Amador supervisors hear hours of public comment on short‑term rentals; no ordinance adopted

Supervisor Carnell asked the Amador County Board of Supervisors on March 11 to direct staff to prepare an ordinance that would prohibit short‑term residential rentals for periods of less than 30 days, with a narrow initial exemption for properties already used as short‑term rentals that would end at the time of sale. Carnell framed the request as an attempt to protect housing availability for local younger workers while the county considers actively marketing short‑term rentals to tourists.

The item drew more than two hours of public comment from roughly three dozen people, including homeowners who said short‑term income supports retirees and small business owners, real-estate professionals who urged a registration and phased approach, and residents who said concentrations of rentals change neighborhood character. Ron Felton, a licensed broker and local Realtor, urged the board to adopt a registration system first and said an ordinance could allow targeted restrictions — for example by density or location — rather than a blanket ban. “A well‑regulated short‑term rental permit system would address community concerns while allowing responsible hosts to continue operating,” Felton said.

Other speakers described short‑term rentals as livelihood support. Nita Patel, a realtor who also operates a short‑term rental, said the additional income enables locals to afford rising costs such as fire insurance. Several hosts and managers who spoke from Jackson, Pioneer and Volcano urged the board not to eliminate their businesses, citing local spending by guests and the role rentals play in helping owners pay taxes and insurance.

Supporters of tighter rules, led by Carnell, said many single‑family homes are being marketed to out‑of‑area investors and that additional county‑level controls should be considered before a tourism marketing push expands demand. Carnell described his proposal as not a ban but a way to “have a very public, very serious conversation among staff, real estate agents, brokers, everybody about protecting some portion of our county for our kids.” He said he did not want government overreach but wanted consideration of “protecting some portion of our county for our kids.”

Realtors and short‑term rental operators urged the board to start with better data and a registration process. Several speakers warned that broad restrictions could reduce local tax revenue and business for restaurants, wineries and lodging‑adjacent services. Others asked for exemptions for second‑home cabin areas (higher elevations such as Kirkwood were repeatedly cited) and for transitional uses that help sellers move between houses.

Board members did not vote on an ordinance. Supervisors asked staff to return with more data — including an inventory of short‑term rental listings, potential regulatory models used by nearby counties and an analysis of fiscal and land‑use impacts — and discussed creating an internal budget/workgroup or ad hoc committee to review options. Several supervisors said they were open to a registration program and targeted limits in dense neighborhoods, but opposed an immediate countywide ban.

The matter will return for further study and public input; no changes to county code were adopted at the March 11 meeting.