Speaking of legislation which could radically affect Airbnb(ing) in San Francisco, the proposed ordinance which would limit the number of days any unit that hasn’t already been registered with the City to no more than 60 days per year, regardless of whether a rental was hosted (i.e., the host is present at the time of the rental) or not, is getting closer to a Board of Supervisors vote.

At the same time, in addition to nonprofit housing organizations, the ordinance would redefine the definition of an “Interested Party” allowed to bring a private right of action to shutter and seek monetary damages for the operation of an un-registered short-term rental to those who reside in the building in which the rental is taking place, eliminating the current allowance for neighbors outside the building but within 100 feet.

But the ordinance would also shorten the waiting period after which the aforementioned private right of actions could be filed from 135 to 30 days following a formal complaint to the City on which it has yet to act.

The legislation has been sponsored by Supervisors Breed, Campos, Peskin, and Kim.

5 thoughts on “Ordinance to Further Limit Airbnb-ing and Lawsuits Closer to Vote”
  1. The restriction on hosted stays is ridiculous. This level of government intrusiveness, and neighborhood snooping is intolerable.

    And please don’t bring up running a brothel or a slaughterhouse in your living room. It’s an absurd strawman argument.

    At this point given the unreasonableness AirBnB is facing from the likes of Futurist, David Campos and others, I am sort of hoping that President Trump steps in and cuts off federal funding to cities that impede interstate commerce…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *