I emailed Council Member Kevin McKeown yesterday to see if we could now discuss the law against vacation rentals. Here is part of his responsse:

"In any case, it turns out the policy against vacation rentals
pre-dates the City's 2004 restriction on short-term rentals, which are defined as 30+ days but intended for persons who have another permanent place of abode.  I had hoped to share the findings from that 2004 ordinance with you, as requested, once you were in compliance, but that now seems neither relevant nor timely.

Vacation rentals are flat out prohibited in Santa Monica's OP-2
zone (SMMC 9.04.08.50.020, which dates back to the 80s).
 
Mayor pro tem Davis and I are asking the Council tomorrow night
to authorize staff evaluation of our prohibition on vacation rentals, but we are doing so to see if the current ordinance and penalties are sufficient to be effective, not to reconsider allowing vacation rentals.

I didn't want to be so rude as to ignore this latest email, and
would have felt such silence was unfair given the item we have placed on tomorrow night's agenda, but it also makes me very uncomfortable to be put in the position of knowing that an illegal activity apparently continues.  As a Councilmember I must be very careful to stick to policy, not enforcement.

I am copying the City Attorney on this response so that my
caution and discomfort are a part of the record."

Some of what he says is in regards to the calendar on this website, a calendar which I have not been able to update since late-June or early-July when I took my listing down from various websites.

I cannot attend the meeting tonight, but am disappointed that I received no notice about it from either Mr. McKeown or Mayor Davis. I guess I'm going to have to call the city tomorrow, see what steps are being taken and, perhaps, see what the staff member is doing in terms of research. I'm still hoping for a peaceful conclusion to this, but I don't think it's going to be easy.

I thought I'd start by writing down what's happened so far. I plan to add entries as new things ocurr.

This started at the end of June, the day before we went to my parents' for a week.

The City of Santa Monica finally decided to start enforcing its ban on vacation rentals, and started by contacting 25 owners, about whom it had complaints. My complaints are, I'm sure, from the same people next door who complained throughout our renovation. We have eight or nine households abutting our property, and only one household complains. However, the city doesn't track whether it's one person complaining multiple times or multiple people complaining, so I have many complaints.

Armando, in planning, said I had to shut down right away. I asked if there was some way to stay open for the summer, since I had people coming from all over the world who had paid deposits. He mailed me a citation and a fine. I've been fined $500 for not having a business license (although they wouldn't give me one when I applied for one), $75 for not collecting hotel taxes (I can't pay taxes if I don't have a business license) and $75 for running an illegal business. The actual bill should arrive any day now. If I pay it, I have 30 days or so before I have to close. According to Armando, at that point, he'll come by to see if I've closed and, since I won't have closed, he'll send me another citation for the same amount. This should cover me until I no longer have booked guests. I'm not booking people for this winter.

When I returned from my trip, I searched the Santa Monica Daily Press and found an article from last year saying that the city wasn't prosecuting people unless they were really causing problems. In the last four years, they've closed down exactly one vacation rental. Since the situation has obviously changed, I contacted the Daily Press and this article was written. http://www.smdp.com/Articles-c-2011-07-11-72170.113116-Homeowner-wants-to-legalize-vacation-rentals-.html

I started to collect data and estimate that tourists who stay in Santa Monica vacation rentals spend about $1.8 million (not including lodging). If vacation rentals were taxed, an additional $1.8 million would be raised. (I'm still wondering about the coincidence of the numbers being the same.) The owners with whom I spoke also said that they'd be happy to pay a licensing fee that would cover the city's cost of inspecting vacation rentals.

I have a phone meeting with the mayor tomorrow. I'll post what happens with that. I'm gearing up for a long fight, but maybe I'll get lucky and prove that being reasonable and logical can get me far. More likely, I'll end up proving that nothing gets done without a good attorney.