Lawsuit filed against City of South Lake Tahoe to stop enforcement of Measure T

SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, Calif. - It has been just two weeks since the final count of the November 2018 election was certified in El Dorado County and there is already a lawsuit surrounding the outcome of Measure T.

On Tuesday, December 18, a lawsuit was filed by the South Lake Tahoe Property Owners Group in El Dorado County Superior Court to stop the enforcement of the measure which would ban most vacation home rentals (VHRs) in the city by 2021. Even though most portions of the measure go into effect in three years, one part is now in place - a maximum occupancy of 12 people per home no matter the size.

The involved parties were to have their first court date on Wednesday, December 19 but the judge assigned to the case, Mike McLaughlin, once owned a VHR so the court hearing was vacated and will be moved to a future date under a different judge. That date is unknown at this time.

The South Lake Tahoe Property Owners Group is made up of homeowners, business owners and property managers and are represented by Andrew Pierce of Pierce and Shearer out of Redwood City, Calif.

"We believe the ordinance is unconstitutional," said Pierce. "The entire ban (on VHRs) is discriminatory, depending on how many months one lives in their home. You can't discriminate based on where you live."

The City will be represented by the City Attorney Heather Stroud through at least the first stage when they respond to the lawsuit. They are reserving comment until they have a better grasp on the situation per Chris Fiore, the City's communications manager.

In the injunction to stop Measure T, Pierce writes the measure, which "passed by a razor-thin majority" is unconstitutional and unenforceable because of the following eight points:

The initiative...

1) Discriminates against property owners who are not "permanent residents" while allowing "permanent residents" to continue renting their properties to visitors as short-term rentals,
2) Imposes occupancy limits without regard to size of the property,
3) Conflicts with state and county law regarding land use regulation in the Lake Tahoe Region,
4) Impermissibly intrudes into administrative matters rather than legislative issues,
5) Interferes with vested rights,
6) Contains numerous vague and ambiguous terms,
7) Violates the privileges and immunities clause of the U.S. Constitution, and
8) Impairs the obligations of contracts.

Pierce said they are asking for a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction and a permanent injunction barring enforcement of Measure T.

In the election, 3517 South Lake Tahoe voters marked their ballot in favor of the measure, 3459 against, a difference of 58 votes, or .84 percent of those voting. voters who turned in ballots did not vote "Yes" or "No" on Measure T and just 65 percent of the registered voters cast a ballot, the lowest in El Dorado County which saw high voter turnouts.

The South Lake Tahoe City Council certified the results of the November election during a special meeting on December 10, something local lawyer Bruce Grego (and proponent of Measure T) says should be enough to show the courts the measure is valid.

All sides of the issue were represented in the courthouse Wednesday, many staying just long enough to hear the case had been vacated and others staying on to discuss matters and next steps.

As are most initiatives across the country and especially in California, Measure T was, and continues to be, divisive and controversial, thus guaranteeing passionate debates. It is also very tough for initiatives to pass muster in the courts as they are written by citizens and not lawmakers. Laws must be black and white with minute details on procedures to direct law enforcement and the legislature.

Pierce said in the paperwork filed in Superior Court they are requesting an order for the City to bar enforcement of occupancy limits, void the ban on new vacation permits and acknowledge that existing permits can be renewed in 2021. The lawsuit also says the measure "contains numerous vague and ambiguous terms."

Proponents of Measure T say those behind the lawsuit are just in it for the money.

"It's a classic Realtor ploy," said Laurel Ames. "They just want to protect their money. It's always about the money."

Timing of the reduced occupancy for South Lake Tahoe vacation rentals is coming just as the holiday and ski crowd are heading to town. Occupancy is limited to two people per bedroom with a maximum of 12 (for a six-bedroom home). In the past ordinance the rule was two people per bedroom plus four with no maximum. Property management companies are reporting problems with the new restrictions for those with prior reservations, plane tickets and vacation plans. The resulting overflow from the new restrictions is forcing some occupants into an already overcrowded motel inventory.

Measure T:

Should an ordinance, to eliminate most vacation home rentals ("VHR") in residential zones within the City of South Lake Tahoe, be adopted, that: (1) eliminates VHRs in residential zones by 2021, except for certain "qualified" VHRs operated by permanent residents; (2) allows VHR operations in commercial zones and tourist core areas; (3) adds VHR occupancy limitations; (4) increases minimum fines for VHR-related violations, after 2021; and (5) limits the ordinance's amendment, unless approved by a majority of voters?