Board endorses settlement with Airbnb, HomeAway after public testimony from hosts and small businesses

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted to endorse a settlement resolving litigation with short-term rental platforms Airbnb, Inc. and HomeAway.com, Inc., after a public hearing that drew hosts, small-business owners and community members.

The settlement, approved by roll call, resolves challenges to two City ordinances governing hosting platforms (identified in the litigation as ordinance numbers 104-16 and 178-16). Under the terms announced to the board, the city will receive a one‑time payment of $80,000 plus an annual payment of $10,000, and parties will proceed with a tolling agreement and implementation steps described in the settlement documents. The board adopted the resolution endorsing the settlement by roll call after closed-session counsel and briefing; the clerk recorded the resolution as adopted unanimously by the members present.

Dozens of speakers addressed the board during the public hearing. Registered hosts described using home sharing to remain in their homes, supplement retirement or medical costs, or to help cover family expenses. Other speakers — including small-business owners and neighborhood residents — described the economic benefits when visitors stay in neighborhoods that lack hotels, saying guests often patronize local restaurants, shops and community institutions.

Supporters of the settlement urged the board to approve the agreement and give it a chance to work before proposing further restrictions. “This agreement is the work of many parties over many months,” said Peter Kwan, a registered host and co-chair of the Home Affairs Democratic Club; he said the settlement’s terms were fair and likely to reduce illegal listings on platforms.

A handful of commenters framed broader concerns about housing and displacement in San Francisco; supervisors who spoke in or near the debate described the settlement as an opportunity to “clear the slate” and move to enforcement and registration rather than prolonged litigation.

Why it matters: The settlement ends active litigation challenging the city’s platform regulation effort and creates a negotiated path for implementing rules and enforcement mechanisms. Supporters argued it balances hosts’ needs and enforcement of registration and tax obligations; opponents (in other forums) have argued for tighter limits on short-term rentals to protect housing supply.

What happens next: The board approved the resolution endorsing the settlement and authorized a tolling agreement. Implementation will require coordination among the City Attorney’s Office, the Treasurer/Tax Collector (for transient occupancy tax and registration) and code-enforcement and permitting bodies. Supervisors and staff said the city will monitor the outcome and may consider future amendments or enforcement actions if the settlement terms do not produce intended compliance outcomes.