San Diego Rules Committee Meeting Summary (Oct 22, 2025)
San Diego Rules Committee Meeting - October 22, 2025
The City of San Diego Rules Committee convened on October 22, 2025, to address routine administrative items, receive financial reports, and deliberate on policy updates and a significant proposed ballot measure regarding short-term rentals. The committee unanimously approved the consent agenda and a policy update to improve transparency regarding the City Funds Commission. A major portion of the meeting was dedicated to an initial review of a proposed vacation home operation tax, which generated extensive public testimony divided between supporters citing the housing crisis and opponents fearing economic harm to small business owners. The committee voted to proceed with further analysis of the tax proposal.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes Approval: Unanimously approved the minutes from the July 9, 2025, Rules Committee meeting. Councilmember Lopez Rivera moved the item, with Councilmember Campillo seconding. One public comment was heard regarding the apprehension of residents by federal authorities and the lack of clarity on holding facilities.
- Contract Amendment: Unanimously approved the second amendment to the contract for the electronic filing system.
Public Comments & Testimony
-
Non-Agenda Public Comment:
- Scott Chipman expressed concern over city mismanagement, citing a 35% budget increase against 1% population growth, code enforcement failures, and parking district fund issues. He expressed full support for the current police chief despite understaffing.
- Paul Krueger urged the committee to be more vigilant regarding surplus lands and park plans, specifically criticizing the mayor's office effort to transfer Mission Bay land for housing and noting the council's perceived abdication of its independent role.
- Laurie Saldonia expressed opposition to the increasing use of license plate readers and surveillance technology, arguing that local control over such data is impossible once contracts are signed with private data miners, leading to violations of civil rights and criminalization of the poor.
-
Agenda Item 4 (Vacation Home Tax) Public Testimony:
-
Supporters:
- Jonathan Castillo (San Diego Youth Services) expressed full support, stating the tax would fund prevention programs for youth to keep them out of foster care and homelessness.
- Zach Schlegel (PAF) expressed strong support, noting the tax is needed to replace lost federal emergency housing vouchers and stabilize services for homeless families.
- Michael Zuket (Municipal Employees Association) expressed strong support, characterizing the tax as highly progressive and essential for funding critical city services without increasing the cost of living for 99% of residents.
- Gary Wanacott (Mission Beach Town Council) expressed strong support, citing city studies showing short-term rentals (STRs) cause artificial rent inflation and that the cost of housing homeless individuals exceeds the TOT revenue collected from STRs.
- Bridget Browning (San Diego Imperial County Labor Council) expressed support, framing the tax as a necessary step to prioritize housing as a human right for the working class over corporate greed.
- Carol Kim (San Diego County Building and Construction Trades Council) expressed support, arguing that without disrupting the status quo to address income inequality and housing crises, working people will continue to be squeezed.
- Liliana Soriano (Youth Will) expressed support on the moral grounds that housing is a human right, not a vacation asset, and criticized the "selfish" mindset of opponents.
- Tyler Andre (Veteran/Small Business Owner) expressed support, stating the tax is fair and simple, ensuring those not using homes for living contribute to city services.
- Nicole Lilly (Our Time to Act) expressed support, asserting that 99% of residents would support the measure and that housing should not be a speculative investment.
- Union Representatives (San Diego Firefighters Local 145, Teamsters Local 986, Abston Local 127) expressed support, highlighting that the revenue would improve public safety response times, provide essential equipment for city employees, and fund critical infrastructure.
- Jesse Schmidt (Coalition for Equitable Development) expressed strong support, calling the measure a step toward accountability and stopping speculators from removing homes from the supply.
-
Opponents:
- Scott Chipman (Repeated testimony on Item 4) expressed strong opposition, calling the tax "ridiculous," an overreach of municipal authority, and a tool to generate class envy by punishing lawful property ownership.
- Jesse Garcia & Jorge Viramontes (Carpenters Union Local 619 / Individual) expressed opposition, with the union citing partnerships with Airbnb and individual hosts arguing the tax destroys their ability to afford their primary mortgages and family homes.
- Anton Ewing (Attorney) expressed opposition, suggesting the tax is designed to be onerous to encourage a federal lawsuit and noting the "power to tax is the power to destroy."
- Colette Stark, Kyle Miller, Greg Smith, Kimberly Jackson, Manuela Bump Marillo, Justine Murray, Fong Bui, Jaime Gonzalez, Nicole Bonzel, Sarah Cardenas, John, Heather Yorger, Michael Ma, Dallas Brown, Michael Palermo, Scott Hafner, Jeff McGurn, Roger Zhang, Braden Moreno, Suzanne Christensen, Debbie Anderson, Carrie Chambers, John Benedict, Rosalind Hafner, Kevin Knickerbocker, James Hemmeck, Jennifer Ragsdale, Aaron Beaard, Carlos Oscaba, Stephanie Lloyd, Paul Krueger (Repeated testimony), Greg Wadsworth, Laura Roberts, Greg Ross, Ellie Cose, Bob Otley, and others expressed strong opposition. Key arguments included: the tax will crush small businesses and family hosts who rely on this income to stay in San Diego; it is a punishment disguised as a tax; it will drive up tourism costs and hurt the local economy; it ignores existing tax burdens (TOT, licensing fees); and it fails to address the root causes of homelessness, likely causing a net loss in revenue due to units exiting the market or converting to long-term rentals without increasing supply.
- Heidi Ventura, Jonathan Love, Carol Weiler, Sandra Cardenas, Heather Yorger, Michael Ma shared personal stories of being middle-class residents who rely on STR income to pay mortgages and survive, expressing opposition to the financial burden the tax would place on them.
-
Discussion Items
- Item 3 (Council Policy 000-26 Amendment): Staff recommended reducing the frequency of City Funds Commission reports from semi-annual to annual to match current practice and adding requirements for narrative summaries from distributing departments (Library/Parks) regarding how funds are spent. Councilmember Lakava emphasized the need for transparency on how funds are actually spent by the public.
- Item 4 (Vacation Home Operation Tax Proposal):
- Councilmember Ila Rivera presented the proposal, stating the framework would apply to second homes and tier 3/4 short-term rentals (whole homes) while explicitly excluding primary residences, long-term renters, and homeowners renting rooms to themselves. He argued the tax would generate revenue to restore balance to the housing market and fund services, asserting it is not about punishment but accountability for profit-driven investors.
- Independent Budget Analyst (IBA) highlighted factors affecting revenue, including tax structure, exemptions, market response (owners changing behavior), and potential loss of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue if units convert to long-term leases or sell.
- Councilmember Campillo expressed opposition to moving the item forward at this stage. He argued the proposal relies on optimistic revenue assumptions, would likely cause a net revenue loss due to market exit, punishes local small business owners who are the majority of hosts, and undermines the local economy by raising costs for tourists and residents alike. He criticized the timing of the June ballot, arguing it violates the spirit of Measure L by excluding the majority of voters.
- Council President Pro Tem Lee expressed support for continuing the conversation, acknowledging the city's severe fiscal deficit. She noted that while the proposal has merit, significant questions remain regarding revenue direction, enforcement, and the specific impact on different neighborhoods. She urged further analysis of the fiscal impacts and data from other cities.
Key Outcomes
- Consent Agenda: Approved unanimously (Motion by Lopez Rivera, Second by Campillo).
- Item 3 (Policy Amendment): Recommended to Council. Motion by Councilmember Lakava, Seconded by Councilmember Lopez Rivera. Passed unanimously (3-0, members absent: Moreno).
- Item 4 (Vacation Home Tax Proposal): The committee voted to move forward with the recommendation to have the Council District 9 office work with the IBA, City Treasurer, and City Attorney to analyze the proposal and prepare ballot language for further consideration. The motion passed 3-1.
- Vote Tally:
- In Favor: Councilmembers Lakava, Lopez Rivera, and Campello (Note: Transcript indicates Campillo voted against, but the final vote count says 3-1 with Campillo voting no. Correction based on text flow: The text says "Councilmember Campio [Campillo]... I have no problem... I can't support this" and then "That passes 311 with Councilmember Campia voting no" (Campio/Campillo). The vote was 3 for (Lakava, Lopez Rivera, Pro Temp Lee - though the transcript says "Motion by Ila Rivera, 2nd by myself [Lakava]... passes 311 with Councilmember Campia voting no and Councilmember Moreno absent". Wait, the chair is Lakava. The vote count says 3-1. The members present were Lakava (Chair), Lopez Rivera, Campillo, and Pro Temp Lee. If Campillo voted no and Moreno absent, and 3 voted yes, then the Yes votes were Lakava, Lopez Rivera, and Pro Temp Lee. The text says "Motion by Councilmember Ilo Rivera... Second by myself [Lakava]... passes 311 with Councilmember Campia voting no". This implies the 3rd yes vote was Council President Pro Tem Lee.
- Revised Vote Tally: For: Lakava, Lopez Rivera, Pro Temp Lee. Against: Campillo. Absent: Moreno. (3-1).
- Vote Tally:
- Next Steps: The Council District 9 office will coordinate fiscal analysis with the IBA and City Attorney. The proposal will return to the Rules Committee for a second review before potentially going to the full City Council for a decision on the June 2026 ballot.
- Adjournment: Meeting adjourned to Wednesday, November 19, 2025. Remote non-agenda comments were taken after adjournment of the main agenda. (Note: A technical delay occurred where Lori Saldonia was cut off from speaking again, but the chair noted she had already utilized her in-person comment time).
Note: A discrepancy exists in the transcript regarding the final vote count. The Chair states the motion passed 3-1 with Councilmember Campillo voting no and Councilmember Moreno absent. The members present were Chair Lakava, Councilmember Lopez Rivera, Councilmember Campillo, and Council President Pro Tem Lee. If Campillo voted no, the 3 'Yes' votes must have come from Lakava, Lopez Rivera, and Pro Temp Lee.
Meeting Transcript
All right, good morning, everyone. We're going to get this party started. Good morning, and welcome to the Rules Committee. Committee meeting of October twenty second, twenty twenty-five. I am Joel Acaba, Council Member for District One, and Chair of the Committee. Our committee lays on Sarah Jordan. We'll go over instruction for today's meeting. Sarah? Thank you, Chair Lakava. Well, members of the public are able to attend the meetings in person. This meeting is being televised and live streamed on the city's website, and Council administration will continue to make arrangements for the public to comment using the Zoom webinar platform. Members of the public who wish to provide virtual testimony must enter the virtual queue by raising their hand before the virtual queue closes. This will allow for better meeting management between the two platforms and ensure the committee is able to manage and conduct city business. Uh I want to remind everyone about the city's practices and procedures for public comment at both city council and committee meetings. We certainly welcome the public's participation at our public meetings. Speakers may address the council during public comment, also in connection with a specific item of business on the agenda. However, the city must make sure that no one person or group of people disrupt the meeting in a way that prohibits other speakers from expressing their ideas, and that is yellings, talking over other speakers or speaking beyond your allotted time are examples of behavior that disrupts the meeting. So to make sure that everyone here has an opportunity to address the council and the committee. And if we have to repeat this process of warning and recessing the meeting, we won't have to do that, right? All members of the public will be excused from chambers, credential media would be allowed to remain. Again, we have these practices and procedures to protect the rights of other speakers who wish to address the council and to allow the council to conduct the public's business. Thank you for your indulgence on that. I will now call the rules committee meeting of Wednesday, October 22nd, 2025 to order and call the roll. Vice Chair, Council President Pro Tem Lee is in the building, and I know he will join us shortly. Councilmember Campillo? Here. Councilmember Moreno is absent, and Councilmember Ilo Rivera. And I'm present also attending the meeting today, Julian Andalina with the Office of the Independent Budget Analyst, Cathy Steinman with the Office of the City Attorney. Matt Yeah Yagin with the Office of Mayor Tagloria, Abby Reuters, our committee consultant. Sarah, please continue with public comment instructions. Thank you, Chair Lakava. If you're in person, please complete a speaker slip located at the entrance of chambers and place it on the top of the box indicated at the table at the front of the room. Please do so in a timely manner to ensure proper meeting management in-person testimony will conclude before virtual testimony begins, and members of the public can also join the webinar by computer, tablet, or smartphone by accessing the link, which is listed online in the preamble language of the agenda on the city's webpage. If you need to participate via telephone, you may dial 1669-2545252. Inputting webinar ID 161-232-7007 pound. This information is also available on the agenda and it will appear on the screen during the public comment period for each agenda item. Please note that if you're watching via City TV 24 or online, there may be delay. Please participate via the audio on your phone and mute your TV or computer when it is your turn to speak. If you wish to speak to a particular item, please wait for that item to be called and then raise your hand to speak by tapping the raise your hand icon if you're on Zoom or if you're a call-in participant by pressing star nine on your cell phone or landline. If you raise your hand during a non-comment period, your hand will be lowered. Chair. All right. Thank you, uh Sarah, for reviewing those instructions. A quorum is now present. We will take up non-agenda public, but because of the item and how many folks are in chambers, we will only take non-agenda public comment for those that are in chambers right now, and we will take up remote uh non-agenda comment at the end of today's session. I want to make sure that we get through this uh agenda here in a timely way and get you all back to where you need to be. So again, we're gonna take non-agenda public comment only for those folks that are in chambers right now. Council members respect and appreciate the public's input and are fully committed to protecting every participant's free speech rights at council and committee meetings. So, Sarah, please proceed with non-agenda public comment only for those that are in chambers right now. Thank you, Chair.
openpublica.com