(Chris Weeks/Getty Images for Airbnb)

Early voting begins Monday in San Francisco. One issue that’s likely to drive people to the polls is Proposition F, which would impose restrictions on Airbnb and similar vacation rental sites. Prop. F would limit private rentals to 75 nights per year and require hosts to file quarterly reports with the city. Proponents say the regulations are needed to protect the city’s limited housing stock, while opponents say the initiative compromises privacy and encourages lawsuits between neighbors.

Guests:
David Campos, supervisor, San Francisco Board of Supervisors for District 9; spokesperson for Proposition F
Patrick Hannan, campaign manager, No on Prop. F

  • ponzerelli

    I wonder how frequently the frugal users of airbnb have inadvertently transferred bedbugs from cheap, infested hotels into people’s airbnb-listed condos, apartments and homes.
    it is bad enough that so many San Francisco hotels are infested with this scourge.
    search hotels for bugs here: http://bedbugregistry.com/
    but what if your neighbor rents her condo on airbnb, and you get bedbugs as a result?
    the customer pockets some savings, the condo owner pockets some profits, & you become collateral damage.

    airbnb bedbugs in Berlin

    Bed Bug – The Powell Hotel – San Francisco

  • lfivepoints69

    Please vote NO on Prop. F. Airbnb has allowed hundreds of San Francisco families to avoid foreclosure by sharing their guest rooms with visitors to our wonderful City. Every homeowner should have a right to share his home with visitors; this law would prevent that. For many San Franciscans, Airbnb alone allowed them to survive the Great Recession by making enough extra money to afford their mortgage, property taxes, and maintenance. Additionally, Airbnb allows San Franciscans to show visitors our city, neighborhoods, and culture.

    • Gene Keenan

      Please cite facts to make this case.

  • Jon Gold

    overheard at Harbin a month ago…”I can’t go ‘home’ right now, I’ve got people in there on airbnb at $200 a night! It’s the only way I can afford to be in the city.” This statement from a dude traveling around and clearly, not in San Francisco.

    • Bruce

      yeah – that did happen. The platform dealt with it and kicked them off.

  • Bruce

    Prop F is worse than anyone thinks. Do you know that SF will be the first city in the world to have data shared between guest / host and government. Doesn’t anyone find this extreme? https://medium.com/@emeyerson/prop-f-is-worse-than-you-think-17e395ca8761

    • jimn

      No, what I find extreme is that 1/3 of the housing supply is for short term rentals while residents have to pay $3500 a month for rent. https://pleblog.wordpress.com/2015/09/29/i-have-read-prop-f-and-it-is-a-perfectly-normal-and-reasonable-piece-of-legislation/

      Edit: Even if that 1/3 number is inaccurate, which it likely is, I still don’t like the idea of people buying up housing stock, in a city with limited housing options, to rent them out to tourists.

      • Bruce

        because we should always believe anything written by a blogger. #fail. Sorry I don’t want to have data shared and from the canvassing that I did yesterday, the people I spoke with the majority did not either.

      • Yonathan Randolph

        The article by Zach Perez that you posted only rebuts half of the complaints from the Emey Erson article. Prop F has some glaring unintended consequences that I haven’t seen anyone on the “Yes” side address.

  • Bruce

    SF Building Dept Planning Video explains the true culprit here for affordable housing is not building enough and the downturn in the economy. If this badly written prop passes, its focusing on 1% (if they all convert to LTRs). Will this do anything? NO. Vote No on Prop F. Look at the video yourself. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XKkJfkLWW4

  • Bruce
    • huckabubble

      That ruling applies to HOTELS and HOTEL guest registries.

      • Pavlo Al

        So now short-term rentals are not hotels? Conveniently applying arguments, aren’t we?

        • Bruce

          Exaclty….call us hotels one moment and now its NOT. How convenient.

    • SFJAZZER

      Huabubble…remember…Short term rentals have been classified the same as Hotels where the SF Treasury is requiring the same 14% Transient Occupancy Tax needing to be remitted for any income made by short term renting.

    • Chuck

      This is not the NSA just because you have to prove you are legally entitled to the economic benefit you seek.

  • Bruce

    Link to article demonstrating the current law is working. 155K fines in 2.5 weeks. I thought they claimed this wasn’t enforceable (but somehow this really is enforceable). Allow the current laws to work. http://sfist.com/2015/10/01/short_term_rental_law_violators_got.php

  • Richard Rothman

    How did people share or rent out room before Airbnb. They used newspaper adds or Craig list. Do we need Airbnb What is Airbnb doing about building owners who empty building of long term tenants and rent our to Airbnb people.

    • The current law prohibits people form emptying out long term tenants then renting to Airbnb people. What will Prop F do to solve that better than the current law?

      Yes, people have rented for centuries to others, even before Craigslist. The differences with a platform like Airbnb include the extra layers of trust, thanks to multiple verifications and peer reviews, and secured transactions, insurance, and in SF, automatic payment of TOT (transient occupancy taxes), etc…. Why is Airbnb the scapegoat here?

      • Richard Rothman

        Airbnb should only post unit for rents that our register with the City and post the registion number.

        • Pavlo Al

          Now THAT’s not enforceable

        • I’m OK with that, or at least make it easier to add a checkbox to search for registered units, and/or add an icon like they do for “superhosts”. But, it should apply to all platforms, including Craigslist, don’t you think? Why only Airbnb?

  • Chuck

    Basic Fact 1: Short term rentals convert residential housing for residents to hotel use for visitors so a few can make a quick buck.
    Basic fact 2: We have a housing shortage.
    SF City government just wants its cut to sell out the residents. So far, after months on the books it just creates another bureaucracy, staffed by moving unnecessary employees from the Mayor’s housing office and Planning Dept.
    The current law is faux regulation

    • Pavlo Al

      rumors!

    • lfivepoints69

      You are lying. If I share my guest room to a visitor from France on a weekend trip, that does not in any way affect the volume of rental housing units in the City.

      • Chuck

        Sorry you accuse me of lying

    • amyj1276

      The assumption that all of these units would otherwise be on the long-term market is false. Basic policy analysis requires correct assumptions, and that’s one the problems with making policy by ballot initiative. Guess how many voters are educated about basis policy analysis and collateral consequences….

      • Chuck

        I did not say that “all of these units would otherwise be on the long term market.” So why are you trying to refute that argument???? You assume that supporters of prop f have made an incorrect assumption and I am not sure your assumption about there assumptions is correct. Please tell us how many voters are educated about basis (sic) policy analysis and collateral consequences and then educate us all on these matters.
        If people need money to make ends meet and avoid foreclosures etc as represented by opponents of prop f, and need or want to provide housing in exchange for money, they could rent them to residents. If they chose not to do so, that is there business until the so called progressives force them to rent vacant or available housing stock.

  • Pavlo Al

    KQED, please do fact-check, Campos shamelessly and purposely lies about the number of units.

    • Jennifer Fieber

      The number comes from the Budget & Legisllative Analyst report which is an independent office of the city. The number of those who have registered as required by law is also easily found. 94% listings are not registered….

      • Pavlo Al

        Read report then. There is no such number. Case closed

      • Jennifer, do you mind sharing a link to the report? Thanks!

      • I searched the entire document for “94%” and search results were zero. Can you explain how they got this number, and the often touted number of 10,000 listings in SF? I know hosts who list their same property on multiple platforms, so I suspect they’re getting counted many times. Also others who list twice on Airbnb: one listing for a spare room in their home, and another for the entire home when they go on summer vacation…

  • Jennifer Fieber

    I work for the SF Tenants Union where we have been trying to have enforcement against the bad actors for over two years. We have contacted airbnb directly to de-list those absentee owners with multiple listings. They claimed it is not their responsibility to get involved in third-party disputes ,though they clearly violated local laws. What a cop out. I would like Hannan how, if airbnb wants to profit off the local housing, how they have no responsiblity to follow the laws they helped write? Why should instead use taxpayer dollars to pay city staff, when it is much more effective and efficient for them to simply follow the laws about not allowing listings which violate primary residence laws?

    • lfivepoints69

      You have NO right to prevent San Francisco homeowners from sharing their guest rooms to visitors.

      • Gene Keenan

        If only it were just homeowners; it is not. And what is your problem with making “homeowners” register their rentals?

  • SFJAZZER

    Current STR legislation is adequate and enforceable but the Planning Dept should have more innovative ideas on how to monitor folks who rent their entire units out for more than 90 days besides asking platforms to provide them with host data. There are too many platforms out there and new ones being created every day for the Planning Dept to keep up . IMHO, Maybe the Planning Dept needs to create some kind of database that San Francisco hosts have to report the time frames they rent their entire unit for short-term renting as it happens and regardless of what platform the SF short term hosts uses, it does not matter. Hosts who lie can then be penalized, have their STR permits revoked, and get serious fines and in some cases, criminal charges for lying.

  • lfivepoints69

    Campos does not care whether San Franciscans lose their homes because they are not able to make money by sharing their guest rooms or couches. Campos does not respect the right of homeowners to use their homes. Campos is an enemy to ALL San Francisco families.

    • Gene Keenan

      Please cite facts that indicate that all of these rentals are by home owners. I know for a fact they are not.

  • Sean Dennehy

    The airbnb-lyft-uber trend is going to lead to a future where everyone’s job is part-time and everyone’s home changes by the day. It’s a libertarian future I do not want to see. These companies need to fail.

    • SFJAZZER

      If people are self-employed part time is better than not having any kind of way work and not having any kind of income. Being able to do Uber, Lyft and short term renting is giving people some extra income. What is wrong with that?

      • lfivepoints69

        Completely true and most people who share their cars or homes do not quit their jobs.

    • lfivepoints69

      Being able to help the environment, meet new people, and share underutilized resources are purely positive developments. These companies are wonderful additions to our nation and world from the creative folks in our City. I have occasionally hosted Airbnb guests and carried Uber and Sidecar passengers (to reduce my environmental footprint when driving somewhere). Using my property to help other people has no effect in any way on my actual full-time job. Why would picking up an Uber passenger during a morning commute to my job have any effect on my career?

    • SFJAZZER

      Sean, Get real. Short-term renting existed before Airbnb was even created. VRBO, Craigslist, Real Estate rental companies have been doing this sort of thing for years and years and years. Now you want to “kill” companies like Airbnb who have created a web based application where there are at least some kind of protection for the host and the renter? I want to also say something about Uber and Lyft. I don’t have a car anymore and before Uber and Lyft were created and I used to call Yellow Cab for a ride, I got rude service and they couldn’t tell me how soon the driver would show up. Also once, I went to the CONTAINER STORE on 4th street to buy some clear plastic containers. There is a Marriott right across the street from the CONTAINER STORE and about 20 yellow cabs would turn into 4th street and not one of those cabs would stop to pick me up as a passenger. They all wanted to get passengers from the Marriott. I don’t have that kind of problem anymore anytime I use Lyft or Uber. I request a ride and I get a driver show up in 1-5 minutes.

  • lfivepoints69

    As a resident of District 9 (Campos is supposed to be my supervisor although he has never done his job), I can state unequivocally that he is probably the worst elected official this City has ever had (with the possible exception of Dan White).

  • Pavlo Al

    Planning Department back tracked they don’t have tools in April. Stop spinning that, Campos

  • i_witness

    Question for the panelists.
    How do the status quo or Prop F help a retiree that needs the income from, in excess of 90 days a year, of home sharing in order to stay in the city. Are they out of luck and need to move out?

    • huckabubble

      No, they can still rent on Airbnb for 75 nights a year.

      • SFJAZZER

        I need to be able to short term rent my extra room for more than 75 nights in order to pay my mortgage, property taxes, condo fees, assessments, repairs, etc…

        • huckabubble

          does your condo assoc allow short term rentals?

          • Huckabubble, if a condo association prohibits short term rentals, can’t they enforce their own contract under current law? Does it require Prop F to solve this?

          • SFJAZZER

            If any condo owner is violating their CCRs, then the Condo Association are the ones who can either fine or sue the condo owner doing Short Term Renting. Prop F or the current legislation does not manage that sort of thing. That is purely between the Condo association and the condo unit owner. The thing is that I am very careful to vet the kind of short-term renter I get. I have rules set in place for a guest staying at my place short-term. Most of the time, my neighbors don’t ever see my short-term renters because they leave early and come to maybe change their clothes to go out to dinner but most just come home late just to get some sleep and the next day they are out again all day. There is no “deterioration” of the neighborhood like the Yes for Prop F is trying to claim. The one time I had two young Chinese ladies who stayed with me who were laughing and talking and taking showers after midnight, I called Airbnb and Airbnb found them another place. You don’t get that level of service if you use Craigslist or Wimdu or any of the other short term renting websites. So it’s hard for me why all this focus of Yes for Prop F is just focusing on just Airbnb and none of the other platforms or Real Estate agencies who find renters for short term hosts.

          • SFJAZZER

            Yes and I have registered with the SF Treasury Dept for a business license and also got a STR permit from the SF Planning Dept.

        • Bruce

          I am in the same boat as you SF Jazzer. 2 weeks ago, I have an aging dog and incurred a 1700 vet bill. Add on a 500 Dental Crown. And those are just 2 bills. How will I make ends meet? Doing STRs….while allowing my friends and family to visit.

      • SFJAZZER

        Why does anyone who is just renting a room be limited to 75 nights a year? The proponents of Prop F say that it is the “unhosted” whole units that are causing the problems and that the Planning Dept is having problems monitoring. So why then remove the “hosted” vs “unhosted” categories and make those who just do “hosted” short term rentals pay the price and be punished. For some SF residents on a fixed income like Social Security, 75 days is not enough.

    • lfivepoints69

      Campos and the proponents of Prop F do not care at all about San Francisco families. Yes, he wants to ban home sharing so San Franciscans have to move out of the City.

  • huckabubble

    Prop F allows neighbors to sue AIRBNB. That’s why they’re spending $8 million to defeat it.

    • Mark

      Anyone can sue Airbnb right now.

  • Pavlo Al

    Can someone get a scoop on that tenant who travels to Bali and Thailand. It doesn’t make sense. Renting out short-term requires lots of work

  • Mathias

    Gavin Newsom stands up for middle class San Franciscans?! Not sure what planet Patrick Hannan lives on, but this is as far from the truth as possible. Indeed, if Gavin Newsom opposes Proposition F, this is a fairly good indication that the measure is worth voting for.

    • amyj1276

      Way to intelligently analyze individual propositions…. I always wondered what kind of people voted one way or another based solely on endorsements.

      • Livegreen

        Don’t forget about people who decide based on the mailed flyers & advertisements.
        Forget about details or participation.

        Therein lies the failures of our local democracy.

    • SFJAZZER

      You don’t vote on a measure because you like or dislike the official that endorses it, Mathias. You look at the details of the measure and consider the consequences and alternatives. Everyone owes themselves and the residents of San Francisco your most “educated” vote.

    • Mathias

      Whoa people, cool your jets! Pay attention to the wordage in my commentary therein, “… this is a fairly good indication that the measure is worth voting for.” Please note that I didn’t say i was using this as my sole determinant when it came to deciding how to vote on this measure. Jeez! But what these prickly responses indicate is that the big guns are definitely in play here, that any small word in favor of this measure will bring out such mammoth blow-back.

      To me, this offers another good indication (again, pay attention to the words, folks) that Proposition F is worth considering. Not to mention the fact that our fair city has been negatively affected by Airbnb in too many ways to name, and that this measure seems like an absolutely reasonable response to addressing this very real problem. Indeed, it cannot be overstated that our communities and neighborhoods here in San Francisco are for the most part, mere shadows of what they once were, and that we can confidently say that the presence of Airbnb has contributed to this makeover.

  • Pavlo Al

    What if I call Airbnb and claim I’m an owner of some unit down the street. Should Airbnb believe me and delist it?

  • Trace Wendell

    Does AirBnB believe it is fair for renters in rent-controlled apartments to earn income by renting out their apartments? Does AirBnB assume responsibility for crimes committed against other tenants in the buildings or against the property itself?

    • Pavlo Al

      Ask that question to craigslist

  • CaliforniaLiveOak

    Agree with David Campos on the scare tactics: Have you noticed how many units around your own neighborhoods have been vacated for tourists? This debate reminds me of the earlier scare tactics used to pass Prop 13. I’m not sure what I think about Prop F but am forever skeptical of Patrick Hannan, who used similar scare tactics when he did the Fisher Brothers’ bidding for City Fields, painting those concerned about the privatization / takeover of San Francisco parks as “nimby” activists (and now we are stuck with toxic chemical-laced fields that are noxious for kids and dogs and birds) …. who would oppose any improvement to parks, when actually all we want (and continue to ask for!) are safe parks open to kids, families, players. Comes down to who can you believe….

    • Bruce

      scare tactics as in they are taking over all the units and evicting people and it could happen to you? Oh those scare tactics….right? https://medium.com/@emeyerson/prop-f-is-worse-than-you-think-17e395ca8761

    • Mark

      I have noticed the 8-unit building across the street from me has sat empty for years, except for the owner who occupies 1. He refuses to rent out the other apts due to fears of rent control. That’s the bigger problem.

  • Prop F does not distinguish between hosted and non-hosted rentals, and outlaws in-laws. In my family’s case, we have a small 250 sq. ft. in-law studio in our garage with a bathroom but WITHOUT a kitchen, and we meet and greet all our guests. Our in-laws stay there 2 to 3 months every year. We’re registered and pay all our taxes (property, fed, state, local and TOT) We’re not taking housing stock off the market. Why does Prop F target us?

    • No on Prop F! More reasons here why STR can be part of the housing solution in SF if we allow current law to work, and just continue to improve enforcement:

      http://www.slideshare.net/kevinkrejci/letter-to-mayor-lee-and-sf-bos-regarding-shortterm-rental-amendments

      • FacheuxIsMyHoe15Dollars

        Yes on Prop F.

    • huckabubble

      it doesn’t. it targets airbnb and other hosting platforms for listing unregistered units.

      • Yonathan Randolph

        fyi, under Prop F, both hosting platforms and private individuals who host short-term rentals will be liable for $250–$1000 per violation per day of civil penalties.

      • West Eric

        Sorry, that’s not correct. Under section (f) of the initiative, it targets the hosts with penalties and legal risks, too. Under the current City law, a neighbor can sue you to pay penalties to the City. But under Prop F, that neighbor will be able to sue you to keep the money for themselves — up to $1,000 per night — even if the City has investigated and found no violation. If it’s completely frivolous, you have no recourse to collect the legal fees you’ve spent to defend yourself.

        • Bruce

          I don’t think they read the proposition. It clearly states that.

        • SFJAZZER

          Thank you for that clarification, West Eric.

      • SFJAZZER

        There are 60 plus platforms that offer short term rentals and more and more are created each day. Targetting Airbnb and other hosting platforms is not the way to enforce short term rental regulations.

    • Chuck

      You are an example of the type of short term rental that should be allowed and encouraged but poor legislation and poor regulation and poor enforcement by the city leads to gross abuses by others that get the attention of Supes. Legislation should allow you to do what you are doing without any registration, taxes etc.

      • Thanks for your comment, Chuck. Under Prop F, my understanding is that we will not be allowed to rent short term at all, as there is a provision that outlaws all in-laws, even though we’ve registered. Is that not the case?

        • Bruce

          See that is what they do not care about the middle class being able to have friends and family come and then do STR on the other side. They only care about cheap rent.

        • SFJAZZER

          Kevin, Prop F does not say that you cannot rent out short-term but it does change the minimum of days that rooms and whole units can be rented out short term to 75 days. The current Short Term Legislation does allow a “hosted” short term rental unlimited amount of days. The logic is that when the residence is occupied by the owner when there is a short term renter staying in the same residence, there is less of a chance for these renters to be causing any kind of disturbance and what not. Someone is there to supervise the short term guest or guests. “Unhosted” short term rentals where someone goes on vacation or a business trip and wants to rent out their entire place short term is capped at 90 days. The logic for 90 days cap is because in the summer time, school is out and if parents want to take their kids on vacation for 90 days, they can. Prop F wants to limit every short term host to a 75 day cap, regardless whether it’s a “hosted” versus “unhosted” short-term rental. Changing it to a 75 day cap for everyone does in fact cause more work and effort on the part of the Planning Dept who are the enforcers of any short term rentals, to hire more enforcers. Plus if the Proponents of Yes on F are saying that if the current law is unenforceable because the Planning Dept cannot monitor whole units that are capped at 90 days, then how in hell is the Planning Dept supposed to monitor every short term rental when every host is capped at 75 days regardless whether it’s “”hosted” or “unhosted”. Why would Prop F removed the “hosted” vs “unhosted” category. It’s not the “hosted” short term rentals that are the problem because those are usually rooms rented out while the host is available and present. It’s the “unhosted” whole unit rentals that are usually the problem. That is why Prop F is flawed.

      • Bruce

        then you should not punish everyone. VOTE NO on Prop F

    • Yonathan Randolph

      I assume you meant “but with a kitchen.” This is probably already a planning violation that is already illegal under current law; if someone reports you, then you may have to remove the kitchen. What Prop F does is make it illegal for people who happen to live in an in-law unit to rent it out on AirBnB.

      • Yonathan, our studio is only 250 sq feet, WITH a small bathroom, but WITHOUT a kitchen. It is in the back of our garage, underneath our home. It was there when we bought the home. We block out dates for in-laws and other guests that are friend and relatives (and don’t charge them). The rest of the year, it would be empty. My parents are getting up there in years and we expect we may need the space for them eventually. Like many others, we never had any intention to rent it permanently to a non-family member.

        • Yonathan Randolph

          Sorry for the misunderstanding. After Prop F, you will still be able to rent out the bedrooms, but only for 75 nights a year unfortunately.

  • fakeanonymousguest

    Campos is pro illegal immigrant but can’t wait three months for people to register with his understaffed department?

    • Bruce

      kind of shows he is all about himself and the mission moratorium etc…This prop was filed in May (less than 90 days given a chance to work). Shameful.

  • CaliforniaLiveOak

    There Patrick Hannan goes again with NIMBY! He plays like a broken record. (see comment below.)

  • KoYaChi012

    I believe many of the in-laws and other apartments that are being rented out on Airbnb were never part of the “housing stock” anyway.

    http://kalw.org/post/growing-number-san-francisco-landlords-not-renting#stream/0

    I know many homeowners in my neighborhood, who have legal in-laws (prior to the legislation to fast track legally permitting in laws) and those were never on the market to begin with because many people don’t want to deal with the onerous rent control laws with people in their own home.

    If they had to stop Airbnb-Ing their in-law, from what I understand, those units would continue to remain empty and not be rented on a long-term basis.

    • lfivepoints69

      Amen. In fact, all studies have shown that over 90% of rooms and couches that are listed on Airbnb are not separate housing units that could or would be potentially rented as rental housing units.

    • Yonathan Randolph

      Both current law and Prop F encourage people with illegal in-law units to take out the kitchen and AirBnB them as bedrooms only. If you legalize your in-law unit, then you already cannot get a Registration Number. Prop F just makes it illegal for people who live in the in-law unit from ever putting it on AirBnB.

  • Ben Rawner

    The people of SF pay astronomical rents! Letting someone stay in their home at their own risk is their own business. Quarterly reports to the city? You have to be kidding me. I know multiple people who have to rent to airBnB just to make it in this city. Even the rent controlled apartment mentioned earlier was $3K a month. How about we pass some laws stopping the gauging of rents by landlords! Leave the renters and owners alone. This law would not really help anyone other than the politicians who want to pat themselves on the back.

    • Mark

      As a landlord, I still have to rent out my extra bedroom to make ends meet. Luckily for my tenants, Airbnb has been so helpful financially that I have gotten caught up on needed repairs and Not raised rents in 3 years. Having hosted more that 150 people, everyone has been a joy to have in my home – I know much about them before they come. NO on F!

  • Pavlo Al

    Why does Comrade Campos decide how many days I can use my guest room?

  • Chuck

    If people have extra rooms and want to make a little money, rent them to long term renters.

    • lfivepoints69

      That makes no sense. Residents use their guest rooms when friend and family visit for a couple days at a time and use Airbnb on some days when they do not have family or friends visiting. Do you not know what a spare bedroom is and how it is used? My husband, son, and I would never want to share our bathroom or guest bedroom for more than two days at a time. That has nothing to do with a long-term rental lease situation. You clearly do not understand Airbnb or the idea of home sharing.

      • Chuck

        I am sorry to hear you have the opinion that I make no sense and do not understand Airbnb. You have convinced me to vote against Prop F. In the future I will not offer any suggestions on political or economic issues but will look to Ifivepoints69 for guidance in such matters.
        I hope you, your husband and your son will enjoy sharing your bathroom with total strangers to make a few bucks if only for two days at a time.

        • lfivepoints69

          You did not address the main flaw in your argument – if a homeowner wants to use their guest room for friends and family who visit or as a home office most of the time and only occasionally wants to host a visiting guest using Airbnb, then renting out his guest room as a long-term rental would not serve his purpose at all. Your proposed solution does not fit the use case of a guest room at all.

    • Bruce

      No sense what so ever. We have friends and family visit from time to time. So i could not do LTR.

    • Mark

      Chuck, in addition to eliminating the opportunity to have a guest room for friends and family, LTRs are a risk because should you get a roommate that you do not get along with, there is no way to get them out. And it does happen. Please vote No on F!

  • Sam Badger

    I can understand why a house owner needing to make some extra money might want to rent one out, but AirBNB’s deceptive and exaggerated television ads make me want to support Prop F out of spite. The fact is, a tight housing market like SF needs some regulation. Perhaps Prop F is too strong on regulating some homeowners, but something does need to be done.

    • Chuck

      Unfortunately, we have a choice only between what a former supervisor gave us and what Prop F will correct.

    • Yonathan Randolph

      Prop F casts a wide net beyond just AirBnB. It will allow neighbors to sue someone who advertises a temporary rental on craigslist or Facebook even on a first offense. I appreciate acting out of spite towards AirBnB, but please consider the other individuals that Prop F will hurt.

    • Mark

      Thanks for your post. Prop F will limit my ability to make extra money by renting my guest room. I have not taken any units off the market, but Prop F sweeps up me and thousands of others in the same net, not healthy for SF. Please, NO on F!

  • Supervisor Campos, we HAVE regulations already! Even the SF Chronicle thinks this Prop F is too extreme…

  • amyj1276

    I think that the pro-side is being incredibly disingenuous. Perhaps Supervisor Campos is just bitter about the result of the Assembly election? First, who cares how much the owners of a company make or how much AirB&B is spending to fight this? OF COURSE they’re spending money to fight this! If you owned a business and a local government wanted to essentially shut you down, wouldn’t you spend a fraction of your revenue to fight that? (Hint: The answer is “yes”.) And really, if some anti-choice zealots came to SF and got enough signatures to put an anti-choice ballot measure on the ballot and Planned Parenthood spent $8m to fight it, we wouldn’t be questioning that at all. I guess money is only bad when it’s being spent against something you’re for. Second, the law, and the arguments for it, are based on bad assumptions. If there’s one thing about policy analysis that it’s important, it’s that policy must be based on correct assumptions to work. This proposition assumes that all of those units and in-laws that are on the short-term rental market would otherwise be on the long-term rental market. That’s just not the case. Talk to almost anyone in this city and they’ll tell you that they would rather keep their unit vacant than deal with the tenant protection laws in the city? (And for the record, I am very much for the tenant protection laws and am only here because of rent control). Whether I agree with that or not doesn’t matter; that’s the reality. The supervisor keeps saying that these are units that “could” be rented, but the reality is that they are not and they would not be. Finally, as was noted, we have laws in place that need time to be implemented. No law can be fully implemented within 6 months. Period. Should ABB be regulated? Absolutely! It should be required to comply with the law and report their listings as necessary. But that’s not what this proposition is about. And as also noted, making policy by ballot initiative is one of the worst possible ways to make policy.

    • huckabubble

      how long do we need to wait for a law that every independent expert says if fundamentally flawed to magically become workable on its own?

      • amyj1276

        I don’t know the exact amount of time. But if the law isn’t working, then it should be addressed by the Supervisors, not by some rigid, poorly written ballot initiative that can never be changed.

        • Chuck

          If Air BnB et al put $8mil. into the fight against a proposition, what do you think they contribute to lobbyist, politicians, etc to get their way. Unfortunately, the initiative is the only recourse citizens have under our version of democracy.

          • Bruce

            I guess you would vote against planned parenthood if a private corporation came to their aid. RIGHT?

          • Chuck

            Sorry I do not understand what you are asking or stating

          • SFJAZZER

            Chuck, You call limiting one’s ability to rent out a room in one’s own home “democracy”? You consider forcing companies to divulge hosting details to the Planning Dept “democracy”? Me thinks you and I have a different concept of democracy for sure.

          • Chuck

            The term “democracy” describes the type of government or law enacting system you have and has nothing to do with what laws are written. There are also theocracies and monarchies, and plutocracies. You are confusing the form of government with the rules enacted under that form of government. In a democracy the citizens can enact good laws and bad laws. An initiative is direct democracy since the citizens vote directly rather than through representatives as with a representative democracy.

          • SFJAZZER

            Except that with an initiative, most voters are uninformed of what they are being asked to vote on and usually rely on ads or media blurps to make their decisions. How many voters you think really read and investigate what the initiative is all about? Plus with an initiative one cannot amend the law. It requires another initiative.

      • Bruce

        Funny as just in 2.5 weeks and issuing 155K worth of fines your previous argument was that it was not enforceable. NOW it is enforceable after 2 weeks according to this article.

        The current law is working.

        http://sfist.com/2015/10/01/short_term_rental_law_violators_got.php

        • Good point, Bruce! The current law might not be perfect, but it can be gradually modified with public comment, and enforcement is improving now.

          • SFJAZZER

            I agree. There are a couple of tweaking that the current short term legislation could be improved upon, but not by this Prop F initiative.

    • rematrav

      Most businesses don’t simply ignore existing laws. Airbnb’s business model violates existing zoning and land-use laws in most cities. R-! zoning means single (not dual or multi-) family residence, and not tourist accommodations.

      • SFJAZZER

        I think you may not realize that there was legislation for short-term legislation passed that became effective February 2015 that did away with all the zoning violations and does indeed allow SF residents that live in a unit for at least 275 days of the year to rent either a room (hosted) in that resident short term for unlimited amount of days of a year and for 90 days max in a year for the whole unit when the SF resident goes away. The SF resident who wants to do short term renting (i.e. less than 30 days for each rental), has to apply for a business license from the SF Treasury and pay the TOT and also apply for a STR permit from the Planning Dept.

  • Pavlo Al

    Entire unit on Airbnb is not exactly an entire unit for long-term rentals. You need to read a listing’s description to find out

  • Gene Keenan

    To the caller. AirBnB would not have protected you in that case of being gone for 11 months.

    • lfivepoints69

      Yes, in this case Airbnb is an ideal solution as Airbnb guests only visit for a discrete time. Long-term renting also normally has a lease with a discrete time (typically a one-year lease with an option for the landlord to extend the renter’s use of the space for a month or on a month-to-month basis). unfortunately San Francisco has draconian anti-homeowner laws that make evicting tenants challenging – even with a two-week or one month notice.

  • DeKulakSF

    STR are one solution – or symptom – of the disfunctionality of Rent Controlled housing in the City. The income from STR is not significantly more than LTR (long term rentals) – especially considering the extra work involved.

    The advantage STR offer over LTR is that you get your unit back after a week or a weekend. With LTR of Rent Controlled units, you rent out your unit and you may NEVER get it back. Or you risk paying five figures to a lawyer to get your property back.

    The risk for LTR is way higher than STR. Change that equation and you’ll see a lot less STRs.

  • Liz

    Airbnb sounds like the Craigslist for short term rentals. Total strangers coming into your home, what could possibly go wrong?

    • Bruce

      you must be super afraid of going out into public. What could go wrong there? You must be locked inside your home.

      • Liz

        Actually I am quite outgoing. I just draw a line at my own home. Its about being cautious and smart about who you give access to. I wouldn’t just leave my wallet out on a table for anyone who feels like it to look at my credit cards and other information, same with my home.

        • That is your choice, Liz, and in a free country, it is great that you have the option to make that choice. For some of us, we welcome people after checking their verifications and peer reviews, and after conversing with them…

    • rematrav

      Just be careful of the pervert’s hidden cameras.

  • What about flexible laws for people who need housing more than one month, but less than forever? Most people do not live in the same place all their life, and most of us are mobile and go through changes in our life that require changes in housing. What about all these people?

    • Chuck

      Sorry, those units go to short term rentals to tourists

      • Bruce

        Well funny as we have rented to Interns, to people relocating with pets that all needed temporary housing, which homesharing provided. Where would you like these people to stay? They all could not afford a hotel that was over 250 / night. WHERE? Our place is 125 / night.

  • Pavlo Al

    Campos needs to prove that he chose to buy his house based on distance from hotels, not based on price.

    • fakeanonymousguest

      That neighborhood argument is complete BS. There are definitely wealthy people with multiple homes that rent them out at a huge profit, but it’s not like a revolving door of hotel guests jumping in and out of cabs. If nothing, it adds more to the diversity of San Francisco, because a lot of Europeans use private room rental because that practice is much more common abroad.

    • Izsak

      Not really.

  • CaliforniaLiveOak

    Airbnb owns the Supervisors…. that’s why we have a referendum instead of Supes vote. Their hands are tied by campaign cash they need. That’s why neighbors, SF residents have to stand up.

    • lfivepoints69

      San Franciscans are standing up against Prop F and Supervisor Campos. Prop F is an existential threat to all San Franciscans as it takes away our homes and property and could force thousands of San Franciscans to lose their homes to foreclosure. Prop F dramatically exacerbates any existing housing concerns in this City.

      • Bruce

        correct. Look to SFAGAINSTF.com for homesharers rising up to fight this terribly written proposition. Vote NO Prop F.

      • rematrav

        “could force thousands of San Franciscans to lose their homes to foreclosure” Oh please. Lose a house to foreclosure in SF? Not going to happen–check prices.

        R-! zoning means single (not dual) family residence, and not tourist accommodations.

      • Chuck

        Thousands of foreclosures due to limits on short term rentals????? Did people buy property on the assumption they would pay the mortgage with short term rental income? Not a wise financial decision by them or whatever institution lent them money based on income from short term rentals.

  • On the subject of tourism and profiles of the visitors:

    1. Like it or not, tourism brings billions of dollars into our city every year, and is the backbone of our economy in SF.
    2. Many hotels are close to capacity, and homesharing gives options to many, especially during peak times when big events and conferences are held.
    3. Homesharing guests are not all tourists. In our case, we get many people from many walks of life for many different reasons:
    * Relatives of our neighbor undergoing chemotherapy.
    * Parents of neighbor here for a wedding.
    * Former SF resident relocating to SF, relying on STR until he can find permanent housing.
    * Bay Area residents here for a weekend in the Sunset district to enjoy Ocean Beach and biking in Golden Gate Park.
    * Grandmother from Scotland here to visit her daughter for two weeks after having baby.
    * The list goes on…

    • amyj1276

      I’d like to add that many West side residents (where there are no hotels) would like visiting family members to stay nearby. I can’t tell you how many families I talk to who would like their visiting parents nearby when they come to help with a new baby, for example.

      • Bruce

        I just got a booking on Teresita Blvd that the family did not have enough room at thanksgiving time and needed a place close by.

    • Chuck

      good argument for converting residential housing to hotels

      • SFJAZZER

        Actually we are not “hotels”. Yes we have to pay the same TOT as hotels do but in reality we are not “hotels”. That definition of Short Term Rentals being “Hotels” is so very inaccurate. I don’t change my guest sheets and towels every day. I don’t ask them to check in by 3 pm and check out by 11 am. There are things I do for guests that no hotel would offer and there are things that hotels that I can’t offer. The list is too long to state the differences.

  • Pavlo Al

    Go ahead and require booking day from VRBO, Booking.com and craigslist!

  • Chuck

    The host argues that “owning city hall” has been true since “ancient Rome”. As long as responsible citizens accept the principle that big money can buy city hall, we will have that system. So Air BnB can spend $8mil to buy the city housing stock
    Basic Fact 3: You can do what you want as long as City Hall gets its cut in fees, fines, permits, user charges.

  • Supervisor Campos, do the hotels at lower valuations than Airbnb provide all the data about their guests to City Hall?

    • Maybe Airbnb has a high valuation because it is popular and people like the service… 😉

      • Chuck

        A good argument for converting residential property to hotels but that is the problem under discussion

      • JennyO

        And VC’s and Angel investors like Ton Conway see billion $$ signs.

        They got the city to change the zoning laws just for them. And are you naive enough to think it’s just so you can “share.”

        Rent control will go next: AirBNB just puts accelerant on the issue.

        Next time you see a family, a disabled or elderly person evicted, pat yourself on the back if you don’t vote YES on F.

    • huckabubble

      Prop F doesn’t require any data about guests. None. Zero. Nada.

      • Pavlo Al

        Not true. Read your own law

      • Bruce

        Actually Airbnb as of Sept 28th became the first company to qualify as a legal website to share data with the city. #bern

    • Chuck

      They are hotels; not residential housing

  • Pavlo Al

    We have a housing crisis because of the policies Campos and Peskin advocated – no construction of new housing.

    • Chuck

      Agree, years of so called progressive government and planning have caused the housing crisis but converting actual or potential residential housing is one more contributing factor

      • Bruce

        Lets look at what the Dept of Planning says in this 2014 video. What is absent? ANYTHING TO DO WITH STRS. #Boom

    • rematrav

      You have a housing crisis because more people want to live in The City than The City has room for. Do what San Franiciscans have been doing for 50 years, move to a less expensive city. Daly City? Hayward? Vallejo?

    • SFJAZZER

      Well…I would also say that the housing crisis is because we got 10 thousand new people who got jobs in the city and the city was not prepared to have enough new housing units built for both the new residents as well as affordable housing for those tenants that got evicted either by owner move-ins, or by owner/landlords who decided to use the Ellis Act to evict long term rent controlled tenants. But certainly, short term renting is hardly to blame for this housing crisis. Now I am not saying that we don’t have some unscrupulous people out there short term renting units that they don’t reside in or are doing so without a permit or abiding by the current STR legislation, but these “bad players” can easily be reported to the Planning Dept instead of the fellow resident neighbors taking on the responsibility and filing a lawsuit as Prop F is advocating. I have reported several “non compliant” short term renters I found on Craigslist to the Planning Dept and the Planning Dept has followed up on them and I no longer see them listed on Craigslist any more. Now could those bad operators start using Booking.com, VRBO or some other short term rental platform. They sure can and might but it’s the Planning Dept’s enforcement agents that are supposed to be monitoring these various platforms to see if these bad operators are jumping from one platform to another.

  • There is a big difference between filing complaints against neighbors and suing them through private right of action for no reason…

    • Jennifer Fieber

      Lawsuits are allowed in current law. What F does is allow you to sue airbnb—that is why they are spending $8 million to defeat it.

      • Yonathan Randolph

        fyi Prop F adds private civil penalties of $250–$1000 per violation per day against neighbors.

      • Bruce

        How many of those lawsuits did Dale Carlson bring? I heard it was up to 50 complaints. Isn’t that like pumping up your numbers just a bit?

  • Pavlo Al

    Ballot measure was filed back in April, two months after the law got implemented.

  • fakeanonymousguest

    Like following immigration rules?

  • Pavlo Al

    KQED, do a fact check! Campos uses made-up numbers. call him out on it

  • Yonathan Randolph

    If someone simply posts an ad on craigslist for a holiday sublet and leaves it up for a week, a neighbor will be able to sue and receive a MINIMUM of $1750 under Prop F. It’s ironic that Sup. Campos would create new low-fault private civil penalties at the same time that he helped fight ‘gotcha’ legal action.

  • Johanna Haag

    So I understand the city has fined only 1/2 dozen owners in 3 months? Really? Are they only relying on neighbors to turn AirBnB people in? And then to sue their own neighbors? What a ridiculously stupid idea.

    • Chuck

      The city just passes rules and issues notices and fines. It does not actually do anything except create new bureaucracies and hire more loyal supporters.

  • Gene Keenan

    Hanlon citing people visiting SF saying they couldn’t afford to come here if not for AirBnB. How about taking care of residents by making a place for them to stay?

    • Pavlo Al

      That’s the question for Campos and the rest of “progressives” who did everything they could to prevent construction of new housings. Now they want to make Airbnb a scapegoat for their failed policies. It’s obvious someone is buying it.

      • Chuck

        You may be right about the failed housing policies of prior Mayors and supervisors but Campos got this one right.

  • The loss of distinction between “hosted” and “non-hosted” is a step backwards. Let’s not “throw the baby out with the bath water”… Prop F will drive many hosts underground to systems that lack verification and trusted communications… Is that what Prop F wants??

    • SFJAZZER

      I totally agree with you, Kevin. Before current Short Term Legislation went into effect in February 2015, alot of people were already doing short term renting in San Francisco. Also of people used to use Craigslist. Also real estate agencies and rental agencies have been doing this sort of thing for years and years and years. My own real estate agent, when I moved to San Francisco in 1992, told me if I bought a studio or a one bedroom because I didn’t have the income level to qualify for a two bedroom at that time, told me I could rent out that studio or 1 bedroom as a short term rental . Where were the authors of Prop F when it was totally illegal to do short -term renting?

  • Reid

    Campos is dead wrong. There are appox 8,000 units not on the rental market, that are also not on the short-term rental market, due to the onerous tenants rights regulations. Those are the regulations that need to be changed.

    • daemon

      If they’re not available because of regulations but could be making a profit for the owners, then it is the owners’ stubbornness that is to blame. It’s proof that conservative hubris is expensive. Or perhaps the owners are slumlords peddling slum rooms.

  • Meredith

    I would Vote yes on this proposition because AirBNB are purely supporting NO because it furthers their agenda. I really don’t like the tone this Patrick Hannan is taking either.

    • amyj1276

      So if some anti-choice zealot put a measure on the ballot and Planned Parenthood spent millions to “further their agenda,” you would vote for the anti-choice measure for that reason? Instead of voting based on people’s tones, perhaps you should vote based on careful analysis of a policy.

    • lfivepoints69

      Thousands of San Franciscans benefit from Airbnb as hosts (and as guests when traveling out of town).

      • JennyO

        Hurts FAR more people than it helps, not just in the short term but the abolishment of rent control is next.

        Will Air BNB care about “our privacy” and “allowing the current laws to work”?

        No. They will have gone public, made BILLIONS off their illegal (deigned “legal” by the Board of Supes) scheme truly and F all the rest of us .

  • fakeanonymousguest

    San Francisco is now Manhattan. You don’t have a right to be resident of San Francisco. You have to be able to afford it. The city needs to build affordable housing if they want to offer it to people, not make it harder for people to pay for the homes they already have by restricting how they choose to share their space.

    • rematrav

      Maybe move to Daly City where rents are less expensive.
      I think the existing zoning and land-use laws in SF already prohibit short-term rentals? They do in the South Bay.

      • Izsak

        Daly City isn’t less expensive, really.

        • rematrav

          How about Pacifica or Hayward or Vallejo?

          • Izsak

            Well yeah, but then you’re getting pretty far out there (Hayward and Vallejo) – Pacifica isn’t significantly less, by any stretch.

  • BLU109

    david campos (again) seeks to admonish people on which laws have been chosen and ipso facto will be enforced…vote NO on prop F and say NO to the campos agenda

  • Mark

    As a resident of the Ninth District, Campos’ office does not return calls or reply to emails on this subject. It was no surprise that he did not answer my question on air today.

    Namely, why are people who are only renting guest rooms and not removing units from rental stock also being included in this measure? That will hurt real families trying to make ends meet on their mortgage (my case), or their rents (my tenants’ case).

    It would be nice if my mortgage was limited to 2 1/2 months (75 days) per year, but since that is not case, the 75 day STR limit is an unfair cap.

    • rematrav

      What is your zoning? R-! zoning means single (not dual) family residence.

      • Mark

        Don’t know my zoning but there are mostly apt buildings and a hotel on my street

  • bitchshield

    If you have a garage sale a few times a year, no one will care. But if thousands of people turn their garages into retail stores, claiming that it’s their homes and they should do whatever they want, of course the city will have a problem with it. Of course retail outlets that follow zoning laws, business registration, employment regulations, and file appropriate taxes, are going to have an issue with it. Regulation exists for a reason. There’s no reason home owners and landlords should be able to engage in a business model and reap all the benefits while skirting all the applicable regulation. There’s no reason individual evicted and affected tenants should have to shoulder the burden of bringing suit and prove wrongdoing against this behemoth corporation. Short term rentals contribute to the hollowing out of cities (see Venice, Paris) where communities are destroyed to make way for lucrative tourism. Suck it up like the rest of us and get some roommates if it’s really that hard for you.

  • rematrav

    Airbnb’s business model violates existing zoning and land-use laws in most cities. R-! zoning means single family residence, not tourist accommodations. I can’t blame neighbors for calling them on it. How many businesses can simply disregard existing laws?

    • Pavlo Al

      Typical NIMBY arguments – existing zoning. Well, change it.

      • Izsak

        Troll.

        • rematrav

          He’s not a troll. He’s a shill paid by airbnb.

      • rematrav

        Great, a name caller. I’m a “NIMBY”. When you have to rely on ad hominem attacks, you’ve lost.
        Why not change the zoning BEFORE you start your business? That’s usually what happens.
        Ask the neighbors on that block about changing the zoning.

        • Pavlo Al

          Short-term rental doesn’t change zoning. Many business activities are permitted in RH-1 including childcare for up to12 kids. STR is one of those activities that is consistent with that zoning. That’s one.
          Second, educate yourself on the origins of zoning laws before using it as an argument.

          • rematrav

            That may be true in The City, I don’t know, but it’s not true in most cities where airbnb operates. R-1 zoning means single (not dual or multi-) family residence, and not tourist accommodations.

      • pastramiboy

        yeah, change it-but for now it’s zoned a particular way and every rental is a violation of zoning code.

  • Shannon Coulter

    Love you @airbnb but I love SF more. I support Prop F. You need to care more about the residents and character of cities.

    • lfivepoints69

      Airbnb allows San Francisco families to stay in their homes while sharing their guest rooms with visitors. Banning Airbnb would dramatically drive foreclosures and reduce the prosperity of all San Franciscans. NO ON F.

  • Froglivinglarge

    The Yes on F folks need to find a better spokesperson.

Sponsored by

Become a KQED sponsor