Introduction to Vacation Rentals in California

David Koslow 0:01

These were homeowners, therefore, could not reply to the extremely angry mob reminding me of Frankenstein and all the villagers with their pitchforce coming after short-term vacation rental.

Announcer 0:15

Welcome to the California Appellate Podcast, a discussion of timely trial tips and the latest cases and news coming from the California Court of Appeal and the California Supreme Court. And now your hosts, Tim Kowal and Jeff Lewis.

Tim Kowal 0:30

Welcome everyone. I am Jeff Lewis. And I'm Tim Colwall. It's summer now, Jeff, and summer vacation rentals have always been a controversy in California, at least since they've been a thing starting back in around 2010. So I thought today we would invite David Coslo to the show. He has been, since 2022 at least, one of Coachella Valley's most active citizen advocates against excessive short-term rental fines, helping some of his neighbors challenge $5,000 plus penalties before the Riverside County Superior Court's Appellate Division. And so David's going to give us his perspective as a former practicing constitutional law attorney and repeat candidate for city council in Cathedral City and an assistant to vacation rental owners on the current state of play in California on vacation rental laws and regulations. Welcome to the podcast, David. Thank you very much, Tim and Jeff. Now, David, you've been peripherally involved in several of these vacation rental cases in Coachella Valley. And I thought that maybe first we'd orient our listeners who uh to why this matters to them. Probably most of our listeners have uh followed at one point or another some of the saga surrounding these vacation rentals, short-term vacation rentals, is the sometimes colloquially known as just Airbnbs or VRBOs. So the disputes uh that you're going to talk to us about center around excessive fines, like this $5,000 per incident fine, merely for advertising a vacation rental with an expired permit, I guess. And so by way of a brief history of these short-term vacation rental laws, it all started around the initial phase was 2010 to 2015 when Airbnb and Verbo founded and started scaling up and they became a real hot ticket. So owners of second homes or in some cases larger investors would uh get a boon and they're able to monetize these second homes or investment homes more easily.

Jeff Lewis 2:18

And then Tim, but before you demonize these homeowners, I just want to let you know. I have an ADU in my backyard. And I would love nothing better than to charge you an arm and a leg for you and your family to come up for one or two days to watch the World Cup or the Olympics that are coming, but I can't because

The Evolution of Short-Term Rental Laws

Jeff Lewis 2:36

my city has a short-term rental ban. I can only rent an ADU for 30 days or more. So my opportunity to fleece you has been ruled illegal.

Tim Kowal 2:45

Or curtailed merely, we could say. Yeah, and that's where I wanted to talk with David about. He's going to give us maybe a survey of some of these cities that have banned short-term vacation rentals entirely, and some of them who have uh merely monetized it, and maybe others who are just ollie-olly oxen-free and more libertarian about it. In 2015 to 2019, we started seeing some challenges and pushback to these short-term vacation rentals, with San Francisco, I think, being one of the first who attempt to put a cap on short-term rentals, although I think that push failed. What they did ultimately, I guess, was around in 2017, they entered into some sort of uh settlement where they would require registrations, basically a permitting policy or a regulated approach to it rather than an all-out ban. Santa Monica uh did ban whole home rentals, and that was upheld apparently in the Ninth Circuit in homeawake.com versus City of Santa Monica back in 2019. And then moving to David's neck of the woods in the Coachella Valley, Palm Springs built an elaborate permitting and enforcement and cap regime. And in 2020, ballot voters actually rejected a measure to phase out most short-term vacation rentals in single-family neighborhoods. So despite a push to ban it entirely, short-term rentals are still allowed in Palm Springs, albeit heavily regulated and permitted and subject to caps and fines and things. And other Coachella Valley cities do enact bans. I'm informed that Rancho Mirage, Indian Wells, and others have restricted or effectively banned short-term vacation rentals in residential zones. And Cathedral City, that takes us to Cathedral City, which is in the middle of this. And then just briefly backing off to uh to the coastal areas where Jeff and I find ourselves, uh, the Coastal Commission becomes another layer of complexity where the Coastal Commission treats bans on short-term vacation rentals and coastal zones as restrictions on public coastal access. And so maybe I don't know if this ironically or not, that because of the Coastal Commission, short-term vacation rentals are more available as a result. They're at least not going to be subject to outright bans on uh when you're under the Coastal Commission. So, where do things stand now in 2026, David? Catch us up uh after

Current State of Short-Term Rentals in Coachella Valley

Tim Kowal 5:01

that kind of city bus tour, how it started and how it how it has gone for the last 15 years or so. Where are we in 2026 and the state of play on short-term vacation rentals?

David Koslow 5:10

As further background, Coachella Valley is the host of several major music events. And during that time, all of the hotels are booked up. And that's why short-term vacation rentals really supply an important feature to those weekends. Cathedral City was permitting them and then closed down permitting, and in 2022 established an escalating fine of 5,000, 10,000, 15,000 plus penalties. I think because they were able to shoot fish in a barrel. These were homeowners who didn't live here and therefore don't vote here, and could not reply to the extremely angry mob, reminding me of Frankenstein and all the villagers with their pitchforks coming after short-term vacation rentals. And the city council set the fines, I believe, because they knew it was just low enough so that won't no one could afford to get an attorney to intervene, and high enough so they could monetize it to the tune of around five hundred thousand dollars over a period of four years. It was a very lucrative side venture for the city. It's a way for the city to get their piece of the action. Yes. As opposed to what Palm Springs does, it gets its piece of the action through the uh temporary residency taxes in other ways, permitting fees. So that made a lot of sense for uh Palm Springs. Some cities, as you mentioned, prohibit it entirely. Irvine, for example. Ranch Mirage prohibits short-term vacation rentals entirely or and the advertising of it, not only in the city, but in HOAs within the city. Recently there was a new statute limiting HOA fines to $100, and the conflict between the city fine and the HOA fine has never been adjudicated.

Tim Kowal 6:57

I believe there's a government code, is it section 36901 that sets a cap of uh $1,000 on uh city fines?

David Koslow 7:05

That's correct, and that's at issue in the second of the two cases that I've been helping by finding attorneys, the Lefick case. The first case, Montenegro, ended with the appellate division saying that the $1,500 fine for court proceedings should apply equally to

Legal Challenges and Excessive Fines

David Koslow 7:23

city forum proceedings. That appellate decision was appealed to the Court of Appeal, and they kicked out the case entirely on the basis of forfeiture, that Alessandra Montenero had not raised the excessive fine issue at the trial level. Now, in the federal courts, this is called non-presentational. And if you read recent opinions by the Supreme Court, they're taking the same tact that if you didn't raise it at the trial court, it doesn't exist. There are ways around it. For example, Schwartz versus Cohen, which is pending before the California Supreme Court, the parties settled. They have no case or controversy anymore. But the California Supreme Court's taking it on because it is an issue of great public significance.

Tim Kowal 8:07

Aren't there some authorities that allow issues that even the constitutional or pure issues of law that were not raised below to be raised on appeal if if the underlying facts are uncontroverted, there's no dispute over the underlying facts, which is in this case, you can take judicial notice that the fines were $5,000, and you can take judicial notice of the fact that the legislative cap on fines is $1,000. It doesn't take a whole lot of trial court litigation to bring that issue to the fore.

David Koslow 8:34

Well, you'll have to tell that to the California Supreme Court, which denied a petition for review filed by an excellent attorney with the Complex Appellate Litigation Group in San Francisco. Do you know that group? Yeah. And he raised that issue. There meant a lot of case laws saying that the forfeiture doesn't apply when there's some issue of extreme public significance. So luckily, Richard Levick uh learned of all the mistakes that Alessandro had made, and he raised all of these issues at the trial court. He got the trial court, in fact, to agree with him that the $5,000 fine was constitutionally excessive, and the trial court instead ordered a 50% fine of the $1,500 fine. In other words, $750. There was an error on his part because the $1,000 cap, which is a default cap, the statute, that is what should have applied, and so the $50 should have been $500. But all of these issues are now before the appellate division. Where did the $50 come from?

Tim Kowal 9:42

I'm sorry? What uh you say that the appropriate penalty should have been $50 of the $1,000 statutory cap. What why $50%?

David Koslow 9:49

Because he gave 50% of the $1,500 by mistake.

Tim Kowal 9:53

I see. But we're I'm just wondering where the 50% came from. But I think that's the one.

David Koslow 9:57

We agreed with the Montenero appellate division

The Impact of Local Regulations on Homeowners

David Koslow 10:00

that the fine in the court forum should be the same as the fine in the city forum. And that decision said that the fine in the court forum would have been fifteen hundred.

Tim Kowal 10:11

Can we back up a minute to the uh uh to the fine itself? The fine was for advertising a vacation rental, short-term vacation rental, with an expired permit. So can you tell us about the the Cathedral City vacation permitting regime? How do you get a permit? What's involved in keeping the permit active? Aaron Ross Powell No more. No more. So they they did away with the permitting program.

David Koslow 10:34

Yes. They sent notices to everybody who had permits, and that included Alessandra. Your permit will be dead as of December 31. Now Richard Levack never had a permit. He didn't know about the law, and that's why he advertised.

Tim Kowal 10:47

They did away with the permits, meaning that anyone can advertise a vacation rental at this point? No, no.

David Koslow 10:53

They got rid of the permits, making short-term vacation rentals unlawful and to advertise unlawful. See, the the ordinance itself says to advertise or to rent.

Tim Kowal 11:03

I see. Outright ban. Okay, I missed that part of it. Okay, so this is pre-ban she was advertising with an expired permit.

David Koslow 11:12

In Cathedral City, the HOAs are left to their own vices and devices. And they're regulated by the new statute limiting fines to 100, as opposed to Ranch Mirage, which is sticking its nose into HOAs and enforcing it against HOAs.

Tim Kowal 11:27

Do you have any insights on why some cities are imposing outright bans, why some cities are just regulating them and collecting taxes and making money like normal people would do? And maybe there are some on the other side, or there are other cities that just allow it without any regulation? I'm not aware of those.

David Koslow 11:44

The brief that Richard Lepick filed tells the history of the outrage about BBs and short-term vacation rentals. There was some violent occurrence in a small town in Northern California, and it apparently set the residents on edge. I know locally the residents here object

Community Perspectives on Short-Term Rentals

David Koslow 12:04

to short-term vacation rentals on the grounds of too much noise and too much traffic. However, we have codes that address exactly that. And our code fines are 100, 200, and 500. It's not 5,000. In fact, we have a violation uh fine for fireworks. It's only $1,000. Why did the pitchforks come out?

Tim Kowal 12:29

I really don't know. Well, I and in Coachella Valley, you mentioned the Coachella Rock Music Festival. A little different clientele than like a like a classical music concert. Uh people would come out and enjoy wine and quiet conversation. Maybe some of the people who are using the short-term vacation rentals there are uh are spooking the neighbors or terrifying them with their with raucous parties. That must be a factor.

David Koslow 12:54

Well, I have a friend who believes firmly that the reason for the resistance is because these neighbors are jealous of the fornication going on. Okay. We have a very interesting group of madcaps here in Cathedral City who visit the city council meetings and express outrage at trash cans not being restored after the trash collections. There's a real uh civil war going on. I think everyone is unhappy and they express it in various ways. And one way is to prohibit short-term vacation rentals.

Tim Kowal 13:27

You mentioned Irvine as a complete ban. Part of it surprises me and part of it doesn't surprise me. The part that does surprise me is uh I don't understand where the incentive comes from. It's I don't know of any big music festivals, big raucous music festivals that happen there that would drive a lot of partygoers en masse to uh solicit short-term vacation rentals. But the part that uh that doesn't surprise me is that it's uh generally a a lot of family neighborhoods, and maybe they just don't like uh the short-term rentals there.

David Koslow 13:55

Well, the ordinances always have a list of horrors. Why the ban is being placed. Too much noise, too much traffic, too much drugs, too much this, too much that. It may be a lithium test for the culture wars and and the whole idea that people should be entitled to use the property that they own in the in the ways that they they prefer. There is a Supreme Court case sheet

Demographics and Political Views on Rentals

David Koslow 14:19

that starts to look at incursions on property ownership that I think will come into play at some point when a city says absolutely not, you can't make any commercial use of your residential property. But that case hasn't occurred yet.

Tim Kowal 14:33

You've advised uh individual short-term vacation rental owners. Where are the big guys in all this? Uh do uh Airbnb and Verbo get get involved directly in any of these lawsuits?

David Koslow 14:45

Are there big companies who buy up uh They really should because a new statute makes the platform, Airbnb, whatever it is, liable, and that hasn't been tested. It's just so weird how this one issue seems to be arsenic to the public politic. And it's a good question you ask, which is exactly why should I be concerned? I have a neighbor two houses down. He outfitted his home completely, took his spare room, created an outdoor entrance to the pool. They had big plans, and they went into the toilet because of the regulation.

Tim Kowal 15:20

I'm curious if you can predict if someone is a short-term vacation rental owner advocate or supporter based on their demography. For example, can you tell if someone would be for or against a ban based on their their their politics, Republican-Democrat, or left or right, or their age or marital status, whether they have children?

David Koslow 15:44

They're demographic. No, no, I think this is a cause to eliminate short-term vacation rentals that the Trumpists, Republicans, the Democrats would all agree on. It's a libertarian viewpoint. It's not doing any harm to anyone. And the harms that are alleged are already covered by code ordinances. So as to demographics, I'd say young people would be all for it, because they're into the Coachella music scene. And seniors probably not so much. Anyone who complains about neighbors not pushing their trash cans back in, that person is probably likely suspect to oppose short-term vacation rentals.

Tim Kowal 16:23

Every neighborhood has someone like that who will complain that you didn't bring your garbage cans in soon enough, or uh my son's got a basketball hoop and uh you can't put it in the street. We live in a cul-de-sac. We put it on the street, but the well, the mailman needs to be able to drive up to the mailbox. Okay, so we'll put it on the sidewalk. Then someone says, uh, well, I need to walk my dog down the sidewalk. So you have to push it into your driveway. And so now my kid has to uh come get me every time he needs he wants to shoot shoot hoops to drag it out to the curb.

The Role of City Attorneys and Legal Representation

David Koslow 16:48

If they've read Foreau and Emerson, they will oppose this type of regulation. And it's interesting to see the Supreme Court cases which are critical of administrative agencies. In the course of this, I became introduced through a cousin of mine to Professor Philip Hamburger, who's written a book called Is Administrative Law Unlawful? And he's been at the center of the litigations that resulted in the removal of the Chevron deference and the Jarcy case, which plays into the appeal that Richard Levick has made.

Tim Kowal 17:21

Yeah, let's talk about the that Jarcosy jury trial issue briefly. The SEC versus Jarcosy, 2024 Supreme Court decision held that the this was about the uh Securities and Exchange Commission, and the SEC has an in-house tribunal that will dole out civil penalties for violation of one thing or another. And uh the court held that the Seventh Amendment guarantees a right to a jury trial in those tribunals.

David Koslow 17:48

And that's because of the choice of forum that was available to the SEC. The SEC had a choice, in-house or court. Now, a recent case, FCC, that the Supreme Court decided, said that the FCC's in-house could be appealed to the court where there would be a jury trial, and so gearcasey doesn't apply. That's why FCC is so important in understanding what gyrocasey's ruling is. Jarcy has not been applied to any state agencies yet, and cities are local agencies by definition. Cathedral City is allowed by state statute to create new misdemeanors. This is something that's boggling because the statute says any code violation is a misdemeanor. And then another section says that those code violations can be prosecuted as infractions or as code violations in the city forum. The city uh ordinances that violations of the STVR ordinances may be, in the words, may be prosecuted as a misdemeanor. So from that, we understand that the City of Cathedral City has a choice of

Potential Outcomes of Ongoing Legal Cases

David Koslow 18:54

forum. It can bring an enforcement action within the city forum through an administrative citation, or it can bring a court action for misdemeanor, which in the sole discretion of the city attorney can be reduced to an infraction. It's given that choice, and given the choice of forum, one without attorney fee, without jury trial, one with jury trial, the reasoning legarkesy would be they've got to select the misdemeanor. This would have helped uh Richard Leffick, because he was doing this poor thing all alone. He had no attorney. He was cribbing from the the Montenero briefs. And if he had been criminally prosecuted, he would have had access to an attorney as an indigent.

Tim Kowal 19:36

I want to make sure I have the argument right, the the Jarquese argument right, that if the city could bring this through an admit administrative proceeding to which a jury right wouldn't attach, or it could bring it through a misdemeanor proceeding to which a jury trial right would attach, then Jarcasey would hold that you're entitled to the jury trial, regardless of which election the city makes.

David Koslow 20:00

He goes on for pages about how essential to our democracy the jury trial is. It's really quite quotable what he says.

Tim Kowal 20:08

The cases we've been talking about have been in in superior court, state court. You have any insight on on uh why they are not brought in federal court and whether the shape or outcomes of the cases would be meaningfully different if they were litigated in the federal forum?

David Koslow 20:23

Aaron Ross Powell, Jr. Well, they're in superior court under a government code section that allows a fine or penalty assessment by the city to get a de novo hearing at the superior court. I haven't really thought deeply about a 1983 claim in a federal court.

Tim Kowal 20:38

But these are cases brought by the city. They're enforcement.

David Koslow 20:41

No, no, no. Enforcement actions. Alessandra and Richard both appeal de novo to the Superior Court. And they're treated there as if they were small claims actions with no right of jury trial.

Tim Kowal 20:52

I see, I see. They they just get these uh these ministerial fines and they have to challenge them in the case. Well, they're called administrative fines.

David Koslow 21:00

And what was remarkable was that Richard piggybacked on Alessandra's appellate division ruling and convinced the trial judge in his case that the $5,000 fine was excessive. That has changed

The Justice Gap and Its Implications

David Koslow 21:14

the posture of the appeal in Richard's case from the posture of the appeal in Alessandra's case. So what happened there is the city appealed. The city appealed from the $750 fine. Richard was happy with the fine, was willing to pay it, but now they've put him to this additional expense and time in presenting all of these arguments, which could result in huge refund requirements to present them in a pellet.

Tim Kowal 21:40

Yeah, that's what I wanted to get to next. What what are the stakes here? If the if the city wins, will that depress the availability of short term vacation rentals? Because these owners will be up against these onerous fines. And is that going to chill them from entering that market? I think so.

David Koslow 21:56

If the city wins, they will have reinstated the five thousand dollar fine. probably on the basis that the charter city status of Cathedral City renders the fines impervious to state statutes.

Tim Kowal 22:09

There probably would be called like a regressive tax or a regressive fine because individual owners are going to be more likely to misstep and incur those kinds of fines, whereas big institutional owners of short-term vacation rentals will have whole legal teams who will know how to avoid those those.

David Koslow 22:26

Well that's what I wanted to talk to you about next, which is what the state bar calls the justice gap. The justice gap is the fact that if I were criminally prosecuted and indigent, I would have an attorney assigned to me. But if I'm bringing or defending a civil action, I can't find any attorney under $25,000 willing to take it on, and that is a retainer which is quickly exhausted. It's called the justice gap. Now the state bar has a very weak solution maybe you're aware of it. They are offering to attorneys who are retiring that they will pay their annual state bar fees if they agree to provide pro bonus services through a state bar certified lawyer referral service. That's not working. Number one, these attorneys are somewhere between 80 and death and their comprehension of some of the laws that apply today may be on the scale of Maitland's book on common law in England. The other problem is that the state bar certified lawyer

Future of Short-Term Rentals and Recommendations

David Koslow 23:27

referral services aren't really a good source of legal representation. There aren't that many lawyers involved in it and they're all really there to make a buck, which is understandable. You may be aware that about two weeks ago the California Supreme Court issued a direction to the state bar to look into rules that would allow what they call community justice workers. I'm probably a community justice worker, but the problem is that these unlicensed legal aides have to work under the direction and control of a licensed attorney. I don't know how many licensed attorneys would want to be doing that. Now you do have the large law firms like Manette Phelps that take on quite a few cases, civil cases, you have the law schools that have student educational programs that take on cases, but they are all directed to specific hot topics like immigration or taxation. None of them are really focused on what I think is the worst offenses going on in the administrative state and that is the the city and county fines. They are just low enough that it would not be worthwhile to hire an attorney and just high enough that the city can monetize it.

Tim Kowal 24:39

I find it a little curious why a lot of these owners who are presumably they're income property owners these are they're probably typically renting out a second home. They so they own investment property. They're not the type of people who would be so destitute that they couldn't afford an attorney. Certainly if they had a tenant and they had to evict the the tenant, they would hire an eviction attorney. I wonder why this kind of cottage industry of real estate attorneys and eviction law attorneys aren't able to either they are not able to come to the aid of their clientele basically to assist with these with these fines and other short-term vacation rental permitting issues.

David Koslow 25:16

Well I'm glad you asked that because in Poem Springs there is an organization of the short-term vacation rental owners with permits and they have one goal and one goal only to prevent competition. They have no interest in helping anybody else and when I approached them to see if they would come on in any respect with these two litigations it was like Henny Penny being asking all the farm animals to help sow the wheat and grind the wheat it's a it's a problem. I wanted to go back to the justice gap and why it is so corrosive in the context of city fines. And it is because of this that Alessandra when she appeared pro pur at the trial court she didn't say the magic words. She said that the fine was draconian. It was draconian and when it got to the Court of appeal they said well it's not draconian. It's assassines of the forfeiture argument exactly this is a a three whacked out judges I'd be very distressed if but that was the ultimate outcome wasn't it that was the outcome and so she had already paid it because somebody at the city told her the fine would be doubled if she didn't pay it. So she fined uh paid it she didn't know that the appeal statute stays the fine while it's on appeal. So sh let's put it this way she got shafted both ways. But in pro peers who are appearing as their own attorney have a fool as a client. Isn't that the old expression? Yeah that's the expression. And oh here's the final point they make mistakes that cannot be rectified by the appellate lawyers. And in searching for an attorney for Alessandra I spoke with a Yale Law School appellant lawyer from San Diego. He read the tentative ruling about forfeiture. He said there's no way you're going to get over this he was absolutely right but this is an example why at the trial court attorneys and in pro person need to consult with you guys to make sure that the record is complete. Now in Lefig's case the city made a huge mistake they didn't order a court reporter. Oops oops yes and we know from the appellate division case that if it's not on the record as being raised it didn't get raised. Levick was filing things with all of his arguments being raised. I guess I have a question about appellate lawyers and where to find them. I know the fourth district court of appeal first division provides a pro bono counsel but it's restricted to cases before them. I think that would be a very good move for all of the district courts of appeal in lieu of setting up community justice workers that would be a better idea. But it doesn't solve the problem of in pro-s making huge mistakes and they make it because they believe Jeff and Tim they believe their heart of hearts that the judge is their friend they believe the judge is their advocate he's the errand to their Moses he will know what's in their mind and will put it into the right legal jargon. But as we know from Chief Justice Roberts when he was up for confirmation, judges act as umpires calling balls and strikes. But what happens if you've got the city sending all these balls and and the improper doesn't know what to do with them.

Jeff Lewis 28:31

Yeah it's like a major lead pitcher throwing at a a little league uh hitter.

David Koslow 28:37

It's really pathetic it's it's almost humorous. In fact I think a a movie about the disparity in power would be worthwhile. A trial is intended to be a match between equally matched parties but it certainly isn't when you have an in pro percent I have a follow-up question for you about the uh association of short-term vacation rental owners I don't remember the In Palm Springs.

Tim Kowal 29:00

In Palm Springs. What are the criteria to become a member of that association? That sounds like it's not easy to do.

David Koslow 29:09

I think there's a membership fee and you you would prove your permit the way Palm Springs works it limits the number of those short-term vacation rentals by area and there's some is it an exclusive organization are there a lot of uh single STVR owners who are not able to gain access mostly single property owners by the way Cathedral city when it enacted permits had all types of onerous restrictions they had to be inspected by the city the person who owns the property has to be there 24-7. It was really ridiculous.

Tim Kowal 29:45

Okay. Well and and then let's go back to the stakes question. I asked if the city wins is that going to be a chilling effect but if the city loses on on this permit issue and the court finds that $5,000 per incident violations that it's been collecting over the years have all been excessive and they need to be refunded. Do you have any sense of magnitude of the stakes how much of a check that the cities are going to have to write my estimate from doing public records requests is it's around $500,000.

David Koslow 30:13

And that's which city plus yeah for Cathedral City. Just Cathedral City. Yeah now this case only involves Cathedral city. However the Attorney General has been notified it's required by the rules of court that there's a constitutional challenge to the delegation to cities to establish these fines. So there's a statute whose constitutionality is being challenged under jerkosy.

Tim Kowal 30:40

All right and last question for city council members and city attorneys who may be listening do you have any suggestions for sensible ways that short-term vacation rentals can and or should be regulated? Where have you seen them work well? Where is the appropriate place for city enforcement to avoid neighborhood disruption? What's the ideal model or does it just vary from community to community?

David Koslow 31:03

The libertarian model is the model I subscribe to and that is that there are enough code ordinances that already cover all of the outrages that are alleged to occur with short-term vacation rentals. So I would just leave them alone and if the city wants to monetize then let them charge permit fees but don't have city inspectors go in and look at swimming pools and bathtubs and bathrooms and require someone to live 24-7 on the premises.

Tim Kowal 31:30

So just stick with the permitting fees to let the cities make enough money out of it to make it worth their while but otherwise leave them alone. That's my platform. I'm running on that platform. What do you think about that platform, Jeff? You're a you're a verbo owner or or not a verbo but a short-term vacation rental owner first of all except verbo.

Jeff Lewis 31:48

Everybody else calls it VRBO I know they're trying to rebrand. And second of all I live in a city that used to be flush with money before huge landslides or sweeping homes into the sea and now we're hemorrhaging money and we need money. And I would think a city like mine would view this as an opportunity relax the ban allow it use rely on its nuisance and other powers to regulate conduct and make a buck and save our city from sliding into the sea.

David Koslow 32:16

And my city has dug into its reserves because it's been overspending and it even got the citizens to approve a 0.5% increase in the sales tax. So now Cathedral City and Palm Springs have a 9.5% sales tax soon to rival New York City. I wanted to mention one last thing about what improper's misunderstand. They think the city attorney represents the citizens of the city. They're so wrong. This city attorney represents the city council and tries to cover the city council's ass. And now because the fine was approved as to form by the city attorney the city attorney is also covering its ass. So I I think public records requests and litigations against the city unfortunately are necessary until there's a change in regime.

Tim Kowal 33:07

I think ethically speaking the city attorneys their client is the city council.

David Koslow 33:11

Absolutely and uh yes but many people misunderstand that true yeah what the judge is there for to be their friend to read their minds to be their advocate quite the opposite they the judge as much as your adversary is your adversary.

Tim Kowal 33:29

What most people misunderstand about democracy could fill a library and and what they misunderstand about the court system also is is pretty overwhelming. But uh David thank you so much for taking the time to share with us your perspectives on these cases and thank you for the for the fight that you're putting up there. That's going to wrap up this episode if you have suggestions for future episodes, guests and topics please email us at info@ calpodcast.com in our upcoming episodes look for tips on how to lay the groundwork for an appeal when preparing for trial.

Jeff Lewis 33:58

Yeah see you next time and email me if you want to stay at my ADU for 31 days.

Announcer 34:02

See you next time you have just listened to the California Appellate Podcast a discussion of timely trial tips and the latest cases and news coming from the California Court of Appeal and the California Supreme Court. For more information about the cases discussed in today's episode, our hosts and other episodes visit the California Appellate Law Podcast website at CAL Podcast dot com. That's C A L Podcast dot com Thanks to Jonathan Caro for our intro music. Thank you for listening and please join us again