
the
rules
moving
forward
and
anyone
making
an
investment
from
this
time
forward
would
know
what
those
rules
were
and
could
invest
accordingly.
So
I
think
that's
an
important
distinction
as
well.
D
Okay,
awesome,
thank
you
so
much
and
I
like
I
said
I
know
a
lot
of
the
challenges
were,
and
at
least
I'm
hearing
is
from
from
our
residential
friends
and
colleagues
and
neighbors
and
and
I
think
that's
where
we
should
really
be
looking
and
working
to
address
their
concerns
and
and
once
again
coming
to
help
enforce
with
the
situation.
D
I
think
that's
all
the
questions
I
had
at
the
moment.
I
know
that
I
try
to
watch
the
planning
commission
meeting.
I
guess
it's
on
the
youtube
2
channel
for
any
of
my
colleagues
that
might
want
to
watch
it.
I've
tried
finding
it
on
the
regular
city
council
youtube
channel,
it's
on
the
other
one.
So,
but
but
thank
you,
madam
chair,
that's
all
I
have
at
the
moment.
B
E
Thank
you
very
much.
Okay.
I
have
a
few
questions
there.
I
tried
to
organize
them
into
categories,
but
I
failed
so
I'm
sorry
this
might
be
a
little
random.
One
of
the
things
I
saw
was
that
there
is
a
renewal
date
of
march
15th
for
all
short-term
rentals,
but
I
know
that
we
recently
changed
that
for
our
business
license,
so
that
they
weren't
all
falling
on
the
same
day
and
there
were
concerns
about
both
impact
on
our
staff
as
well
as
service
to
individuals
coming
in
for
business
licenses.
J
Thank
you
for
for
that
question
counselor.
So
we.
J
In
the
previous
draft
removed
that
and
and
changed
the
renewals
of
short-term
rentals
to
actually
align
with
business
licensing,
but
in
thinking
through
how
we
would
actually
administer
short-term
rentals
and
specifically
the
waiting
list
when
we
get
to
a
time
when
we
have
a
waiting
list,
we
felt
that
it
would
be
too
difficult
to
manage
that
on
a
rolling
basis
and
so
to
be
effective
in
managing
that
we
wanted
to
have
a
firm
deadline.
J
When
us,
you
know
people
who
did
not
renew
on
time.
We
would
know
exactly
how
many
permits
were
now
available
and
we
could
offer
those
to
the
next
tranche
of
people
waiting
on
the
waiting
list,
give
them
an
opportunity
to
apply
if
they
don't
apply
and
there's
more
go
to
the
next
group.
And
so
that's
why
we
have
decided
to
keep
it
the
way.
It
is
and
ask
that
people
renew
their
short-term
rental
business
license
at
the
time
of
renewal
of
their
short-term
rental.
Permit.
E
Okay,
thank
you,
and
that
makes
sense.
I
mean
you
guys
are
the
ones
who
are
really
impacted,
so
I'll
trust
you
to
know
what
is
most
efficient
for
for
your
department
and
is
that
currently,
how
it
is
is
that
march
15th
is
when
the
renewal
is
for
permit,
so
we're
not
going
to
have
situations
where
somebody
applied
for
a
permit.
J
So
you
can
apply
any
time
of
year,
but
we
do
ask
that
people
renew
by
march
15th.
We
allow
them
to
renew
by
april
15th,
but
they
are
subject
to
a
late
fee.
I
believe
it's
fifty
dollars
or
maybe
a
hundred
dollars.
I
think
it's
50.
and
and
then
beyond
april
15.
J
You
know
we
do
allow
sort
of
you
know.
We
see
things
coming
in
if
you've,
if
you've
submitted
your
application
and
we're
still
processing
it
before
april
15th
we'll
continue
to
process
it,
but
anything
we
receive
after
the
april
15th
hard
deadline,
those
if
you
have
not
applied
to
renew,
we
consider
your
permit
expired,
and
if
you
want
to
renew
after
the
deadline
and
there's
permits
available
like
there
are
now
you
basically
it's
not
you
start
over.
It's
a
new
application.
J
E
J
Thank
you,
counselor.
That
is
correct
because
we
do
not
the
the
registrations
which
so,
if
you're
non-residentially
zoned,
you
don't
have
a
permit,
you
have
a
registration
and
the
registrations
do
not
apply
against
the
1000
permit
cap.
So
only
so,
by
definition,
if
you,
if
you
have
a
short
term
rental
permit,
you
are
in
a
residentially,
zoned
area.
E
J
Counselor,
I
don't
have
that
number
available
to
me,
but
I
believe
it's
at
last
last
accounting
when
we
were
doing
this
in
june
and
thinking
about
pulling
the
registrations
under
the
cap
we
were
at
about,
I
believe,
79,
to
85
somewhere
in
that
range.
So
it's
probably
close
to
100,
I
would
say
roughly
about
100
registrations
in
our
non-residentially
zoned
properties
of
the
city.
E
Okay
and
then,
how
does
that?
I
know
that
there
was
a
report-
I
don't
know,
maybe
a
year
ago,
maybe
two
years
ago
about
the
number
of
short-term
rentals
that
were
operating
basically
under
this
under
the
I
don't
know
where
I
was
going
with
that
analogy,
but
without
a
registration
or
a
permit,
and
I'm
curious
how
that?
E
How
that
aligns
with
what
we're
seeing
here,
do
we
think
that
at
this
point
we
have
most
of
them
registered
or
permitted,
and
then,
when
we
start
to
really,
if
we
pass
this
and
we
go
with
the
1000
permits,
do
we
ostensibly
already
have
a
thousand
that
are,
or
over
a
thousand
that
are
operating,
so
there
might
be
a
bit
of
a
permit
crunch
as
we
move
into
this.
J
Thank
you
counselor,
so
the
1000
permit
limit
exists
now
it
was
introduced
via
resolution
and
and
so
the
reason
why
sally
mentioned
it
earlier,
I
believe,
is
because
we
are
now
folding
it
into
this
ordinance.
So
it's
all
the
str
regulations
are
in
one
place.
J
You
know
it's
hard
to
say
really
how
many
are
operating
without
the
proper
permits
and
registrations.
You
know
we
were
just
looking
into
something
the
other
day
we
you
know
got.
You
know
someone
alerted
us
to.
J
They
thought
that
their
neighbor
was
renting
short-term
rental
without
a
permit
and
actually
what
they
were
doing
is
they
were
doing
long-term
rentals,
but
they
were
still
advertised
on
vrbo
and
airbnb,
even
though
they
weren't
renting
it
that
way,
and
so
that's
just
to
say
that
it's
hard
to
get
conclusive
data
on
how
many
are
operating
in
the
city
without
the
proper
perimeter
registrations,
but
I
would
say
that
it's
probably
the
number
of
folks
that
are
still
operating
in
these
coveted
times
without
without
the
right.
J
You
know,
authorization
from
the
city,
both
in
terms
of
permits
and
registrations.
I
would
put
that
in
like
the
150
to
200
range
right
now
we
did
see
we
did
issue
warning
letters
to
folks
back
in
june
and
we've
issued
a
second
warning
letter
again
here
more
recently
and
after
sending
out
that
first
letter
we
did
see
an
increase
in
people
applying
for
for
permits
and
coming
in
under
the
permit
system.
So
we.
J
Our
enforcement
having
an
impact
and
folks
are
complying
now,
which
is
which
we'd
like
to
see,
but
we
do
have
people
operating
illegally,
and
I
would
think
that
considering
the
number
that
we
have
currently
permitted,
which
is
about
875
plus
the
folks
that
are
operating
without
the
proper
permits
that
if
everyone
were
to
come
under
compliance,
we
would
be
over
the
1000
cap.
E
So
that
being
said,
I
know
that
we
are
also
working
with
the
platforms
to
try
to
identify
all
those
individuals
bring
everybody
into
the
permitting
system,
as
we
start
to
run
into
this
issue
of
bringing
everybody
in
we're
going
over
that
cap.
How
are
we
is
there?
A
is
it
a
first.
Come
first
serve
you'd
kind
of
a
okay,
so
we're
really
just
telling
people
get
your
permit
if
you
want
to
continue
to
operate
as
we
move
forward
with
this.
J
And
and
as
as
miss
paez
mentioned
earlier,
you
know
we
did
earlier
this
year
pass
a
a
pretty
powerful
enforcement
bill
that
allows
us
to
issue
civil
penalties
for
folks
who
are
operating
without
the
proper,
with
that
they're
operating
outside
of
the
of
the
line
so
to
speak,
and
so
it
will
be
first
come
first
serve
folks
that
come
in
with
applications
after
our
1000
cap
is
full
will
be
put
on
the
waiting
list
in
the
order
that
their
applications
are
received,
and
if
we
are
able
to
verify
that
folks
are
operating,
whether
they're
on
the
waiting
list
or
not
without
the
proper
permits
or
registrations,
we
will
be
able
to
issue
fines
on
a
you
know
a
escalating
scale,
and
you
know
those
fines.
J
If,
for
repeat
offenders,
may
you
know
be
as
much
as
500
a
day
for
operating
without
a
license,
and
so
you
know
there
are
significant
penalties,
and
hopefully
that
will
be
enough
to
deter
folks
from
from
operating
illegally.
E
Perfect,
thank
you
yeah.
Definitely,
that's
that's
some
motivation
right
there
and
then
I
know
that
we
are
working
on
partnering
with
the
different
platforms,
and
this
is
part
of
our
strategy
to
really
enforce
this.
Do
we
have
agreements
with
the?
How
do
we
get
the
platforms
to
comply
with
what
we
are
asking
them
to
do?
Do
we
have
the
ability
to
hold
them
accountable.
J
Thank
you
counselor,
so
sally
may
be
able
to
add
to
to
this
as
well.
But
you
know
one
of
the
big
areas
where
we've
had
cooperation
from
the
platforms
hasn't
been
so
much
on
the
listing
as
much
as
it
has
been
on
the
tax
collection
and
that's
where
we're
seeing
quite
a
bit
of
help
right
now,
and
so
since.
J
Group
and
other
platforms
have
agreed
to
help
us
with
collecting
both
lodgers
tax
as
well
as
grt.
We
have
seen
our
revenues
going
up
that
are
str's
are
contributing
to
the
city.
Some
of
the
conversations
we've
had
with
them
is
asking
making
it
a
requirement
that
hosts
include
their
permit
or
registration
number
on
the
listing
on
the
platform,
so
that
guests
can
know.
J
If
they
are,
you
know
supporting
a
licensed
unit
or
an
unlicensed
unit,
and
we've
asked
them
for
some
help
in
other
areas
as
well
and
and
and
they've
shown
some
willingness,
but
where
they've
been
the
most
helpful
has
been
on
the
revenue
side
with
grt
and
rogers
tax
collection.
H
But
if
we
have
a
rule
that
says
owners,
you
need
to
put
a
valid
city
issued,
permit
or
registration
number
on
all
listings
and
they're,
providing
us
with
all
of
their
urls
in
our
area.
So
we
can
actually
look
at
listings
and
identify
if
there
are
any
that
are
not
valid,
they
will
remove
those
listings,
and
so
there
are
certain
things
beyond
that.
That
they've
said
you
know,
maybe
we
could
do
especially
expedia
group
and
vrbo
they've
consistently
wanted
to
meet
with
city
staff.
H
With
the
mayor
with
the
counselors
and
they've
said
things
like
well,
there
are
things
that
we
could
be
willing
to
do.
We
do
have
tools
that
we
put
in
place
for
jurisdictions
in
terms
of
you
can't
do
less
than
a
two-night
rental.
For
example,
there
are
certain
you
know
it
has
to
be
the
kind
of
thing.
H
That's
can
be
programmed
in
and
they
would
have
to
agree
to
it
and
since
we're
sort
of
still
in
the
drafting
stage,
but
especially
vrbo
they've
said
you
know,
if
you
want
a
two-night
minimum,
we
can
program
that
in.
If
you
want
no
more
than
52
in
a
year,
we
might
be
willing
to
talk
to
the
city
about
whether
we
can
have
a
particular
listing
locked
out.
You
try
to
rent
it
out
a
53rd
time
and
one
calendar
a
year,
and
we
can
prevent
it,
so
they
have
some
ability
to
do
things
like
that.
H
That
can
be
easily
programmed
if
they're
in
our
ordinance
there's
a
limit.
I
think
to
how
much
we
can
require
the
type
of
reporting
we've
put
in.
This
ordinance
does
have
the
support
of
airbnb
and
vrbo.
I
think
in
terms
of
they
said
you
know,
these
are
things
we
can
do.
This
is
stuff
we
do
for
other
jurisdictions.
H
This
is,
in
our
view
of
balance
between
being
too
much
of
a
burden
on
us
and
unfair,
or
potentially
asking
for
legally
protected
information
that
we
can't
give
you
about
our
our
customers,
a
good
balance
to
where
we
can
provide
this
to
you.
We
think
this
will
help
you
go
a
long
way
towards
enforcement,
and
it's
something
that
we
can
do
so
they're
a
lion's
share
of
the
the
business.
H
It's
I
think
harder
to
reach,
there's
kind
of
a
myriad
of
smaller
host
platforms
that
I
I
don't
know
that
we're
in
contact
with,
but
at
least
those
two
big
ones
have
definitely
volunteered
some
willingness
to
partner
with
us.
So.
E
Okay,
thank
you.
That's
that's
good
to
hear
it
sounds
like
it's
not
something
that
we
can
really
enforce,
but
I'm
glad
that
we
have
been
in
those
conversations
and
yeah.
I
am
curious
about
the
other,
smaller
platforms.
I
don't.
I
think
that
home
away
is
a
thing
for
chance.
Right
believe
that
they're.
H
H
Are
quite
a
few
more
small
ones?
I
don't
know
how
they're
doing
if
they're
still
operating
these
times,
they've
been
less.
They
haven't
reached
out
to
us.
E
E
I
am
happy
to
hear
that
that
has
improved
I'm
assuming
that
this
will
help
us.
Will
this
help
us
further
improve
our
ability,
and
can
you
give
me
a
little
bit
more
details
there.
J
Absolutely
thanks
counselor,
so
the
reporting
requirements
that
we've
included
in
this
ordinance,
this
draft
ordinance
and
being
more
explicit
about
the
types
of
records
that
we're
asking
hosts
to
permit
holders
to
maintain,
should
assist
us
further
in
making
sure
we're
collecting
the
correct
amount
of
both
lodgers
tax
and
grt
to
the
city.
E
Well,
thank
you,
and
I
think
I
believe
my
last
question
for
now
and
I
think
it
kind
of
takes
us
out
of
the
realm
of
more
precise
answers
and
into
a
little
bit
of
opinion
and
discussion.
E
I
know
one
of
the
concerns
that
I
have
had
with
short-term
rentals
is
the
impact
on
our
overall
housing
market
and
there's
there's
kind
of
a
couple
pieces
to
that.
One
people
have
said
it's
not
very
likely
that
people
are
going
to
be
purchasing
short-term
rentals,
for
example
in
my
district,
although
I
argue
that
that
might
change,
if
midtown
does
what
we
hope,
midtown
will
do,
which
is
be.
E
You
know
another
center
or
the
rufina
business
district
you
know
has
already
started
to
overturn
with
meow
wolf,
and
so
I
and
some
of
the
breweries
that
are
popping
up
there,
but
also
the
concern
that
if
people
are
purchasing
investment
properties
and
driving
at
prices
and
decreasing,
available
housing
on
districts,
one
and
two,
it
inevitably
starts
to
push
more
residential
people
who
are
actually
here
for
long-term
housing
and
long-term
rentals
into
districts.
E
Three
and
four,
and
just
adding
to
some
of
the
challenges
that
we
have
in
the
housing
market,
I'm
curious
about
the
thoughts
of
this.
I
know
that
there
is
not.
This
is
not
necessarily
something
that
is
a
concrete
answer
that
we
have
a
lot
of
data
for,
but
I
just
think
it's
an
important
part
of
the
conversation
that
I
wanted
to
get
both
our
staff
thoughts
on
and
then
as
well
as
the
sponsors.
If
you
guys
were
looking
at
this
and
what
your
thoughts
were,
there.
J
Thanks
counselor:
well
let
I'll
jump
in
and
then
turn
it
over
to
the
sponsors.
So
I
think
you
know
our
short-term
rentals
impacting
housing
prices
in
santa
fe.
I
think
the
answer
is
yes,
I
think
where
it
becomes
less
clear
is
to
what
degree
you
know
I
think
in
talking
about
it
in
our
committee
meetings.
You
know,
I
think,
it's
safe
to
say
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
homes
that
are
purchased
as
vacation.
Rentals
here
in
santa
fe
would
not
become
long-term
rental
units
if
they
weren't
short-term
rental
units.
J
I
think
a
lot
of
people
are
of
a
sort
of
income
level
or
level
of
affluence
that
they
wouldn't
have
to
rent
them
out
long
term.
They
would
just
they
would
just
stay
empty,
so
I
think
that
that's
something
to
factor
in.
I
think
the
o'donnell
report,
if
I
remember
correctly,
attributed
maybe
around
15-
of
the
rise
in
home
prices,
so
not
not
15,
not
to
say
home
prices
have
risen
15
because
of
short
term
rentals,
but
of
the
amount
that
they've
risen.
15
of
that
could
be
attributed
to
short-term
rentals.
J
H
H
The
other
thing
that
I
have
kind
of
in
our
record
for
this
legislation
is
a
question
at
the
first
planning
commission
meeting.
This
issue
was
raised
and
you
can
read
this
for
yourself
in
the
planning
commission
minutes
if
you
have
the
time
and
the
wherewithal,
but
there
was
a
question
from
one
of
the
planning
commissioners
to
alexandre
lads,
specifically
on
the
issue
of
affordable
housing.
H
Obviously,
I
think
is
her
focus
more
than
sort
of
overall
housing,
but
she
looks
obviously
at
the
whole
housing
market
and
what
she
said
was
that
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
years
of
very
good
study
on
this.
So
it's
hard
to
have
real
good.
Like
numbers
and
data
she
said.
Research
has
shown
in
other
communities
that
there's
a
tipping
point
where
the
number
of
str's
impact
the
market,
santa
fe,
is
probably
not
there
yet,
but
certain
neighborhoods
do
have
a
higher
share
of
short-term
rentals.
It's
possible!
H
H
H
We
can
ask
if
alexander
lads
willing
to
come
to
further
meetings,
maybe
maybe
she
would
be
an
important
person
to
invite
to
our
final
public
hearing
before
the
governing
body,
but
her
opinion,
I
would
paraphrase
as
being
sort
of
the
the
data,
is
unclear
and
it's
going
to
impact
different
parts
of
town
differently,
but
we
don't
have
real
good
proof
that
it's
having
a
negative
impact
on
the
availability
of
long-term
housing
and
then
I'll
turn
it
over.
If
the
sponsors
want
to
comment
further
yeah.
B
I
would
I
was
going
to
say-
and
maybe
I
should
have
started
here-
sorry
counselor
via
real
after
we
get
done
with
questions.
I
certainly
want
to
give
you
an
opportunity
to
speak
about.
You
know
why
why
you're,
a
sponsor
and
and
what's
motivated
your
interest
in
this,
so
you
know
if
you,
if,
if
you
want
to
talk
about
that
now
or
or
wait
till
till
the
questions
are
finished,.
B
Okay,
you'll
wait
so
ahead
of
me
yeah!
Thank
you
yeah,
so
I
I
think
though
counselor
cassette
sanchez,
you
you've
had
your
your
question
answered
for
the
most
part.
G
Can
I
add
to
that,
though,
what
we're
seeing
now
and
just
talking
with
friends
of
mine
that
are
in
the
real
estate
business
is
people
are
buying
property,
not
to
move
here,
necessarily
and
that's
disheartening,
I'm
sure
there's
quite
a
few
people
moving
because
they're
moving
out
of
large
cities.
G
They
want
to
be
away
from
the
kind
of
density
aspect
of
lots
of
people
around,
but
I
what
I'm
seeing
also
is
investment
properties,
and
I
don't
think
we
should
be
having
opportunities
for
people
to
come
in
to
buy
properties
just
so
they
can
turn
it
around
and
make
short-term
rentals.
And
so
I
I
agree
with
what
alex
said.
You
know
it
doesn't
necessarily
translate
into
affordable
housing.
G
However,
we've
talked
about
in
the
community
development
commission
that
simultaneously
we
definitely
need
affordable
units,
but
we
also
need
market
rate
units,
an
ability
for
people
to
work.
Excuse
me
live
here
that
work
here,
and
so,
if
those
properties
became
long-term
rental
units
to
me,
that's
a
win
for
the
city,
because
we
need
more
people
to
live
here
that
work
here
and
yes,
affordable
housing
is
where
we
have
a
major
deficit.
G
However,
we
have
a
great
need
too,
for
a
market
rate,
so
I
just
see
it
as
just
overall
supporting
this
is
that
I
we're
not
trying
to
we
are
not.
I
don't
think
this
is
punishing
people
that
have
existing
short-term
rentals
and
you
know
there
are
a
lot
of
local
people
that
use
this
as
supplemental
income,
and
we
want
to
support
that.
We
think
that's
important,
and
so
I
don't
think
that
this
is
really
targeting
them.
G
I
don't
really
know
why,
because
some
of
those
people
already
have
short-term
rentals,
and
we
want
to
support
that.
So
I
think
that
it's
really
looking
at
the
possibilities
in
the
future
of
people
buying
investment
properties
and,
more
than
one,
remind
you
that
it's
not
just
one
unit
that
people
think
that's
going
to
be
their
investment,
it's
people
that
are
buying
multiple
units
that
are
then
turning
them
around
for
short-term
rentals.
So
that's,
I
think
the
impetus
for
me
to
support
this,
and
there
was
a
lot
of
work.
G
Put
in
it's
very
complicated
ordinance
to
begin
with,
and
we're
seeing
this
now,
because
some
of
the
things
that
people
have
had
consternation
about
were
already
in
the
ordinance.
So
I
think
it
was
just
really.
It
was
very
clear
that
not
many
people
knew
what
was
involved
with
the
current
ordinance
and,
I
think,
with
sally's
interpretation
and
breakdown
of
what
has
changed
was
is
helpful,
but
we'll
still
have
some
folks
that
are
still
not
clear
about
the
changes
and
what
was
already
existing
and
there's
probably
some
things
that
we've
talked
about.
G
I
don't
have
any
amendments
right
now,
but
the
the
ones
that
we've
been
you
know
trying
to
figure
out
what
what
makes
sense
with
the
200
foot
buffer,
the
carve
out
for
trans
transferability
of
permits
for
a
deceased
spouse
or
domestic
partner
to
to
their
surviving
spouse
or
domestic
partner.
So
I
think
that's
something
we
need
just
probably
language
to
make
adjustments
as
we
move
through
the
committee
process,
but
overall
there's
there's
just
a
lot
and
yeah.
I'm
I'm
just
thankful
for
staff
to
walk
us
through
this.
B
Yeah-
and
I
I
do
think
you
know,
the
the
provision
about
one
per
natural
person
is
definitely
targeted
at
speculators.
B
Limiting
you
know,
people
who
just
have
unlimited
income,
and
I
just
want
to
buy
up
a
neighborhood
and
and
turn
it
into
strs.
That's
not
what
we
want
to
see,
and
so
just
add
that
so
did
you
have
other
questions?
Oh
director
isaacson.
You
had
something
further.
J
Thank
you
counselor,
just
to
add
a
quick
data
point
to
your
to
your
point.
Counselor.
You
know
we
do
need
more
housing
in
the
city,
affordable,
housing
and
market
rate
housing.
We
currently
have
between
and
2122
housing
units
under
construction
in
the
city
of
santa
fe,
so
we
are
making
progress
in
that
area.
We
are
starting
to
fill
that
gap,
that
deficit
of
housing
and
and
hopefully
that
will,
as
we
start
to
fill
in
housing
at
all
price
points.
E
Yeah,
thank
you
all
for
that.
For
that
answer.
I
know
it's
it's
a
very
complex
issue
and
just
like
you
know,
we
have
frequently
said
that
there
is
no
single
solution
for
affordable
housing.
I
know
that
short-term
rentals
are
not
the
only
challenge
that
we
have
to.
You
know
as
I
put
it:
affordable,
housing
and
housing
that
is
affordable
and
they
are.
You
know
two
separate
things
that
we
have
to
consider.
I
have
to
say
I
my
husband
and
I
are
in
the
housing
market.
E
Right
now
are
trying
to
buy
a
house
right
now.
Obviously
we
have
weird
constructions
to
a
district
that
other
people
don't
have
to
worry
about.
It's
it's
rough,
and
so
I
have
a
lot
of
empathy
for
individuals
that
are
trying
to
purchase
a
house
right
now
and
you
see
them
gone
within
a
day,
and
I
know
that
one
that
we
were
interested
in
looking
at
has
now
turned
into
a
short-term
rental,
and
that
can
be
a
little
frustrating.
E
But
so
I
really
I
do
appreciate
all
of
the
thought
of
all
of
the
different
factors,
because
you
know,
as
counselor
vietnamese
pointed
out,
there
are
absolutely
individuals
that
live
in
our
community
that
are
part
of
our
community,
that
their
short-term
rental
is
how
they
afford
to
be
in
our
community
and
as
counselor
garcia
pointed
out,
you
know
we.
E
Tourism
is
such
a
huge
piece
of
our
economy
and
really
finding
the
balance
between
all
these
pieces.
I
can
imagine,
was
and
is
a
challenge.
So
thank
you
to
the
sponsors
and
thank
you
to
staff
for
all
of
your
work
into
this
and
delving
into
such
a
complex
but
very
necessary
piece
of
legislation
that
we
need
to
be
looking
at.
I
don't
believe
I
have
any
other
questions
right
now.
E
B
Any
other
questions
I
I
will
just
let
the
committee
know
jennifer
and
I
met
with
the
housing
with
with
the
staff
in
the
city
who
touch
housing
at
any
level.
We
are
planning
a
series
of
presentations
over
the
next.
B
I
don't
know
four
months,
let's
say
to
give
this
committee
a
deeper
dive
into
where
we
are
with
housing,
the
kinds
of
things
the
city
is
doing,
and
we
also
want
to
hear
from
the
advocates
about
some
ideas
of
of
directions
that
we
need
to
start
to
move
in,
and
so,
though,
so
just
so,
you
know
that
we
will
be
providing
more
presentations
on
housing,
because
this
is
absolutely
a
critical
area.
B
So
with
that,
if
there
aren't
any
other
questions
counselor
via
real,
if,
if
did
you
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
this
bill
or
no.
G
B
B
Okay-
and
I
I
guess
I-
the
only
thing
I
would
add
is
that
you
know
with
this
bill.
We
really
are
balancing
interests
right
and,
and
that's
a
lot
of
what
we
do
as
counselors
we.
So
I
I
have
this
is
I'm
very
excited
that
this
bill
is
starting
to
move
through
the
committees.
We
have
worked
on
it
a
long
time.
B
We
need
to
correct
the
negative
impact
that
they've
had,
and
I
I
think
the
sponsors
recognize
that
there
is
a
role
for
short-term
rentals
in
our
lodging
options
in
the
city,
especially
being
a
tourist
economy,
but
we
need
to
correct
the
negative
impact
that
they've
had
in
in
some
of
the
neighborhoods
and
and
when
I
think
about
it,
when
I
was
going
door-to-door,
I
heard
a
lot
from
people
how
their
neighborhoods
had
changed,
how
they'd
lost
that
quality
of
life
of
a
neighborhood,
because
there
were
so
many
people
coming
and
going
and
they
don't
live
there
and
they
don't
they.
B
You
know
it's
it's
not
it's
not
the
same
as
having
a
neighbor,
a
long-term
neighbor,
and
so
I
certainly
heard
a
lot
about
the
need
to
do
this,
and
certainly
in
the
south
capital
area.
We
know
that
you
know
there
are
big
swaths
of
that
area
that
are
short-term,
rentals
and
and
that's
that's
been
hard
on
the
people
who
live
there
long
term
year
round.
So
with
that,
I
think
we
could
entertain
a
motion
to
move
this,
I'm
not
sure
what
committee
it
goes
to
next.
B
As
I
said
at
the
beginning,
the
sponsors
are
talking
about
how
to
address
some
of
the
things
that
the
planning
commission
asks
that
that
we
think
through,
and
you
know,
I
think
there
will
be
amendments
down
the
road
here,
but
none
tonight,
and
so
if
we
could
get
a
motion
to
to
move
this
bill
forward.
E
B
Second,
thanks
all
right
and
jennifer:
do
you
want
to
call
the
role.
D
D
B
Yes,
okay,
so
thank
you,
everybody
I
think
it's.
This
is
a
good
off
to
a
good
start
to
thank
you
staff
and
get
getting
to
have
it
have
the
opportunity
to
talk
about
this
and
and
get
some
understanding.
Let's
see,
I'm
looking
for
my.
B
B
Okay
matters
from
the
chair.
Our
next
meeting
is
november
4th
and
we
do
have
a
couple
presentations
that
I
think
you'll
find
very
interesting
and
we'll
see
you
soon.
I
think
we're.