Los Angeles

L.A. City Council moves to require hotel developers replace lost housing

In continuous efforts to mend the city’s housing disparity, hotel developers may soon face a new requirement.

Photo of a microphone in front of the Los Angeles City Council members, as they wait for their meeting to start.
Los Angeles City Council members wait to start a Los Angeles City Council meeting on Wednesday, Oct. 12, 2022. (AP Photo/Ringo H.W. Chiu)

An initiative that will require hotel developers to replace any permanent housing lost due to hotel construction was advanced by a 14-0 vote of the Los Angeles City Council on Tuesday.

While the vote for what was titled Item 35 did not solidify the ordinance, it does allow the council to submit a draft ordinance to the city attorney, who will report back to the council with an official ordinance for voting. According to the L.A. Times, the move comes after City Council President Paul Krekorian came to an agreement with the hotel workers’ union, Unite Here Local 11, to replace a ballot initiative that would have required hotels to provide vacant rooms to unhoused individuals.

The new ordinance will not require hotels to provide housing or disclose room vacancy to the city, but rather require hotel developers and city officials to consider how these developments are impacting the livelihood of the greater Los Angeles community.

“This ordinance would move us significantly forward in requiring developers to replace housing lost to hotel construction,” Krekorian said during Tuesday’s city council meeting.

The ordinance also contains verbiage that will require home renters and Airbnb owners to obtain a permit from the Los Angeles Police Department, in efforts to better monitor public safety in rented spaces.

These permits would “strengthen public oversight over short term rentals, hotels and other properties that create public nuisances,” Krekorian said.

Not all at the meeting shared his positive sentiment towards the ordinance.

While voting yes on the item, First District Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez expressed her distaste for how the added labor will impact the police department.

“I just think it’s an additional load that seems unnecessary to add already to all the work that [the LAPD carries],” Hernandez said. “It doesn’t feel feasible, considering how hard it’s been to recruit.”

According to Krekorian, additional studies and discussions on permit fees and labor distribution will continue to take place.