Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hemet council introduces light regulatory ordinance for short‑term rentals, adds zoning clarification
Summary
Council directed staff to introduce and set for subsequent reading a short‑term rental ordinance focused on registration and a ‘good neighbor’ policy, amended to clarify residential zoning references in chapter 90.
The Hemet City Council on June 10 introduced an ordinance establishing a registration requirement and a basic “good neighbor” policy for short‑term lodgings (commonly referred to as short‑term rentals or STRs) and asked staff to amend the code language to clarify that the rules apply to properties zoned for residential use under Chapter 90 of the municipal code.
City Attorney Steven Graham said Hemet previously lacked regulation tailored to short‑term rentals and recommended a light‑touch approach focused on registration, transient occupancy tax collection and rules for noise, parking and litter that would be enforceable at the city level. The draft ordinance emphasizes registration, a requirement to collect transient occupancy taxes, and a neighborhood‑oriented good‑neighbor policy rather than the more detailed, restrictive regimes some other jurisdictions have adopted.
Council members asked whether the draft would apply to homes housing people for more than 30 days; the city attorney clarified that the ordinance’s definition of transient stays is less than 30 days, and longer stays would not be governed by the STR rules. Council Member Krupa requested wording clarity for the zoning reference; the city attorney agreed to update the draft so the ordinance refers to properties “zoned residential under Chapter 90” to avoid confusion where legal nonconforming residential uses exist in nonresidential zones.
Mayor Pro Tem Krupa moved to approve the staff recommendation introducing the ordinance with the amended reference to Chapter 90; Council Member Lodge seconded. The motion passed 5–0. The city attorney said the amended ordinance language will be sent to the clerk’s office and set for a future reading and vote.
