Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Short Term Rentals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Office of Short-Term Rentals reports registrations and enforcement progress; officials press platforms for data
Summary
Kevin Guy told supervisors the city has received about 2,250 short‑term rental applications and has roughly 1,682 registered hosts, opened 856 enforcement cases and assessed about $870,000 in penalties (about $350,000 collected). Staff said platforms have not provided full data and the city may need subpoenas; the committee discussed proposed 60-night caps and fee changes.
Kevin Guy, director of the Office of Short-Term Rentals, briefed the Government Audit and Oversight Committee on Nov. 3, 2016, on registration, enforcement and pending legislation.
Guy said the short-term rental program (effective Feb. 1, 2015) has received about "2,250 applications" and has approximately "1,682 registered hosts." He told the committee 229 applications have been approved, 133 are incomplete and 57 are under review; applications with complete documentation are typically processed within three to four weeks. The office reported a 72 percent response rate to the most recent quarterly host report.
On enforcement, Guy said the office opened 856 cases since the program launched, issued notices of violation for 349 dwelling units, and has 417 cases fully closed with another 151 pending closure. "We ssessed around $870,000 in penalties," Guy said, and the office has collected about "$350,000" to date, with some amounts in court or referred for collection.
Committee members repeatedly pressed the office about platform data. Guy said staff reached out to major platforms; Airbnb participated in meetings where data transparency was discussed but most platforms did not provide the data staff needs. "The mechanism for us to obtain this kind of data would really be working through the City Attorney's Office to get subpoenas," Guy said. He and supervisors discussed limits to enforcement without platform cooperation and whether the city could require platforms to display registration numbers (an ordinance passed over the summer that is currently in litigation).
Supervisors raised practical enforcement and housing‑supply concerns: how to address "hacker homes" and multiple listings, how to determine permanent residency for certificate holders, and whether property owners should be notified immediately when complaints are filed. Guy said the office uses web-scrape data to prioritize investigations, pursues repeat violators collaboratively with the City Attorney's Office, and will explore improving notifications to property owners and outreach to property managers.
Public commenters echoed staffing and enforcement concerns. Dale Carlson (Share Better) observed the discrepancy between 1,682 registered hosts and Airbnb's claim of more than 7,000 hosts in San Francisco and urged earlier landlord notification of complaints. Cynthia Pollock said a complaint she filed in July remained pending and urged quicker action. Laura Thompson of the Home Sharers Democratic Club urged measures to bring compliant hosts forward and suggested limited short-term licenses to reduce clandestine listings.
The committee discussed pending local legislation Kevin Guy summarized, including a board proposal to cap all rentals at 60 nights per year and an office proposal to retain the $50 application fee after the Controller proposed raising it to $250; Guy said the office proposed tying any future fee increases to CPI and exploring penalty revenue to offset costs. The committee continued the item to the call of the chair.
