El Dorado County reports enforcement gains in vacation‑rental program; board orders West Slope review

The El Dorado County Board of Supervisors on Sept. 30 received a status update on the county’s Vacation Home Rental (VHR) program and enforcement work and directed staff to bring back a focused review for the West Slope.

Planning and code enforcement staff told the board the 2024 amendments to the county’s VHR ordinance and the creation of a dedicated enforcement unit have materially changed how the county responds to reported VHR problems, though staff and supervisors said additional refinements are needed for rural and West Slope properties.

Planning and building Director Karen Garner said the item was “intended to provide an update on the county’s vacation home rental program with an emphasis on the enforcement.” She noted the board had approved the ordinance updates roughly a year earlier and that the presentation would show data from before and after the changes.

Chief Deputy Director Bridal Ferry said staff viewed this year as a “mini celebration” of enforcement progress, saying the county moved from largely complaint‑driven work to a mix of complaint response and proactive identification of illegal listings. “The board provided us with resources in the form of additional staff,” Ferry said, adding that the goal remained voluntary compliance, not fines.

Code Enforcement Supervisor Kevin Bailey described the new enforcement structure: three full‑time enforcement officer positions dedicated to VHR work (two in Tahoe, one in Placerville), a supervisor, and a central complaint hotline and email system available 24 hours a day. Bailey said the hotline and email system recorded 988 calls and 331 emails between June 25, 2024 and Aug. 15, 2025, and that typical field response times were fast: “Our complaint received by code enforcement to the time that it takes us to respond back to the reporting party is … 5 minutes,” Bailey said, adding the average time to contact the local contact was about 11 minutes and average arrival at the property about 35 minutes.

Staff presented program numbers (staff-provided totals): active VHR permits reported about a month before the meeting were 762 in the Tahoe Basin and 172 on the West Slope; the Tahoe count has been declining in part because of the 500‑foot clustering/buffer policy while West Slope permit activity has grown. Tahoe has a 900‑unit cap and a countywide 500‑foot clustering buffer that limits new permits near existing VHRs. Ferry also reported transient occupancy tax (TOT) receipts for the basin were down roughly $248,000 (about 3%) in the year since the ordinance changes; staff said the county receives a single consolidated TOT payment from some platforms and cannot easily split that check by address to show whether the decline is hotels, VHRs or other lodging.

Bailey said enforcement has identified a rising number of unpermitted rental listings after staff began proactive online sweeps: staff reported more than 300 unpermitted violations in the dataset used for the presentation, noting the number reflects newly identified properties and that enforcement operations began roughly 8–10 months earlier. Bailey said most administrative hearings so far have affirmed the county’s findings.

Public comment illustrated mixed community reactions. Leona Allen, a lifelong Tahoe resident, told the board that after a recent call to the VHR hotline she received a callback within seven minutes and praised county staff for quick action. Other commenters, including some West Slope owners and operators, said the county’s rules and enforcement have been disruptive for small, rural operators and urged exemptions or different buffers for large rural parcels.

Supervisors and staff acknowledged the divergent West Slope circumstances and signaled the county should treat the West Slope and Tahoe Basin differently. After discussion the board directed staff to return with a formal item to create an ad hoc and a stakeholder task force to analyze West Slope issues, including whether adjustments are needed to the 500‑foot buffer, hosted‑rental rules, accessory dwelling unit treatment and possible temporary approaches to fines while the review is underway.

The board’s motion asked staff to return with options for the ad hoc’s composition, scope and whether the board should consider a limited suspension or refund mechanism for recent fines while policy changes are evaluated. The motion passed on the record (board vote recorded as approved). Board members emphasized continuing enforcement against illegal rentals while the review proceeds.

Why it matters: VHRs are a major local policy flashpoint in Tahoe and elsewhere in El Dorado County because they intersect with housing supply, neighborhood livability, wildfire and vegetation management, and local tax revenue. The county’s enforcement shift — more proactive sweeps and a dedicated hotline and officers — has heightened both complaints resolved quickly by staff and concerns from owners who say rules now restrict lawful uses on larger rural parcels.

What’s next: Staff will work with the ad hoc and return with an agenda item that presents options for West Slope changes, timing and potential approaches to outstanding fines and compliance pathways. The board asked for community engagement and for staff to report back with proposed text or ordinance language where changes are recommended.

The board received the presentation and approved the direction for staff to return with a West Slope ad hoc/task force and options (vote recorded as approved).