SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, Calif. – After weeks of public and staff input, the South Lake Tahoe City Council has approved a new Vacation Home Rental (VHR) ordinance for homes outside of the Tourist Core. It passed with a vote of 3-2, with councilmembers Scott Robbins and David Jinkens opposing. The item is scheduled for a second reading during the council’s June 17 meeting and will take effect 30 days later, on July 17.

The previous ordinance was passed in November 2017 (Ordinance Number 1114), and it addressed many concerns the community had with the previous one, though some residents found it too little, too late, and created a citizen’s initiative known as Measure T to ban them in areas outside of the Tourist Core and Commercial Zone the following fall. When El Dorado County Judge Gary Slossburg found a portion of Measure T, the qualified VHR provisions, to be unconstitutional in March 2025 because they impermissibly discriminate against interstate commerce, Measure T was struck down in its entirety. In April of this year, the Council voted not to appeal the court’s decision. The City had been defending the measure in court with a lawsuit filed by property owners against it.

With an urgency ordinance in place to prevent the previous VHR ordinance from going back into place, the council started the public process of deciding next steps to a new ordinance, and with much public input, what it should look like.

During the June 3 South Lake Tahoe City Council meeting, the new ordinance was approved in a first reading after a few hours of public and council comments and discussion.

There were several thoughts shared, from those asking to reinstate 1114 in its entirety, and then work out changes, but others worried it would be too late to pull back any desired changes.

In order not to inundate the police department and other staff with issuing new permits and their requirements, only a maximum of 150 will be issued per month.

“We’ve been going down this road for the last four meetings,” said Mayor Pro Tem Cody Bass. “If we allow this to start, if only 150 permits a month, staff can come back with real data, and we can amend in September [if needed].”

Bass said they will also find out the decision of the appellate courts that could halt the new ordinance anyway.

On May 22, the lower courts gave the Tahoe Neighborhoods Group, the residents behind Measure T, the grounds to appeal the judge’s earlier decision, and they will.

“The Tahoe Neighborhoods Group believes the city ignored its responsibility to the majority of the voters who approved a ban on VHRs in residential neighborhoods and should have appealed the lower court’s decision rather than take steps to reintroduce VHRs into our neighborhoods,” said Peggy Bourland and Dianne Rees of the Tahoe Neighborhoods Group, LLC about the council’s passing of a new VHR ordinance.

“Our appeal will be a request for a higher court to review the decision of the lower court,” said Bourland and Rees.

The council had the choice of three decisions to make: table the new ordinance and continue with a moratorium, throw out the new ordinance and go back and amend it later, or approve and amend it later, if needed, when data from the first months of enactment are available.

They chose the latter.

The new ordinance is the same as 1114 but with some adjustments:

1) Remove the 1400 cap and establish a 150-foot buffer.
2) Allow condominiums to hold a VHR permit if they had one as of September 1, 2016, with condominiums exempt from the 150-foot buffer.
3) In-person or virtual face-to-face check-in with either a wet or electronic signature on a Good Neighbor Contract at or before check-in. 24/7 in-person response to
complaints. Indoor noise monitoring. Outdoor cameras for trash and parking.
Require animal-resistant recycling carts when they are available.
4) Occupancy limit will be two per bedroom, exempting up to five children age 13 and under, except for studios where the occupancy limit will be two people plus two
children age 13 or under.
5) There will be no two-year waiting period to apply for a VHR permit after the sale of a property.
6) Require defensible space inspections.
7) Increase consequences for violations; the owner can always be cited/rules apply to all.
8) All VHR permits will be issued by the Police Department.
9) Monthly limit of 150 permits issued.
10) The Planning Commission will have the final decision on appeals of permit denials and revocations. Any appeals of first and second citations within 24 months will go to the hearing officer, with the third appeal, if any, going to the Planning
Commission with any revocation appeal.
11) Staff will review the VHR permit fee to ensure complete cost recovery.
12) Provide permitting preference for prior VHR/QVHR permittees who were in good standing.

Possible amendments coming in September would include removing the buffer and having a cap instead, evaluating the in-person check-in process, requiring a minimum age of 25 to rent, establishing online language for rules/agreements, and setting aside tourist/commercial and recreation zones as not affected. The three councilmembers wanted to get the ordinance approved now to start the process and not keep moving it down the road, so approved owners could have the summer season.