SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, Calif. – After El Dorado County Superior Court Judge Gary Slossberg struck down Measure T on March 13, 2025, the City of South Lake Tahoe has been preparing next steps. Measure T was a 2018 citizen-led initiative to ban vacation home rentals (VHRs) in residential neighborhoods of South Lake Tahoe, and to allow them in the tourist and industrial zones. Provisions in the measure allowed full-time residents to rent their homes up to 30 days per year, and it was this portion of the measure that Judge Slossberg determined to be unconstitutional in violation of the Dormant Commerce Clause. He also determined it was part of Measure T and could not be severed from the rest of the measure.

The first step was to decide if the City would fight the judge’s decision, or not.

On Tuesday, April 1 during closed session, City Council voted to not fight the judge’s decision by a vote of 4-1, with Councilman Robbins voting against the decision. Robbins was part of the group that created Measure T prior to his time on the council.

The second step was to decide if the City would impose a 45-day moratorium on the issuance VHRs permits in the areas where Measure T prohibited them.

City Council voted unanimously to impose the temporary moratorium. The 45-days is the maximum ; length an urgency ordinance can be enforced but Council can vote to extend the moratorium in 45 day increments if they are not ready to start issuing VHR permits after that time. All urgency ordinances need a four-fifths vote to pass.

Councilman Keith Roberts said he didn’t want the community to think they were turning their back on them, and he views the next steps as a chance to correctly fix the VHR ordinance.

Mayor Pro Tem Cody Bass said he doesn’t want to make any misteps in creating an ordinance and fail to find a middle ground , thus ending up with another citizen’s initiative. Bass said they can find the solution – maybe a buffer, a cap. He said a lot of thought will go into the new ordinance, and they need time to hire new staff and conduct background checks.

“Residents need to be our primary focus in neighborhoods,” said Bass.

“This is the city council turning its back on the community,” said Robbin who was disappointed in the closed session vote. “We have taken away the will of the majority and handed it to the will of the minority.” .

In 2017, City Council approved an updated VHR ordinance after months of working with community groups and staff, and listening to complaints to find common ground. Some of the public comment made on Tuesday night stated this, and said the rules were starting to work with increased enforcment staff, a log of calls they went on were made public within two days,, fines were increased, and citations issued were starting to decrease.

Some in the community were frustrated, even with the implemented rules that were working and enforced at the end.

Another speaker Tuesday said homeowners suffered damages and should get their permits back.

There is no requirement the City has to immediately reissue permits to those who had them prior to Measure T, and there is no vested right to have a permit. Permits were good for one year, and permit holders would have to reapply annually and not a vest right to have an automatic permit. Once Measure T passed, permits were allowed to expire and not renewed unless in the areas VHRs were allowed. The permits were not taken from the public.

The moratorium helps City Council think about the process and prevent a run on permit requests which could be over 1,000. This allows the City to plan. It could be a tiered plan that allows 200 permits issued at a time, and a new ordinance could come back that adds buffers and other limits.

Some in the community are concerned about affordable housing. Measure T didn’t fix it, and with so few homes on the market currently, having VHRs won’t change the situation. Not allowing VHRs in multi-family units could possibly help with housing.

Citations were issued all through the existence of Measure T to those who continued to rent illegally. Perhaps a new ordinance would not allow permits to those who broke the law? Council will evaluate ideas, what worked before, what didn’t, during their next steps.

The public will have plenty of opportunity to help craft a new ordinance.

The third step will be to determine what will be in a new ordinance, or bringing back the most recent one.

The next City Council meeting on April 22 could have VHRs on its agenda.