Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
Share
Statement issued regarding PHR suit
By JUDI BOWERS
A lawsuit challenging the private home rental ballot measure should be aggressively defended. But the city of Big Bear Lake encourages Jim McLean to take up the defense.
The suit filed by Citizens Protecting the Rights of Property Owners names the city of Big Bear Lake and the city clerk, Kathy Jefferies, as defendants. McLean, who is the proponent of the ballot measure, is named as a real party in interest.
CPRPRO claims California Elections Code was violated when McLean, owner of Apples Bed and Breakfast on Moonridge Road, collected the signatures to qualify the measure for the November ballot. The suit states that Jefferies, in her capacity as city clerk, approved the petitions in violation of the code. CPRPRO is asking for the court to invalidate the measure and remove it from the November ballot.
Private home rentals are homes rented for periods of less than 30 days. They must be registered with the city, be inspected and collect transient occupancy tax. McLean and other lodge owners have opposed private home rentals for a variety of reasons, which led to the ballot initiative.
The ballot initiative calls for more restrictions, stiffer penalties and tougher enforcement measures. It also calls for private home rentals to be approved by the Planning Commission after completing the conditional use permit process.
The city and CPRPRO assert the ballot measure if approved would financially devastate the city’s coffers and PHR rentals would go underground.
CPRPRO filed the suit regarding the measure in Big Bear Superior Court Feb. 6. The suit claims that the elections code requires the ballot title and summary to appear at the top of every signature page. CPRPRO obtained petition signature pages through the Freedom of Information Act with names redacted. The ballot title and summary appear on one page, but none of the others.
City Attorney Stephen Deitsch at the Feb. 12 council meeting read a statement at the direction of the City Council. The city will issue a formal response to the court regarding the CPRPRO challenge, Deitsch read. But the city won’t enter a defense motion to the challenge. Deitsch said the responsibility for defending the challenge lies with the initiative sponsors, the McLeans.
Following Deitsch’s statement, McLean read a letter penned by Councilman Bill Jahn and Councilwoman Liz Harris dated November 2006. Jahn and Harris’ letter touched on the Chamber of Commerce task force designed to search for common ground between the two sides of the private home rental issue. The letter asked the McLeans to consider not filing the petition to place the measure on the ballot and allow the task force to continue working toward a solution.
Jim McLean told the council Feb. 12 that the letter asked him to throw the election and was an attempt to alter the election process. He said Jahn is in the real estate field and Harris owned private home rentals, so it is clear where the two stand on the issue of private home rentals. McLean recommended they recuse themselves from discussions and action relating to PHRs.
McLean also said based on the statement read by Deitsch, he now knows where the city stands on the lawsuit. McLean told The Grizzly that he has not been formally served. The service was to his son, which McLean claims is not valid. McLean said his attorney is requesting service to his office in Las Vegas.
Local attorney Dixie Allison, who drafted the ballot measure for the McLeans, told the City Council she doesn’t believe the council understands how serious the community is about the business of private home rentals disrupting neighborhoods.
McLean told The Grizzly last week that if the court upholds CPRPRO’s claim and requires the measure to be removed from the November ballot, he will try again. But this time, McLean said he will seek to outlaw all private home rentals from areas of the city zoned residential.
Contact reporter Judi Bowers at 909-866-3456, ext. 137 or by e-mail at jbowers@bigbeargrizzly.net.
The suit filed by Citizens Protecting the Rights of Property Owners names the city of Big Bear Lake and the city clerk, Kathy Jefferies, as defendants. McLean, who is the proponent of the ballot measure, is named as a real party in interest.
CPRPRO claims California Elections Code was violated when McLean, owner of Apples Bed and Breakfast on Moonridge Road, collected the signatures to qualify the measure for the November ballot. The suit states that Jefferies, in her capacity as city clerk, approved the petitions in violation of the code. CPRPRO is asking for the court to invalidate the measure and remove it from the November ballot.
Private home rentals are homes rented for periods of less than 30 days. They must be registered with the city, be inspected and collect transient occupancy tax. McLean and other lodge owners have opposed private home rentals for a variety of reasons, which led to the ballot initiative.
The ballot initiative calls for more restrictions, stiffer penalties and tougher enforcement measures. It also calls for private home rentals to be approved by the Planning Commission after completing the conditional use permit process.
The city and CPRPRO assert the ballot measure if approved would financially devastate the city’s coffers and PHR rentals would go underground.
CPRPRO filed the suit regarding the measure in Big Bear Superior Court Feb. 6. The suit claims that the elections code requires the ballot title and summary to appear at the top of every signature page. CPRPRO obtained petition signature pages through the Freedom of Information Act with names redacted. The ballot title and summary appear on one page, but none of the others.
City Attorney Stephen Deitsch at the Feb. 12 council meeting read a statement at the direction of the City Council. The city will issue a formal response to the court regarding the CPRPRO challenge, Deitsch read. But the city won’t enter a defense motion to the challenge. Deitsch said the responsibility for defending the challenge lies with the initiative sponsors, the McLeans.
Following Deitsch’s statement, McLean read a letter penned by Councilman Bill Jahn and Councilwoman Liz Harris dated November 2006. Jahn and Harris’ letter touched on the Chamber of Commerce task force designed to search for common ground between the two sides of the private home rental issue. The letter asked the McLeans to consider not filing the petition to place the measure on the ballot and allow the task force to continue working toward a solution.
Jim McLean told the council Feb. 12 that the letter asked him to throw the election and was an attempt to alter the election process. He said Jahn is in the real estate field and Harris owned private home rentals, so it is clear where the two stand on the issue of private home rentals. McLean recommended they recuse themselves from discussions and action relating to PHRs.
McLean also said based on the statement read by Deitsch, he now knows where the city stands on the lawsuit. McLean told The Grizzly that he has not been formally served. The service was to his son, which McLean claims is not valid. McLean said his attorney is requesting service to his office in Las Vegas.
Local attorney Dixie Allison, who drafted the ballot measure for the McLeans, told the City Council she doesn’t believe the council understands how serious the community is about the business of private home rentals disrupting neighborhoods.
McLean told The Grizzly last week that if the court upholds CPRPRO’s claim and requires the measure to be removed from the November ballot, he will try again. But this time, McLean said he will seek to outlaw all private home rentals from areas of the city zoned residential.
Contact reporter Judi Bowers at 909-866-3456, ext. 137 or by e-mail at jbowers@bigbeargrizzly.net.
Share this Article
 |
 |
|
| Grant funds on the block | Citizens get a new ride |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of bigbeargrizzly.net.
Tim wrote on Feb 19, 2008 3:11 PM:
" If you outlaw private home rentals altogether, then where will full-time tenants live? If you only outlaw short-term private home rentals, then where will you draw the line as to the length of stay? 1 week, 1 month, 6 months?
Personally, I think this whole thing smells of nasty greed on the part of the lodge owners. Lodge owners already have a whole host of advantages over individual vacation home owners. Home owners are just trying to offset the cost of their getaways. Homeowners aren't profiting from tenants. That's a falacy. Most vacation home owners are in the red, while lodge owners are able to afford massive advertising budgets as well as legal budgets apparently. Lodge owners able to sell meals, gift items, tours, transportation, you name it. Individual home owners can't do any of that.
The bottom line is that lodge owners
are making money (and in some cases huge money) or they wouldn't be doing it, while most vacation home owners are going negative and just trying to offset the loss so they can hang on to a comfortable place that they enjoy visiting themselves, and not have to stay in some crowded, stuffy hotel when they're on vacation. "
Personally, I think this whole thing smells of nasty greed on the part of the lodge owners. Lodge owners already have a whole host of advantages over individual vacation home owners. Home owners are just trying to offset the cost of their getaways. Homeowners aren't profiting from tenants. That's a falacy. Most vacation home owners are in the red, while lodge owners are able to afford massive advertising budgets as well as legal budgets apparently. Lodge owners able to sell meals, gift items, tours, transportation, you name it. Individual home owners can't do any of that.
The bottom line is that lodge owners
are making money (and in some cases huge money) or they wouldn't be doing it, while most vacation home owners are going negative and just trying to offset the loss so they can hang on to a comfortable place that they enjoy visiting themselves, and not have to stay in some crowded, stuffy hotel when they're on vacation. "
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
Bob Pool wrote on Feb 13, 2008 6:07 PM: