REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
**POST AGENDA**

Meeting #:
Date:	Tuesday, November 09, 2021 at 5:00 P.m. - 6:00 P.m.
Location:	Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA

View the Meeting Live in English & Spanish: chulavistaca.gov/councilmeetings

 AT&T U-verse ch. 99 (San Diego County) Cox ch. 24 (Chula Vista in English only)

 

Welcome to your City Council Meeting

The City Council has transitioned back to holding live, in-person meetings.

 

PUBLIC COMMENTS: Public comments may be submitted to the City Council in the following ways:

• In-Person comments during the meeting. Join us for the City Council meeting at the time and location specified on this agenda to make your comments.
• How To Submit eComments: Visit www.chulavistaca.gov/councilmeetings, locate this meeting and click on the comment bubble icon. Click on the item you wish to comment on, then click on "Leave Comment." eComments can be submitted when the agenda is published and until the conclusion of public comments for the agenda item. eComments may be viewed by the City Council and members of the public as they are submitted. If you have difficulty submitting eComments email your comments to: [email protected] 

HOW TO WATCH: Live stream is available at www.chulavistaca.gov/councilmeetings. To switch the video to Spanish, please click on "ES" in the bottom right hand corner. Recorded meetings are also aired on Wednesdays at 7 p.m. (both channels above in English only) and are available on the City's website in English and Spanish.

ACCESSIBILITY: Individuals with disabilities or special needs are invited to request modifications or accommodations to access and/or participate in a City meeting by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at [email protected] or [phone] (California Relay Service is available for the hearing impaired by dialing 711) at least forty-eight hours in advance of the meeting.

SPEAKER TIME LIMITS: The time allotted for speakers may be adjusted by the Mayor. 

- Five minutes* for specific items listed on the agenda
- Three minutes* for items NOT on the agenda (called to speak during Public Comments)
- A group of individuals may select a spokesperson to speak on their behalf on an agenda item, waiving their option to speak individually on the same item. Generally, five minutes are allotted per person, up to a limit of 30 minutes, although the limits may be adjusted. Members of the group must be present.

*Individuals who use a translator will be allotted twice the amount of time.
 

                                                              GETTING TO KNOW YOUR AGENDA

Agenda Sections:
CONSENT CALENDAR items are routine items that are not expected to prompt discussion. All items are considered for approval at the same time with one vote.  Councilmembers and staff may request items be removed and members of the public may submit a speaker slip if they wish to comment on an item. Items removed from the Consent Calendar are discussed after the vote on the remaining Consent Calendar items.

PUBLIC COMMENT provides the public with an opportunity to address the Council on any matter not listed on the agenda that is within the jurisdiction of the Council. In compliance with the Brown Act, the Council cannot take action on matters not listed on the agenda.

PUBLIC HEARINGS are held on matters specifically required by law. The Mayor opens the public hearing and asks for presentations from staff and from the proponent or applicant involved (if applicable) in the matter under discussion. Following questions from the Councilmembers, the Mayor opens the public hearing and asks for public comments. The hearing is closed, and the City Council may discuss and take action.

ACTION ITEMS are items that are expected to cause discussion and/or action by the Council but do not legally require a Public Hearing. Staff may make a presentation and Councilmembers may ask questions of staff and the involved parties before the Mayor invites the public to provide input.

CLOSED SESSION may only be attended by members of the Council, support staff, and/or legal counsel. The most common purpose of a Closed Session is to avoid revealing confidential information that may prejudice the legal or negotiating position of the City or compromise the privacy interests of employees. Closed sessions may be held only as specifically authorized by law.

Council Actions:
RESOLUTIONS are formal expressions of opinion or intention of the Council and are usually effective immediately.

ORDINANCES are laws adopted by the Council. Ordinances usually amend, repeal or supplement the Municipal Code; provide zoning specifications; or appropriate money for specific purposes. Most ordinances require two hearings: an introductory hearing, generally followed by a second hearing at the next regular meeting. Most ordinances go into effect 30 days after the final approval.

PROCLAMATIONS are issued by the City to honor significant achievements by community members, highlight an event, promote awareness of community issues, and recognize City employees.

 

---

1.

CALL TO ORDER

2.

ROLL CALL

3.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE

4.

CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 4.1 through 4.8)

All items listed under the Consent Calendar are considered and acted upon by one motion. Anyone may request an item be removed for separate consideration.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Council approve the recommended action on the below consent calendar items. 

4.1

Waive Reading of Text of Resolutions and Ordinances

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Approve a motion to read only the title and waive the reading of the text of all resolutions and ordinances at this meeting.

4.2

Consideration of Requests for Excused Absences

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Consider requests for excused absences as appropriate.

4.3

Contract Approval: Agreement between the City and the County of San Diego regarding the Sale of Automotive Fuel by the County to the City

Report Number: 21-0165

Location: No specific geographic location

Department: Public Works

Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Adopt a resolution approving the agreement between the City and County of San Diego regarding the sale of automotive fuel by the County to the City through December 31, 2026.

4.4

Grant Acceptance and Appropriation: Accept Funding From U.S. Department of Homeland Security for Operation Stonegarden

Adriana Jasso

I recommend for the City Council members to reject the DHS Operation Stonegarden grant. Chula Vista as a City is already one of the most policed cities in our state and has lost a lot of the community trust. There is a lack of accountability that is inherent in these types of grants and they harm members of our community. Chula Vista needs to build trust.

Alex Mensing

It has been shown that immigration enforcement does not make our communities safer or healthier, which should be the priority. In order to include everyone and encourage all community members to feel safe and participate in community life, it is important to not bring in more immigration enforcement.

Patricia Mondragon

Operation Stonegarden generates fear for over-policed communities, and intensifies distrust of law enforcement. Communities of color and immigrant communities are disproportionately targeted as part of Operation Stonegarden. Members of our immigrant communities have been deported as a result of local collaboration with DHS through joint task forces. I urge you to vote NO and reject the DHS Operation Stonegarden grant. We should be working to build trust not to further erode it.

Angelica Ruiz

As an 18 year resident of Chula Vista, I'm concerned that City officials would consider receiving controversial funds from the Department of Homeland Security that could be misused to target residents in Chula Vista. This undercuts credibility and trust with the City and its police, something that's already lacking given its reliance on surveillance technology that undermines everyone's civil liberties. I urge a NO vote on DHS Operation Stonegarden funds.

American Friends Service Committee

The American Friends Service Committee's US-Mexico Border Program opposes the City of Chula Vista's proposal to obtain federal DHS Operation Stonegarden funds for the purpose of augmenting border enforcement in the region. It urges City officials to vote NO on item 4.4, and to reject DHS money. The City and its police department must prioritize its migrant community and not accept federal money that will taint its reputation as a Welcoming City to migrants. Other law enforcement agencies, including the San Diego Sheriffs Department, have misused Operation Stonegarden funds, and have targeted migrants in the County, in violation of SB 54, the California Values Act.

Kathy Cappos Hardy

A collaboration between DHS and our local police department is counterproductive to our status as a Welcoming City. Increasing coordination between the two agencies undermines trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement. According to the City of Chula Vista’s website, inclusion of immigrants is an important aspect of our City. If there is no trust, how can we believe that there is inclusion? Is this an example of “embracing immigrants and refugees”? Does Operation Stonegarden do anything to “address the immigrant experience in Chula Vista” as proudly touted on CV’s website with regard to our Welcoming status? As far as I am concerned, the duplicitous nature of Operation Stonegarden does nothing to enhance public trust or make the inclusion of immigrants in our community a priority. I urge a NO vote on this grant!

Nicholas Paul

I urge that the Chula Vista City Council vote NO on accepting federal from DHS for programs such as Operation Stonegarden. The terms of the grant are unclear, and as a community member I want more transparency on what these funds would be used for. In the DISCUSSION SECTION of the attachments provided, there is reference to "transportation nodes" and I want clarification on what exactly this means...? When I hear terms like this I think of our communities trolley and bus systems. I will also want to know if there are any requirements to use these funds in ways that benefit DHS's immigration enforcement measures? I feel like these types of agreements would make the City of Chula Vista no longer in compliance with the Welcoming City Standards... Residents of Chula Vista dont want our law enforcement to play any part in the federal governments deportation machine. Avoiding dependency on federal DHS dollars is a huge part of this effort.

San Diego Border Dreamers

Operation Stonegarden generates fear for over-policed communities, and it intensifies distrust of law enforcement in communities of color and immigrant communities as these communities have been disproportionately targeted as part of Operation Stonegarden. I urge you to vote NO on accepting money from DHS for Operation Stonegarden.

Dulce Garcia

Operation Stonegarden generates fear for over-policed communities, and it intensifies distrust of law enforcement in communities of color and immigrant communities as these communities have been disproportionately targeted as part of Operation Stonegarden. We urge you to vote NO on accepting money from DHS for Operation Stonegarden. -- Dulce Garcia, Chair of San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium (SDIRC)

Border Angels

Border Angels urges City Council members to reject the DHS Operation Stonegarden grant. The City of Chula Vista is already one of the country’s most policed cities with surveillance technology. It must make policy and fiduciary decisions based on principles that uphold our human dignity, not fall for problematic funds that devalue the integrity of its commitment toward inclusivity and place people’s lives at risk.

Nancy Relaford

Operation Stonegarden funding is a pretext to expand border enforcement measures that target migrants. Participation directly contradicts the principles of a Welcoming City, and devalues Chula Vista’s commitment to inclusivity.  Furthermore, Operation Stonegarden generates fear for over-policed communities, and it intensifies distrust of law enforcement in communities of color and immigrant communities as these communities have been disproportionately targeted as part of Operation Stonegarden. I urge you to vote NO on accepting any more money from DHS for Operation Stonegarden.

Margaret Baker

On behalf of South Bay People Power, I write in strong opposition to the Operation Stonegarden grant. We urge Chula Vista to disentangle itself from federal immigration agencies & programs like Operation Stonegarden that racially profile Latino & immigrant members of our community. Operation Stonegarden lacks oversight & transparency & takes advantage of loopholes in laws such as SB 54 to lure local law enforcement with grants to collaborate in joint operations with agencies of the Department of Homeland Security that routinely over-police, criminalize and terrorize our community. As a volunteer with San Diego Rapid Response Network, I have personally witnessed the terror and utter disregard for human life perpetrated by ICE & other DHS agencies in my community, specifically, pointing guns at US citizen children, spying on our neighbors, breaking down doors without presenting judicial warrants, arresting people without cause, and during the COVID pandemic, arresting people without the proper use of PPE - endangering our community and the local CVPD officers with whom they interacted just blocks from my home. The types of DHS surveillance and raids that I have witnessed are not operations we should partner with in our community. We urge you to reject the DHS Operation Stonegarden grant and its incentive to collaborate in immigration enforcement activities that contradict our shared values of inclusiveness and safety for all members of our community.

Becky Thimm

I urge Chula Vista City Council to vote NO on accepting federal money from DHS for programs such as Operation Stonegarden. This program is a pretext to expand border enforcement measures that target migrants. I live in Chula Vista and expect our city to NOT collaborate. It undermines the principals of a Welcoming City and devalues our commitment of inclusivity.

Francis X. Riley

While I strongly support seeking and accepting Federal funds for community development, affordable housing, Public Health, etc., I vehemently oppose accepting funds that divide the community and may negatively affect minorities who live and/or work in Chula Vista. The "strings" to these funds are not worth the perceptive and/or actual negative consequences of their use in the demographically changing and growing City of Chula Vista!

zakk clark

I urge City Council members to reject the DHS Operation Stonegarden grant. The City of Chula Vista is already one of the country’s most policed cities with surveillance technology. It must make policy and fiduciary decisions based on principles that uphold our human dignity, not fall for problematic funds that devalue the integrity of its commitment toward inclusivity and place people’s lives at risk.

Tama Becker-Varano

Operation Stonegarden generates fear for over-policed communities, and it intensifies distrust of law enforcement in communities of color and immigrant communities as these communities have been disproportionately targeted as part of Operation Stonegarden. I urge you to vote NO on accepting money from DHS for Operation Stonegarden.

Erin Tsurumoto Grassi

My name is Erin Tsurumoto Grassi and I am the regional policy director at Alliance San Diego. On behalf of Alliance San Diego, I strongly urge the Council to vote "no" on receiving Operation Stonegarden Funding. Operation Stonegarden is a pretext to expand border enforcement measures that target migrants. It undermines the principles of a Welcoming City, and erodes community trust in law enforcement and local government, which in turn public safety for all of us at risk. In 2018, the San Diego County Sheriff Dept. had two SB 54 violations. Those violations occurred as result of working with Border Patrol on Operation Stonegarden activities. Local law enforcement participating in Operation Stonegarden has directly led to community members being deported in the past, and puts the City of Chula Vista at risk of aiding Border Patrol and other DHS agencies with the detention and deportation of community members. Alliance San Diego is in strong opposition to the City of Chula Vista receiving Operation Stonegarden funding. We urge you to vote no.

Erika Clark

I live and work in Chula Vista, and I expect that the second largest city in the County would not seek funding to collaborate with the federal government on border enforcement measures. I urge you to vote NO on accepting money from DHS for Operation Stonegarden.

Norell Martínez

I urge you to vote NO on receiving funding from DHS to support border enforcement. I live in Chula Vista and I see this as undermining the principles of a Welcoming City, and devalues our commitment to inclusivity. The City of CV is already one of the country’s most policed cities with surveillance technology.

Lois Klepin

The grant incentivizes law enforcement agencies receiving the funds to collaborate on immigration and border enforcement matters, which contradicts our shared values of promoting inclusive communities. Operation Stonegarden generates fear for over-policed communities, and it intensifies distrust of law enforcement in communities of color and immigrant communities as these communities have been disproportionately targeted as part of Operation Stonegarden. In 2017, a government report found that FEMA and CBP “did not meet their oversight responsibilities to monitor Stonegarden grantees, issue guidance and approve costs, and demonstrate program performance.” In short, Operation Stonegarden lacks oversight and transparency, and serious allegations of racial profiling have been raised about the program. For example, there have been reports of local law enforcement agencies using Operation Stonegarden as a pretext to stopping and arresting immigrants.

Pedro Rios

The grant incentivizes law enforcement agencies receiving the funds to collaborate on immigration and border enforcement matters, which contradicts our shared values of promoting inclusive communities. City officials should reject the DHS Operation Stonegarden grant. The City of Chula Vista is already one of the country’s most policed cities with surveillance technology. It must make policy and fiduciary decisions based on principles that uphold our human dignity, not fall for problematic funds that devalue the integrity of its commitment toward inclusivity and place people’s lives at risk.

Report Number: 21-0176

Location: No specific geographic location

Department: Police

Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Adopt a resolution accepting $70,001 from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and appropriating the funds to the Police Grants Section of the Federal Grant Fund for Operation Stonegarden (4/5 Vote Required).

4.5

Grant Acceptance and Appropriation: Accept Grant From U.S. Department of Justice for Bulletproof Vest Partnership

Adriana Jasso

I recommend for the members of the City Council tor reject the DHS Operation Stonegarden grant. The City of Chula Vista is already known as one of the most policed cities in our state. The idea that the City Council will actively look for additional grants to keep our community under more surveillance is not acceptable. There is a lack of accountability in these types of grants and Chula Vista as a City needs to heal relationships and trust with community members. City Council members take this opportunity to show every member in our community to show that you are worth of their trust and reject this grant.

Dr. Norell Martinez

I oppose this and other items on the agenda that have to do with police funding. Why is there rarely any city funding available to fund public projects that will actually help our community? More police funding doesn't actually help stop crime but recreation centers and mental health programs and other services to help our most vulnerable community members will. For instance, affordable housing and mental health It is time the City Council members listen and do research. Wealthy communities with low crime rates do not have more police, they have more resources. Move funding away from police and into the community now!

Report Number: 21-0200

Location: No specific geographic location

Department: Police

Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Adopt a resolution accepting $13,459 in grant funds and appropriating the funds to the Police Grants Section of the Federal Grants Fund for the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program (4/5 Vote Required).

4.6

Amendments to City’s Nationwide 401(a) Money Purchase Plan: Approval of Amendments to the Plan to Conform to the Employment Contracts for the City Manager and City Clerk

Report Number: 21-0225

Location: No specific geographic location

Department: Finance

Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Adopt a resolution to approve amendments to City’s Nationwide 401(a) Money Purchase Plan (“Plan”) to conform its terms to the employment contracts for the City Manager and City Clerk.

4.7

Measure A: Amend Measure A Public Safety Expenditure Plan to Add 10 Positions

Report Number: 21-0202

Location: No specific geographic location

Department: Finance, Fire, Human Resources, Police

Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Adopt resolutions: A) amending the Compensation Schedule and Classification Plan to reflect the addition of Property & Evidence Supervisor; B) approving the revised Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Compensation Schedule effective January 14, 2022, as required by California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 570.5; C) approving the amended Measure A Public Safety Expenditure Plan to add one Police Captain, one Equipment Mechanic, one Forensics Specialist, three Property & Evidence Specialists, one Property & Evidence Supervisor and three Senior Police Records Specialists, and amending the Fiscal Year 2022 expenditure budget for the Measure A Sales Tax Fund to fund such positions out of Measure A available fund balance (4/5 Vote Required); and D) approving various amendments to the Fiscal Year 2021/22 Budget to appropriate funds for these purposes (4/5 Vote Required).

4.8

Grant Acceptance and Appropriation: Accept Grant From Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control

Report Number: 21-0179

Location: No specific geographic location

Department: Police

Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Adopt a resolution approving an agreement with the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC), accepting $20,000 in grant funds and appropriating the funds to the Police Grants Section of the Federal Grants Fund for the ABC – Office of Traffic Safety Grant Program (4/5 Vote Required).

5.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

The public may address the Council on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Council but not on the agenda. 

5.1

Public Comments Received for 11/9/2021

Benjamin Grundy

My name is Ben Grundy, and I am a Global Warming Associate with Environment California, a statewide advocacy group that works for clean air, clean water and open spaces. In our recent report, Trouble in the Air, we found that last year California once again had the worst air quality in the country. Specifically, the report found that the San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad metro area, home to 3,332,427 people, suffered through 232 days of elevated air pollution in 2020. As you know, air pollution is dangerous for our health, increasing the risk of premature death, asthma attacks, cancer, worsened mental health and more. Even just one day of breathing in polluted air is dangerous for our health. In California, the main sources of air pollution are transportation and wildfires. Electrifying our transportation systems and investing in EV infrastructure are some of the best actions to transition away from fossil fuels and dirty air since EVs emit no tailpipe pollution. Currently, cars, trucks, buses and the fuel they burn account for more than 50% of greenhouse gas emissions in CA, making them the number one source of global warming pollution. There is a lot that a local government can do to lead the way to tackle this problem. I want to encourage the council to adopt a GoEVCity measure that commits Chula Vista to streamlining plug-in charging permitting, transitioning public transit to Zero emission vehicles,

Allison Newton

I support this opposition

6.

BOARD AND COMMISSION REPORTS

The following item(s) have been brought forward by a City board, commission, or committee.

6.1

Measure A Citizens’ Oversight Committee: Presentation of Annual Report Covering Reporting Period of July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020

Report Number: 21-0177

Location: No specific geographic location

Department: Finance, Fire & Police

Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Council hear the presentation and accept the report.

6.2

Sustainability Commission: Consideration of Sending a Public Comment to the California Public Utilities Commission Regarding CPUC Net Energy Metering 3.0

Carolyn Scofield

As a long time Chula Vista resident, I support Agenda Item 6.2 Sustainability Commission: Consideration of Sending a Public Comment to the CPUC Regarding Net Energy Metering 3.0. I am grateful to the Sustainability Commission for bringing this item forward to urge the CPUC to adopt rules that continue to make solar energy viable and affordable for the public. I want to see programs that allow expanded NEM access to residents of low-and-moderate income including access to other clean energy technologies that pair with solar, such as storage and EV charging. In considering which document to send to the CPUC, I ask that you consider the letter. Both agencies that are referenced by the letter, SDCP and The Local Government Sustainable Energy Coalition have submitted important equity-based proposals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by supporting sustainable growth of all sources of renewable electricity, including rooftop solar. Their specific recommendations will promote solar access in Chula Vista and our region. Thank you.

Rita Clement

Good evening honorable mayor, city council members and city staff, I strongly support sending this letter about net energy metering to the CPUC. It is well written and has solid research included. This will support the solar industry and help us to meet our Climate Action Plan goals.

Report Number: 21-0222

Location: No specific geographic location

Department: Economic Development

Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Consider the request of the Sustainability Commission to send a public comment (via resolution or letter) to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Regarding CPUC Net Energy Metering (NEM) 3.0

7.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

The following item(s) have been advertised as public hearing(s) as required by law.

7.1

Grant Acceptance and Appropriation: Accept Grant From U.S. Department of Justice for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant

Report Number: 21-0201

Location: No specific geographic location

Department: Police

Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Conduct a public hearing and adopt a resolution accepting $63,798 grant funds and appropriating the funds to the Police Grants Section of the Federal Grants Fund for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (4/5 Vote Required).

8.

ACTION ITEMS

The following item(s) will be considered individually and are expected to elicit discussion and deliberation.

8.1

Municipal Bonds: Presentation from Stradling Yocca Carlson & Wauth, P.C., Bond and Disclosure Counsel, Regarding Federal Securities Law Matters Related to the Offer of Municipal Bonds

Report Number: 21-0170

Location: No specific geographic location

Department: Development Services

Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined in Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Hear the presentation from Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth, P.C., Bond and Disclosure Counsel, regarding federal securities law matters related to the offering of municipal bonds.

8.2

Economic Development Department Work Plan: Presentation on the Fiscal Year 2022 Work Plan

Location: No specific geographic location

Department: Economic Development

Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined in Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Hear the presentation and accept the Economic Development Department's 2022 work plan.

8.3

Short-Term Rentals: Consideration of Adopting a Short-Term Rental Ordinance, Adopting Related Permit Fees, and Adding Enforcement Staffing

albert

lets get our peace of mind back in our neighborhoods.

Terry Manges

Please ask staff to address the rationale for including a provision for 'STR Event Permit' in the ordinance. This provision seems to open the door for the types of activity at STRs , e.g., parties, celebrations, etc. that are among those that create the most complaints from neighbors by authorizing events attended by large numbers of people. The availability of 12 such permits (per STR) each year seems to invite trouble.

Sarah

I assist in cleaning arbnb, and it’s part of my family income

Alex McDaniel

As a business owner in Chula Vista focused on the growth of our community and our economy, it’s important to take into consideration how different styles of businesses support one another. For example, the owner of a gas station and the owner of a auto repair shop share a particular clientele and benefit indirectly from each other’s success. Short term rental operations in Chula Vista not only only add value to the city as a destination for tourism, but in my experience, they help drive more foot traffic and business through direct referrals to the area where my business is located. 3rd Ave was hit hard by the pandemic and benefits greatly by being on the list of “things to do” in these short term rentals. Once again, a clear interest in the recovery and growth of our local economy obviously leads me to oppose any motion making it complicated or ultimately impossible for these short term rental businesses to operate. Please allow those who have the courage to operate a business in the service of others, using their own resources, to continue their attempt at surviving the blows of the pandemic and directly contributing to neighboring businesses that rely on attracting more people. Thank you.

James DeLucia

I oppose this regulation

Concerned Resident

Honorable Mayor and Council, We are longtime residents and homeowners in Chula Vista who wish to remain anonymous. We understand you have the STR ordinance on the agenda for this evening. We feel the vote needs to be delayed for 30 days (or more) to address deficiencies which we feel can be remedied with some modifications. We would like more time to review the provisions to make further suggested changes. We have directed you all a separate email with further detail but would like to summarize our main point as follows: The bottom line is owners/permittees of STRS will not comply with the ordinance(s) if there are no realistic valid enforcement capabilities. Enforcement capabilities are not currently addressed within the existing ordinance. Unless 24/7 access is provided to code enforcement the burden will fall to the Police who do not have time to enforce this. In addition, the community needs to have a clear outlined path in which to lodge complaints that will be heard and addressed. We urge you to please reconsider passing this ordinance as it is currently stated. From our neighborhoods experience within the last year, it would be ineffective and a waste of city resources and time.

Matthew Fisher

I don't support increasing regulations on short term rentals.

CJ

I see people pick "oppose" and then they explain they don't want STRs in CV. People, that means you *support* the regulations, pay attention. Tabulations have been rendered meaningless. *eyeroll* People who say that STRs don't hurt anyone, YES THEY DO. They drive rent prices up, for starters. That hurts local residents. As for those who say that CV doesn't have any good hotels, then support a plan to get some, NOT STRs that create a housing shortage for local families, turn residential neighborhoods into a business network of temporary visitors and hospitality workers, and make people feel less safe. ENOUGH.

Adrian Duarte

Has the City done its due research into the Air B&B community and how much Air B&B renters have brought new revenue to Chula Vista local business? There are other communities in San Diego County that have benefited from the Air B&B community (Restaurants, Local Business, Tourism, S.D. Vacation destinations, Travel Nurses, etc.....). I have lived in Chula Vista for over 30 years and I see nothing but positive in what they bring to our community. This needs more research into the local Air B&B community and the huge benefits it bring to our beautiful city.

Omar C

Please reconsider this legislation. This has a direct impact on the local economy for CV. It takes away from local businesses; the homeowners, restaurants and other shops.

Bree

STRs provide jobs, and good wages to those who help keep up these homes; house keepers, landscapers, plumbers, pool maintenance, etc. Many of these contractors are Chula Vista residents. STRs have created jobs and put money right back into Chula Vista! Then people who stay in STRs eat in CV restaurants and spend their money! Why would we want to limit this?

arash mahmoudi

This is against free enterprise

Paul Zinsmeister

Short term rentals continue to have a negative impact on our neighborhood. There is already a shortage of housing and this makes that worse. Even when you do find a home you can have a short term rental next door with people partying and disrespecting you and your neighbors.

David V

I oppose to this regulation.

Madison DuFaukt

I support the new rules

Ari

I strongly oppose this regulation.

Natalia

I am opposing to this regulation. I'm reading some of your reviews and from what it seems most people don't have the slightest idea why they are supporting this law. If the city of Chula Vista make tighter regulations for those who may have caused disturbance to others and neighbors, everyone will benefit from this. We all have family members who visit us once in a while and CV hotels are in bad shapes and not sanitary + families don't wanna pay San Diego high hotel prices and at the end, the locals are all we got. Let them operate.

Mely

I oppose

Kam

Opposing. You can't possibly be supportive of this law knowing our city needs tourism revenue and its always been based on that. Chula Vista doesn't have any decent hotels. Why not let the locals handle it!

Kidra

I oppose. Chula vista needs this more than they know. 3rd Ave downtown with all the businesses need locals and travelers to support and come together with this. We are all financially under stress and this is an honest way of making a living and supporting local businesses.

Maria soto

I am opposed to this change

Fery

I oppose to this. It's been a hard year for everyone and these poor people aren't hurting anyone.

Issac

I oppose. I do Solar service installations and vacation rental homes have giving me an opportunity to feed my family and stay above the water in hard covid times.

Roman

Good revenue stream, supports local economy

Frank

I oppose to this regulation. My neighbor does Airbnb and It has never been an issue living next to a well maintained home.

Elena

I oppose to this regulation. I have a job and income because of vacation rental hosts and that's how I feed my family.

Steve mcflair

Business does not belong in neighborhoods. We are not a third world country.

Richard Blake

All the people i know in chula vista have been affected by str. This will be an amazing popular chance for the council to jump on.

Vahid Zakeri

This ordinance will hurt small families in Chula Vista in favor of shifting the business to large hotel companies that have shown strong lobbying power within the city of Chula Vista. Please do the right thing and oppose this ordnance in support of your contituents.

Jason Park Ian

Yes! Big opportunity to give neighbors peace of mind.

Farid Khayamian

A well maintained Vacation rental with a good management brings positive cash flow & revenue for the city and creates many jobs from landscaping, pool services, cleaning crew + local business and mom and pop shops will all benefit from this. No need to be against this. I am opposing to this matter.

David Andrew smith

I was at my moms house visiting, and the neighbors str had more than 60 people hanging out, some smoking weed, some were drinking, and some were in the pool. We had to leave to go have a conversation elsewhere. I hope they control str so we can chat in my moms back yard.,

Jessica Ramirez

Nightmare, living hell, and crazyness: str! Finally some laws to break down horrible Host.

Alberto cantu

The ordinance will bring peace of mind to my neighborhood.

Cristina

I agree with ordinance.

raul mondeca

God bless our city of chula vista with this amazing ordinance.

Roman

I oppose this regulation

Alina

I oppose this regulation

Carl Vendson

I agree with this ordinance!! Will stop crazyness in chuila vista.

Larry WIlliams

There are 4 airbnb str in our neighborhood, its horrible nightclube loud music all day everyday, and causes all neighbors to be in distress and worried everyday. This sucks for us!! Approve the ordinance!!

Navid Namdar

Vacation rentals aren't the problems of Chula Vista. Tourism is a huge revenue source for the San Diego County and there are only 250 Active Vacation rental in CV V.S 16K in San Diego. I don't see this at all being an issue. I oppose.

Anna Yermakova

City of Chula Vista relies on the revenue and tourism! Gardener, pool cleaning, and house keeping/cleaning lady rely on vacation rentals as their sole source of income!

Amelia

I oppose this regulation! During lease-ups, short-term providers can bring apartment communities a substantial occupancy boost

Ruben Estudillo

I opposed! This is government overreach. Noise, too much coming and going, and trash are all related to parties/events. Hosting parties at short term rentals is too high risk for people in the business. We own the property next to our short term rental and have a good relationship with our neighbors. Bad practices in this business is not sustainable and will weed out organically and we don’t need more regulations. We understand that technology can change industries like travel and hospitality. The hotel industry has lost a lot of market share because of innovative companies like Airbnb, and we should let the free market play out without government intervention. Let there be fair play or else we the people will rally up on the next election. Our social media networks are in the tens of thousands and many are Chula Vista resident followers. We will see on the next election that anyone for this regulation gets elected out of office using our influence in the community, and tools given through Ai metaverse technology.

Blair

This will save our amazing city of chula vista.

Benigno Camarena

I agree with this ordinance.

Tamara Sofia Leon

great for the city of chula vista.

Eduardo chavarin Millan

Lets make it happen City Council

Rachel

I absolutely oppose this regulation

Enrique Becerra Martinez

End this nightmare for neighborhoods.

Drew

I oppose this regulation

Dwayne

I agree with STR ordinance.

Erika

I agree with most experiences. I was about to sell my 4 business in chula vista and move them to Northern San Diego.I had lost faith in the chula vista government for not having an ordinance for this head ache. But I pray and hope this passes. odrinance

Jason

My kids 4 and 6 are under fear and stress. Our nieghbor has a str next door. My kids were bonding with my wife in the backyard, when all of a sudden a fight broke out next door to us, and it was two rival gangs members. They were yelling so many uncompturble words. Ever since then this has been a constant problem next door, drunk people, drug use and yelling thru the evenning and night hours. NOT FAIR WHEN WE BOUGHT OUR DREAM HOME TO RAISE A FAMILY

Raul Rucal

If this ordinance is passed, ill be able to park my car outside my front street parking. This type of business is problematic.

Gloria Adamer

Please approve this ordinance. Thank you

Luis angel Navaro

Living nightmare in our family neighborhood. Get them out

Rosy Eliud Rojas sanchez

My family is praying this ordinance pases.

Gerardo Rayas

YES!!!!! GIVE US LAWS!!

Carlos Velazquez

I agree with this ordinance.

Parish Stephen

Drunk people and drug use and parties theme in our neighrbohood airbnb str. Its not fair!!!

Tamara Sofia Leon

Smoking marijuana and big parties thru irrisponsible host have been the problem for 2 years in our neighborhood. FINALLY SOME HOPE°!

Critina raad

Finally some rules for str. Bring back our quiet neighborhoods.

Oscar delgado

I also agree this str stuff is a nightmare for neighbors and communities.

Sugey jade silva

FInally a stop to this nightmare.

Steven Niederhauser

A Well managed and properly enforced short term rental program has a tremendous positive economic impact to the community

Rafael Miramontes

I agree with this ordinance.

Jose medera

I agree with ending str nightmare in our home.

Juan reyes

RULES AND REGULATIONS BEST WAY TO GAIN MORE TAX MONEY FOR OUR BEAUTIFUL CITY.

Linda robles

We have lived terrified by the mess and irropsonsible host next door. We had our vehicles vandalized by airbnb guest. And lots of bad words during there parties next door.

Roberto

Bless us with no hotels in residential area.

Emilio Martinez

I applaud this ordinance.

Miguel Sanchez

I agree with this ordinance.

Lillia

Yes to this ordinance for our peace of mind again.

Juan manuel

Lets get this ordinance approved CITY COUNCIL

Christine

I oppose this STR's regulation

Paulina

I really really support this ordinance.

Justin

Vote on this regulation! I do not support this regulation on STR's

Steve

This has destroyed our peace of mind.

Ryan

Make the regulations as strong as possible

Pablo

Yes to this ordinance.

Aaron S

Fully oppose this regulation

Tyler D

I do not agree with this regulation. I fully support STR's

Kimberly

I support STR and oppose this regulation

Nahid

I oppose this regulation for short term rentals

Jen

I oppose to this regulation

Savana

I do not agree with this regulation

Antonio

I oppose this regulation for short term rentals

Abel

We do not support this regulation

Joi

I oppose this regulation

Tamara

I do not agree with this regulation

Jeremy

This regulation make no sense, I oppose

Kris

I oppose this regulation.

Angela

I do not agree and oppose to this regulation

Stephanie

I oppose this regulation for short term rentals.

Marco M

I'm oppose this regulation

Gilda

Hello Council Members, I am a long term renter in Chula Vista on a multi unit property that also houses short term rentals and I am in opposition of this ordinance passing. As a San Diego native and traveling individual, it is important to me to live and stay in places that are well managed and maintained. I've been a renter for over a decade in various types of properties ranging from AirBnBs, luxury apartment homes, and locally family owned properties. It has become a priority of mine to ensure that where I live is safe and the utmost quality. My current residence in west Chula Vista has been peaceful and managed beyond my expectations. I've been able to build a home for myself with the trust of the property owners when I am traveling for business. I support the hard work and dedication that families put forth to build and run home away type of properties for traveling individuals who need a safe place to stay temporarily. I without reservation oppose this ordinance and recommend the City delay this vote and find a more appropriate solution to support economic growth that STRs provide, provide protection to these home owners who do the right thing in our community, and also support neighbors in their right to have a peaceful neighborhood without irresponsible homeowners who run poor STRs.

Heidi A

My experience with living next to an STR has been without incident. The hosts are approachable and welcome any concerns we have as neighbors. STR are a great option for finding short term living accommodations for various reasons, weather it be for vacation or temporary housing due to home repairs. STR allow for accommodations beyond what typical hotels/motels can provide, such as multiple rooms for housing families, kitchens, backyards for pets. There are obvious benefits to those who operate them and their guests, but the benefits extend beyond that. It helps promote tourism and business because it allows for unique and versatile kinds of stays that can appeal to a wide range of people. Additionally, 90 days is likely not going to cover the cost of maintaining the unit, so prices for STRs would either significantly increase or the amount of STRs operating would decrease. The concerns of the disruption to neighborhood are valid and should be addressed by the platforms that organize these STRs (AirBnb, VRBO, etc). These platforms have resources such as Neighborhood Support pages where complaints can be made about specific STR hosts. Hosts should be held liable for actions on their property, however we should not penalize other STR hosts due to the malpractice of a minority. There are several hosts that do a great job in vetting their guests and make sure rules are followed to not disrupt the neighborhood.

Marco

I’m oppose this regulation for short term rentals

Kendra Flatts

My family and I are long term Chula Vista residents. My mother migrated here to make a better living for us. We support short term rentals and this seems to be an attack by hotels due to the construction going on for the bay project that is right down the street from us. You are punishing people when this provides jobs to our own community and attracts people to our small community.

Juan Pablo Aulet

I oppose this regulation and support short term rentals beyond 90 days'' or anything similar thank you!

Elba Montero

Oppose

Jess

Many of those cannot afford to stay in hotels for vacations or during an emergency. STRs allow for affordable options that allow for more safety and social distancing due to COVID. I oppose this and recommend the city consider different regulations that find a common ground.

Brian benson

We need short term rentals to keep the revenue local. Local business thrives when tourists come and spend. The economy is fragile right now... not the time to change what affects most of us. The hotel corporations make enough. Keep it local! Thanks Brian benson

DAVID CHABNER

My wife and I were both raised in Chula Vista, graduating from CVHS in 1969. After completing college and post-grad work, we returned to CV in 1976, purchasing our first home on a wonderful cul-de-sac of Milan Street. Though we moved to Oregon in 1978, we have continued to come to CV to visit friends and family. on an annual basis. Now, as retired older adults, we love coming to CV for the winters, and have been doing this for the last five years. We generally stay three months, but occasionally come for periods of 3 weeks. We enjoy renting available homes, allowing us the opportunity to have our grandsons and nephews come over play in the backyard and patio. We also occasionally entertain old friends, and family in our cozy rental. We would hate to lose this ability, or this availability. Staying three weeks to three months would not work well if we were required to rent a motel/hotel; and, in fact it would prevent us coming to Chula Vista to stay. Though we have friends in town who suffer from some very bad rental situations in their neighborhoods, we believe this could be ameliorated by simply re-writing rental codes, forcing compliance with "Good Neighbor" practices relating to number of people allowed on the property, noise and reckless behavior, and consistent policing of the policies. We do not believe "throwin the baby out with the bathwater" is the direction Chula Vista should take in meeting the very real problem of Party Houses masquerading as VRBO rentals.

Jesus Medina

We continue to vote for and build more apartments because we are aware people need housing, long term affordable housing, like most Chula Vista residents, people born and raised here, who work here, who contribute to our economy. How can we, in good conscience vote to pass a plan where we limit the growth of our community, yes it will make a handful of people money, but is it worth what we are loosing. I vote for families, for the service workers who have done so much for us through a pandemic, for the residents of Chula Vista who deserve neighbors, not a headache of an Airbnb with tourists who will leave and are not guaranteed to return. San Diego has an enormous amount of short term rentals, pacific beach is constantly fighting against more short term rentals, where the residents have been pushed out of their community. Do not let this happen to Chula Vista. I vote for families, I vote for neighborhoods, say no to hotels in our community.

Kate

Bad actors should be weeded out, and ordinances should support neighbors for bad STRs and also long term renters as well! Not all STRs ruin neighborhoods, in-fact, quite the opposite, they are a positive and welcome addition that support tourism and housing for those in need of short term housing.

Olivia Rincon

Horrible situation our neighborhood is living currently with short term rental.

laura ruiz

please!!!! for the grace of god.

westin

This makes a lot of sense. Finally!!

Brandy

amazing ordinance.

Megan

I live near an STR, and the homeowners do a great job keeping up their property and ensuring the guests are respectful to the neighborhood. Do not let a few irresponsible homeowners impact tourism in Chula Vista! Tourism stimulate our economy!

Wayne

This non sense of not having an ordinance is horrible. Punish bad host! ordinance will help do that.

karla

my husband and i bought this home not knowing short term rental next door. We have been in constant stress and lack of peace of mind because of this awful situation. Please help us!

andrew

I agree and support this ordinance.

Adolfo

city council its time for an ordinace, so over due!!

Nicolas

My mother has been distressed and in the hospital many times because her home is now invaded by drunk people and craziness next door. The neighbor uses Airbnb and a few other apps to bring business to her home. Please stop this!! help vote in favor and save my moms mental health.

Laura

Airbnb and short term rental next door is a tired situation mentally and spiritually.

Doctor Mike

I agree with this new ordinance.

Brenda

finally some hope of regaining our peace of mind in our home and neighborhood.

Jason

great for chula vista.

stefanie

Living next to a hotel (short term rental) is a living hell. No rules!! I am tired of the noise and drama with short term rentals bring to my neighborhood.

Jeff

Give our neighborhoods back to home owners. str harm chula vista.

Sofia

regulate str. its about time.

Rafael D Castrejon

This measure is against free enterprise and Democracy.

Sharon Gehl

I urge the City Council to legalize entire home vacation rentals and not implement a limit on the number of days a home can be rented. STRs provide an opportunity for visitors and families to affordably visit and enjoy the city and the broader coastal community. Short term whole house, apartment, and condo rentals all serve a function that hotels and motels don’t serve. If they weren’t needed, no one would use them. Both my husband and my families have rented large houses in other parts of the country for family reunions; and when we visited our son and his family in Washington D.C. pre-covid, we preferred to use Airbnb rather than stay in a hotel, so that we could be within walking distance of their apartment. People in other part of the country should be allowed to do the same here. We’ve had beach rentals in San Diego County for over 100 years, but now NIMBY’s want to change the rules and discriminate against tourists who can’t afford expensive hotels or to rent a house long-term. While we do have a shortage of houses in San Diego County, it isn’t because of short term housing, it’s because of years of intentionally limiting the number of new apartments that are allowed to be built in urban areas. The 30’ height limit on the coast has prevented new hotels close to the water. The only way to improve the housing situation is stop discriminating and allow builders to build enough apartments and hotels for everyone.

Martha Cruz

I oppose because it creates jobs for people that are not able to work because of their educational level, plus it makes us see the quality on hospitality that they have compared to hotels

Cathy Rabe

Our daughter has been resident of Chula Vista for several years and we are residents of Ohio who come to visit her and our grandchildren several times a year. With a family of 4 and a very large dog we have enjoyed finding homes near by that we can rent on a short term bases. This allows us to have a wonderful visit and enjoy our time in CV for a longer time than we might stay if we had to stay at a hotel Please do not take these wonderful stays in CV away from us. Sincerely. Cathy and Steve Rabe. Cincinnati Ohio.

Sean L.

Short-term rentals are good for the economy of Chula Vista and I urge the council not to over regulate. The main reason for housing shortages is the over regulation of government on the housing industry. The City of Chula Vista has one of the most regulated building requirements in America. It also does some great things also. :) I am pro Chula Vista I just urge the council that we don't over regulate. The 5% of bad shot-term rental operators should not ruin it for the 95% who do a great job. Lets find a more balanced solution and middle ground

Juan

I AGREE WITH NEW ORDINANCE

david

I used to do str and the stress i caused my neighbors made me look into a different career. Str bring a lot of stress to neighboods. CITY its time for regulations.

brenda rubio

who is staying next door to my family?? I have seen gang members, drug use,and etc. We need LAWS!

ashley wilkins

MY FAMILY AGREES WITH THIS ORDINANCE.

Jose alberto canton

STR don't have any regulations. So when we have a problem with the STR near our home, they are protected due to the lack of ordinance. Ive called police department and they say we cannot do anything. We have called the code enforcement and they say nothing can be done due to no rules are in place. CITY COUNCIL GIVE OUR CITY SOME LAWS TO IMPLEMENT AND GET OUR PEACEFUL HOMES BACK.

Jake

I agree with this ordinance.

Tom

I am praying this ordinance is approved. My neighbor has been conceded about his well going on str he owns. in the back of my mind i wish he would understand and control his guest and cut down on noise and parking arrangements. But he only cares about the money.

Gabriela Lopez

I oppose this regulation

cathy

CITY COUNCIL ITS ABOUT TIME!! PLEASE HELP THIS NIGHTMARE END WITH APPROVAL OF STR. GOOD NIGHT

IAN

Ban STR from Chula Vista!! My children dont feel safe in the back yard, because the neighbors home is a constant party and crazyness. Weve had to call the police a million times and they cant do anything!! NO laws to implement!! COME ON CITY COUNCIL!!!!

liu

no rules no laws. NOT FAIR PLEASE IMPLEMENT STR ORDINANCES

Juan capistrano

Let me start by giving you my experience of the short term rental next door. Drug use and loud parties all day. From beer pong tournaments of more than 50 people to Garage marijuana tournament, yes exactly what im saying. But wait its legal, but the source comes from STR lack of ordinance! My wife being hit on by airbnb neighbors as she throws the trash out, at 7pm. Yesterday there was a bachoret party with more than 100 people.. I took my family to a hotel. I have needed psychological help and my wife has now a nervous tick due to this. we live in distress daily and cant be more happy to know this can get approved and give us back peace of mind.

Alice walton

I am a 70 year old and retired from this amazing country. my peaceful and relaxing back yard and retirement life was wiped away. STR moved in across the street from my husband and I home. Please implement this ordinance for us to have a peaceful retirement home.

jessica dominguez

Good evening city council, we need rules for str. This is a nightmare living a few house down from this str home. Drugs, partying, and loud music all day.

alberto melendez

We are sick and tired of living next to a hotel in a residential area. please give us our neighbor life back which i think forgot exist since this str moved in next door.

Carey Hazelton

This ordinance is would be a direct win for corporations and a devastating loss for small business. It will funnel revenue out of Chula Vista benefitting adjacent municipalities and corporate owned hotels. The properties impacted by this ordinance are unique in that they offer a full kitchen and other amenities not available in traditional hotels. Will Chula Vista define a statute prohibiting corporate entities from developing similar accommodations at their properties? Otherwise how can the public trust that this ordinance's sole purpose isn't to damage or destroy competition to favor aforementioned corporate entities? I can't think of an idea more crippling to small businesses in Chula Vista than this. Regards, Carey A frequent Chula Vista tourist

Mike

I support short term rentals in Chula Vista California.

Tiffanie Chavarria

I support short term rental

Marlene

I do not agree with the restrictions.

Jason Kramer

We do not believe property rights of lawful homeowners should be limited. Homeowners pay significant cost, taxes and expense to maintain their homes for the benefit of themselves and others. We believe enforcing regulations against bad STRs is more effective than limiting homeowner's property rights. Furthermore, STRs offer a great value to Chula Vista and the San Diego area by providing affordable and available lodging. Many are choosing to work remotely and spend their time and dollars in our community. STRs generate tremendous revenue for local communities and require property owners to maintain and beautify their properties. STRs can allow us to keep our homes when deployed longer than 90 days. Proper licensure, regulation and oversight is far superior to limiting property rights. We can achieve a more inclusive community partnering with STRs instead of limiting them. STRs are often lionized as a boogeyman for property costs that existed long before STRs existed. We firmly believe that encouraging responsible STRs is better for property owners and the communities they serve.

Forward thinker

Short term rental ban will be a long term problem! This would hurt the local economy as the proprietors that are doing things correctly and orderly bring revenue to local businesses directly and passively through word of mouth to others that might not normally venture to South Bay.

Local Professional

This seems like an overreaction. If the City of San Diego is taking a more measured approach, with a considerably larger draw than Chula Vista (no offense to CV, which is great), why are we going to punish the whole because of a few bad operators??

Natalie

My family travels to Chula Vista multiple times a year. If this passes, we would have to bring our business to San Diego, which we do NOT want to do. Our family is too large to simply "rent a room" so that is not an option for us. We LOVE CV... we frequent many local establishments such as Brew Bar, Standlees, Teriyaki Grill, and Bar Sin Nombre. We wouldn't be able to support these places if we were forced to stay in SD. PLEASE scrap this ridiculous idea, and let us continue to stay in our favorite city of Chula Vista!!!

Steven Montoya

I oppose strict ordinances that bring revenue to low income communities that would stay in San Diego.

Maria Alvarez

Short term rentals provide business to me and my family as house keepers. This would cause us to lose our jobs and we oppose the 90 day limit. We are minorities and helps us provide an income that is flexible to the house hole. The houses are clean and professional with no issues.

Craig McClurg

Dear Esteemed Council Members, Thank you for this opportunity to speak on the important topic of vacation rentals in Chula Vista. I welcome measured and appropriate regulation. However, the policy on the agenda for November 9, 2021 is an ill-thought, unwise, de facto ban on vacation rentals. This ban is bad for our city and for its citizens. I urge you to rethink this policy. Let’s create harmony between regulation that can curb bad actors, and freedom for Chula Vistans to create hope for themselves. Vacation rentals are an opportunity for our city and its citizens. Tax revenue from vacation rentals in Chula Vista are a windfall for the city that otherwise would go to neighboring municipalities. Chula Vista citizens can create home-based businesses by using their homes as a vacation rental. For many families, this is much needed and welcome revenue. I urge you Council Members to create an environment where both citizens and the city can prosper. I recognize that the bay front project includes hotels, and that the city would receive some taxes. It’s my view the city should be neutral between Big Hotels and Chula Vistans. However this policy — this ban — prefers Big Hotels and it takes money out of the pockets of ordinary citizens, and limits their opportunities. Instead, I urge you Council Members to level the playing field and create policies that allow vacation rentals to coexist with hotels in our fair city.

Diego

I am a homeowner in Chula Vista and do not have short term rentals. I still do not agree with the new regulations that are looking to pass on short term rentals. If new regulations were to pass, it will have a negative effect on the economy of Chula Vista. Less options on flexible housing demand will equal less tourism. Local Chula Vista residents will also be losing jobs if new short term rental regulations pass.

Rodrigo Leal

This restriction as written is too restrictive in regards to the 90 day limitation. Put in place a fee/tax and rules in regards to the responsible person & no more than 10 people but unlimited. This is a major source of income to a a lot of low to mid income people.

Zkandia Beltrán

Limiting or denying the use of our Chula Vista properties as Vacation Rentals infringes on my ability to make money for my family. It brings tourist dollars to Chula Vista that would otherwise stay in San Diego, and responsible hosts should not suffer the consequences because of the few that do not adhere to the good neighbor doctrine. Those irresponsible people should be held accountable, and a system in place for not keeping our beautiful city clean and peaceful would be beneficial to all.

Janet lambert

Air b n b is positive for the city of chula Vista. It brings both revenue to our citizens and provides accommodations as decent hotels are in short supply In our area. We have hosted air b n b guests from time to time and there has never been a noise complaint and all of our neighbors are happy with our process and our guests are blessed and love Chula Vista now. The revenue has enabled our family to continuously improve our property

Rachel Broersma

I think Airbnb is a wonderful way for visitors to experience Chula Vista and all it has to offer. I oppose this strongly!

MAYRA ROMAN

I oppose this regulation and support short term rentals beyond 90 days

JASON LUKE

My beautiful family live next to a short term rental, its a living hell!! No rules, no laws, and No Help!! We need laws to protect home owners like my family. Every other day, there is parties, smoking and using drugs. They allow up to 19 people at this home. The whole neighborhood is overly stressed and tired about this situation. WE SUPPORT THIS ORDINANCE!!

Jesus Dominguez

I oppose this regulation and support short term rentals beyond 90 days.

Andrea East

Supporting this bill means opposing economic prosperity for our city and its residents. Chula Vista has an opportunity to capitalize on tourism and the Airbnb industry to allow guests to rent local resident homes. I oppose this resolution and I support Airbnb in our community. Why is this resolution being brought up now and in a rushed manner? It took San Diego years to pass a resolution,,…so why is Chula Vista trying to pass this under the radar?

Terry Manges

The existence of Short-Term Rentals has seen rapid growth as STRs have been allowed to operate in Chula Vista with no regulatory guidance. It is time that our City Council adopts regulations in the form of an ordinance that balances the rights of homeowners who wish to operate a STR with the interests of neighbors and other community members who experience the negative side-effects associated with people renting out their homes on a short-term basis. While it may be lucrative for some homeowners to become part-time hotel operators, most of the negative impacts of STRs are borne by the neighbors and surrounding community whose interests are disregarded. STRs change the character of a residential neighborhood that was never planned to include mini hotels. In addition, tourists and others renting STRs are reducing the availability of space that otherwise might otherwise be used for long-term housing that is currently in short supply.

Jessica

I am in opposition of this. This helps support income for many homeowners in the area and business owners. It brings more opportunities with reduced income during COVID.

Doug Fisher

I Oppose to this as I use them and think there is nothing wrong with them..Why change something that’s not a Problem??

Michelle Salinas

I oppose this regulation and support short term rentals beyond 90 days.

Adriana Ramblas

In Opposition

Roman Gonzalez

I oppose this, I have short term rental buissness and if this passes it would affect me

Chelsea DeBoef

I do not agree with increasing the regulations for short-term rentals.

Kevin Astley

I oppose this regulation and support short term rentals beyond 90 days.

Alexander Gilkes

I oppose this regulation and support short term rentals beyond 90 days. We do not need more restrictions.

Christopher Aguas

I oppose this regulation and support short term rentals beyond 90 days. We don't need more restrictions

Paulina Luna

We want community and families to thrive! people need housing, there is more than enough vacation rentals in San Diego.

Jose Limon

I oppose this regulation and support short term rentals. It helps provide a safe place to stay for families and friends

Daniel Fisher

I oppose short term rental restrictions in chula vista. I live next door to an Airbnb and we have no problems with it!! The owner is always responsive and responsible & attentive. We have met some amazing people. Shutting Down this ladies business during these tough times is ridiculous and heartless!!!

Geovanna Fisher

Short term rentals are a safe place for families to stay. They should be allowed to stay more than 90 days

Ivette Fisher

I oppose short term rental restrctions in Chula Vista. I live next to an Airbnb and we do not have any problems with it, the owner is always responsive and attentive and we have met some Cool people. Shutting her business down during these tough times is heartless.

Ivette Fisher

I oppose short term rental restrctions in Chula Vista. I live next to an Airbnb and we do not have any problems with it, the owner is always responsive and attentive and we have met some Cool people. Shutting her business down during these tough times is heartless.

Alicia Arlow

I'm opposed to a 90-day limit of whole home STRs and STR permits and/or other controlling and invasive laws against private homeowners.

Robert Perez

Oppose this resolution.

Guillermo Rivas

My family is multi generational in the Chula Vista area. Long before east lake even had their land contract. My mother a senior citizen supplements her income in this manner and treats short term rental as a serious business and has never had a complaint for noise, trash, or parking. Seems to be an issue of other neighboring cities and let's keep Chula Vista as an innovative and people first city. Last thing we want to do is spiral into a political ideology concerning a subject as short term rentals.

marie nesmond

I support any measure that places limitations on STRs. Short-term rentals are a plague that has been proven to drive long-term rental prices up. Anything that scales back regulations on them leads to making the cost of living in the area more and more prohibitive for a growing number of families. STRs hurt the very communities they claim to benefit. Residents would spend more money at local businesses if they didn't have less and less of it due in large part to rising costs, particularly rent--so that excuse is moot. Don't allow STRs to keep making things worse. Focus on measures that help create more hostels and budget motels instead, if we're worried about those tourist dollars. The fact that some people remove housing from the LTR market to increase their profits with STRs is shameful, and if anything I would support banning them entirely. The housing rental industry at large should be reined in as much as possible by making home-buying affordable to all, or at least long-term renting, but giving more leeway to STRs to contaminate the market achieves the opposite. Homeowners who say they need to rent out a whole house as they please in order to weather the financial storm of the pandemic can just sell those houses if they're strapped for cash, since home values have increased drastically. Or they can rent them out as LTRs instead of STRs to benefit local individuals and families, as can those who use the same excuse about renting out rooms in their homes.

Jasmin Corral

I respectfully oppose the banning of STR's. As a responsible property owner, we should have the right to operate a STR. STR hosts should only be allowed to operate if hosts implement & adhere to strict noise control, quiet times, maintain a clean and safe STR. Please do not take away an incredible revenue producing source of income for the continued growth of Chula Vista.

Brad Greenwald

Don’t limit whole house rentals. We count on that income. We screen all renters in advance. We meet every one in person. We limit them to being outside on deck til 10:00pm. We counsel them on any noise or being a nuisance. Please do not limit us.

Nicole F. Rodriguez

Hello. I oppose these STR restrictions for whole house rentals. During these tough times, hosting helps support our incomes and provide a safe place for families to gather with their own households. Our STRs also help financially support many people and many other small businesses. I depend on this income and would not be able to survive without it. I'm a single immigrant woman from Central America who came here to this country to build a better life for myself and do so by purchasing in real estate. I like short term rentals because they help many families gather safely, especially during this pandemic. Part of my services include hosting refugees, first responders and home owners whose houses are being worked on; all these stays are under 30 days. Why would we want to further displace them or limit the days of their stay, all we are doing is limiting who we can help! Due to covid a lot of people don't feel comfortable staying in hotels, they want to be together with their families alone, and not the host. As for noise, there are noise detectors and cameras to monitor our properties, lots of great technology is available. Properties are professionally cleaned and landscaped so it brings up the value to the neighborhood and community unlike other homes in the area. Let's keep Chula Vista the upcoming attraction for families, vacationers, and refugees. Give everyone their privacy by allowing whole home rentals with no cap on the number of days per year we can host!

Francisco D.

I depend on my AirBNB income to support my family.

Report Number: 21-0209

Location: No specific geographic location

Department: Development Services

Environmental Notice: The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  A) Place an ordinance on first reading adding Chapter 5.68 (Short-Term Rentals) to the Chula Vista Municipal Code, establishing regulations, standards, and a permitting process for Short-Term Rentals (First Reading) and B) Adopt a resolution amending Chapter 4 (Business Fees) of the City’s Master Fee Schedule to add Short-Term Rental permitting fees, adding 1.0 Code Enforcement Officer II to the Development Services Department, and appropriating funds therefor. (4/5 Vote Required).

8.4

Emergency Shelter Units: Approval of a Master Product and Service Agreement with Pallet SPC for Emergency Shelter Units

Location: 205 27th Street

Department: Development Services

Environmental Notice: This activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act State Guidelines; therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) no environmental review is required.

• RECOMMENDED ACTION:

  Adopt a resolution approving a Master Product and Service Agreement with Pallet SPC.

9.

CITY MANAGER’S REPORTS

9.1

Information Memorandum on CTH and Homeless Outreach Efforts

10.

MAYOR’S REPORTS

11.

COUNCILMEMBERS’ COMMENTS

12.

CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS

13.

ADJOURNMENT

to the regular City Council meeting on November 16, 2021 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.

 

Materials provided to the City Council related to an open session item on this agenda are available for public review, please contact the Office of the City Clerk at [email protected]
or [phone].

 

Sign up at www.chulavistaca.gov to receive email notifications when City Council
agendas are published online.