By Kate Callen
A proposed ballot initiative to create a San Diego Vacation Home Operation Tax that would fund general services will be put before the City Council’s Rules Committee on October 22 by District 9 Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera.
A fact sheet about the proposal says it “ensures that those who own a vacation home or a STVR [short-term vacation rental] pay their fair share for taking limited housing stock off the rental or for-sale market.”
Revenues from the tax would be earmarked for housing, homelessness prevention, and infrastructure services. The measure would not apply to homes lived in by San Diego residents. Renters or homeowners who use their home as their primary residence or rent to long-term renters also would not be affected.
The Rules Committee will consider Elo-Rivera’s measure at its October 22 meeting. A press conference on the proposal will take place that morning.
If the Committee votes to draft a measure, it will consider the proposal again in January or February 2026. The full Council will give a final consideration in March on whether to adopt an ordinance to place the measure on the June 2026 ballot.
“While this is not a ‘special tax,’ we’re always looking at what other jurisdictions are doing in our effort to improve quality of life in San Diego,” said Molly Weber, Elo-Rivera’s chief of staff. “Many are responding to the short-term vacation rental issue with similar taxes.”
Weber said the proposal has early support from the San Diego Housing Federation. Elo-Rivera is in discussions with community stakeholder groups, she added, “and we have briefed the Mayor’s team.”
Former Councilmember Barbara Bry is working with Elo-Rivera on the measure, and she praised him for his leadership.
“I’d like to thank Councilmember Elo-Rivera for realizing that short-term rentals are cutting into the housing supply for San Diego families,” Bry said. “This type of tax will hopefully bring some of those units back onto the market for long-term renters, and it will also provide much needed revenue for the City of San Diego.”
Widespread public anger over the worsening shortage of affordable housing will be one factor in the proposal’s chances of success. The notorious lobbying machinery of Airbnb and the short-term rental industry is another.
In 2018, Airbnb led an aggressive industry campaign to quash city regulations that would have curbed proliferating vacation rentals. After 62,000 signatures were collected to qualify a ballot referendum opposing the regulations, the City Council withdrew them.
More recently, Airbnb supported a July 31 fundraiser for YIMBY Democrats of San Diego. The event flyer gave a big shout-out to the vacation rental conglomerate: “We would like to extend a special thank you to Airbnb, our presenting sponsor this year.”
Hmm. The amount of homeless people counted in the yearly PIT count is SO similar to the amount of units Sean believes they can tax.
San Diego Region (County-wide), the 2024 Point-in-Time Count recorded:
• 10,605 people experiencing homelessness.
Wondering why rents are so high that people can’t afford to rent anymore? Look no further than our Airbnb exacerbated housing shortage.
The YIMBY housing shortage orthodoxy never addresses these critical factors. Rather than overbuilding, which is the simplistic, unproven, unworkable and unsustainable solution to the housing crisis (and only benefits big developers and their investors), we need to embrace these alternative and workable solutions. Strictly limiting short term rentals, and banning private equity companies and foreign nationals from buying up residential properties, would free up tens of thousands of units of existing housing for residents who desperately need it.
How much will the tax be and how much will it raise?
Does anyone really think giving Gloria and the City more money to address homelessness and housing will really change anything based on their past track record? This is the same crowd that thinks the bonus ADU program was good policy.
Elo Rivera likes to tax and fee people but is short on specifics on how the money would be spent.
This how bureaucratic bloat happens – collect the money first and figure out how to spend it later.
What better motivation to entice electeds to increase the number of STR licenses they can issue, than to increase the tax revenue STR’s bring to a city with a glaring debt and mismanagement problem.
Far more likely that there will be a substantial decrease in the number STRs.
I am writing to support an important policy proposal that aims to significantly increase the short-term rental (STR) tax across San Diego as a strategic measure to mitigate homelessness across the City. This proposal is carefully framed to highlight the potential benefits while addressing concerns related to property rights.
By way of example, La Jolla’s STR market generates over $7.4 million monthly, with more than 1,400 active listings and an average daily rate of $664. This robust tourism demand not only presents opportunities for homeowners but also reveals an untapped potential for substantial public revenue. Given the growing homelessness crisis in San Diego, this revenue could be a game-changer.
A significantly increased STR tax—beyond the current Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)—has the potential to generate millions in new revenue. Specifically, a 5–10% supplemental STR tax could yield $100 to 130 million annually. These funds could be earmarked for housing-first programs, shelter expansion, and mental health services, all of which are critical in addressing homelessness.
Moreover, this targeted STR tax would promote housing equity. STRs are known to reduce long-term rental availability, contributing to displacement and rent inflation. By redirecting STR profits toward housing solutions, we can help rebalance the market and protect our most vulnerable residents.
It’s also crucial to note that STRs benefit from public infrastructure, safety services, and tourism promotion. Therefore, a higher tax ensures that these benefits are reciprocated through reinvestment in community needs. This alignment of private gain with public good is essential for sustainable development.
Of course, there are property rights concerns that opponents may raise. Some might view the taxation as overreach, potentially discouraging entrepreneurship. Others may fear reduced profitability or market competitiveness, and there are those who worry about setting a precedent for broader taxation of residential assets.
However, this proposal does not challenge the right to rent—it challenges the notion that private gain should be untethered from public responsibility. Property rights are indeed vital, but they exist within a civic framework. When STRs contribute to housing scarcity and social displacement, taxation becomes a tool of stewardship, not punishment.
San Diego has the opportunity to lead in demonstrating how prosperity and compassion can coexist. A well-designed STR tax—paired with transparent oversight and community engagement—can transform tourism revenue into housing stability, honoring both kuleana and economic vitality.
Thanks Gary! I wonder what the Mission Beach STR market would reveal? Here is a site about Return On Investments (ROI) for Airbnb’s in our city. 9067 active listings.
https://www.airroi.com/report/world/united-states/california/san-diego
I think this is a bad idea. If the city begins to receive a lot more revenue from this, it will ensure the STVRs are permanent because once they get used to that money, they will never go back. We need to keep fighting the whole STVR system and get rid of it eventually. The city is already addicted to $50 million plus they already get from STVRs, any more would be nuts.
Don’t people with Short Term Rentals already pay a fee every year? Didn’t he also say that this would be for anyone who owns a second home that they don’t live in? You know any fee on a second home that is rented out will just be passed on to the renter and that will just make rents higher than they were with the benefit going to the City coffers.
No additional tax if the second home is rented out, and not a short=term rental.
It would be surprising if many of the high-end STRs would have any impact on affordable housing. Reducing the number of STR licenses could mean lower end STRs would be removed for housing stock. To keep the revenue equal, lower STR numbers with a higher tax per unit to put pressure on the lower end market.
As with the Convention Center tax that is being collected, but no expansion is now in the pipeline, additional STR taxes would probably end up in the General Fund where Gloria can grab it to dover excessive spending of his regime.
I had heard that STRs in either OB or the entire 92106/92107 zips codes are in the range of 7%. That is much above the city limit or 1%. I believe a percentage limit should apply to either zip codes or planning districts with a 5% mark as the lowest reduction that should be accepted.
The words ‘Leadership’ and ‘Sean Elo Rivera’ should not be used in the same sentence. Starting with his boss Todd Gloria, he and the whole city council have totally mismanaged the city budget and now the residents of San Diego are apparently going to be ‘nickeled and dimed’ to death. Every time you turn your head they are coming up with new ways to tax people and add fees to pay for the mess that they created. Trash collection fees, parking fees, vacation rental taxes etc. …… There is never a clear direction of how the money will be spent and no accountability when the money is mismanaged and specifically stated goals are not achieved. All this nonsense about tourists using city resources (EMT, Fire, Lifeguards etc.) is complete hogwash. San Diego is one of the most popular tourist destinations in this country, and already benefits significantly either directly or indirectly from the huge influx of additional revenue (including specific taxes that tourists already pay such as TOT) that ALL tourists bring to our city, and that if correctly managed is more than enough to offset these costs. If we as taxpayers agree that we need to shoulder the burden of the homeless problem, then that should not be shouldered by a specific group of people such as those who are trying to earn a living and need to park their cars downtown at great expense while they are at work, or those who own a vacation rental property. It should be shouldered by EVERYONE in San Diego. Maybe when EVERYONE feels the pain of this consistently mismanaged problem they will make their voices heard at the ballot box. There is a reason why the proposed sales tax increase failed ……… The general public is tired of paying to clean up the city’s mismanaged budget.
City is far, I was going to say perfect, but average may be more appropriate. On the other hand, here we are and the City needs revenue. Whole home short term rentals concentrated at the coast are a causative factor for homelessness, and therefore, to be fair, those bringing in huge profits from their STRs should help pay the costs. Whole home STRs are a negative cost benefit to the City and should be banned as has been the case in other cities.
We don’t need a tax, just stick each homeless person in each Airbnb and let them squat.
This solves two problems at the same time.
The City already limits the number of licenses issued for short-term rentals. Instead of adding a tax to fill the City coffers if there is an actual problem, just reduce the number of licenses issued. Or perhaps the licenses can only be for a limited time. It will be interesting to see what the voters decide if it gets on the ballot. Limited the number of licenses does not have to go to the ballot.
Like many people, I received a flyer from our friends at the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce which, apparently, just became aware that the city council has doubled down on taxing/fee-ing/chiseling residents. It list briefly the trash bait-switch, the parking gouge and then goes on a tear about the proposed STVR tax. And provides me with a handy form to mail to a city council member.
It’s lovely to have a new ally!
I’m sure that AirBnB’s membership is just a coincidence……
I’ve heard that residents in multiple city council districts got this. All I have to do is buy a stamp.