Our next speaker is Antje Weishheimer. And Antje kindly also gave a lecture last week. She's at EASMWF and the University of Oxford. And in her free time, Antje likes to ramble the English countryside. Thank you, Judith. Nice memories from years back when you were in England. Thanks for all the possibility opportunity to speak. Let me share my screen. Can you see that? Okay, Judith. Yeah, perfect. Okay, so I'm gonna talk a little bit about some recent work I've been doing with my colleagues from EASMWF and also from the Bureau of Meteorology in Australia on multi-decadal variability in long range, only new predictions during the 20th century. And so the motivation for this really is, I mean, as I'm sure you all know, that any new ENSO is arguably the most predictable climate mode at seasonal time scales. And it provides the scientific basis for global seasonal climate predictions. And over the last years and decades, significant progress has been made in our understanding of ENSO and the complexity of ENSO, but also in the development of the observing system, systems, the model development of couple GCMs of data assimilation techniques to improve the initialization of forecasts. And it's probably fair to say that current forecast models can provide effective predictions of an Indian woman cold events approximately a year had six to 12 months ahead. Estimates of this type of predictability and so skill are commonly based on retrospective forecast, most commonly over the last two or three decades, which results in an overall quite small sample size of ENSO events. They come with a substantial uncertainties in the skill estimates. On top of this problem is this small sample size, decadal scale changes in ENSO background states can make certain decades less predictable than others. And these background fluctuations can be seen as some spontaneously generated multi-decadal variations in ENSO diversity. So for example, I mean, I listed a few papers, all the papers on this topic here, changes in a tropical Pacific mean state related to the equatorial thermocline, they have been suggested as a source of inter-decadal modulation of the amplitude of inter-annual variability and survivability with an intensification of the ENSO signal observed in the second half of the 20th century. Especially the papers by Kurtman and Chopf here and others looked a bit more in detail of how changes in the ENSO amplitude can affect ENSO predictability. And they proposed a relationship between the amplitude and the variability and based on some sort of simple models at a time which sort of could be explained with the classical theory of the delayed oscillator mechanism which robustly maintains self-sustained oscillation that drive the SSTs anomalies and so on. But also stochastic noise from the atmosphere, for instance, through westerly wind burst can influence SST anomalies. And it was shown that these effect them stronger during epochs and the delayed oscillator is perhaps damped by colder SSTs leading into overall reduced predictability. So an in-person attempt to re-forecast historical ENSO events was done in the sort of seminal paper by Chen et al, 2004, who run the Zebjörg and Cain model by initializing with some reconstructed SST data. So the Zebjörg and Cain model, sort of model of the coupled pacifical tropical ocean atmosphere. And they showed in that network that the ENSO predictability depends on the time period over which it's estimated and that periods with high skill were dominated by strong ENSO events. And yeah, I mean, basically motivated by these earlier studies, we here try to use a state of the art modern now with our standards nowadays, modern dynamical forecasting system, the ECMWF forecasting system and try to revise where we are in terms of predictability based on these earlier works with the more idealistic model setups. So the purpose here of this work is two-fold in a sense that we'd like to explore long range retrospective ENSO predictions in the 20th century. And when I say long range, I mean up to two years with the state of the art dynamical seasonal forecasting system. But we also wanted to test sensitivities to the ocean observing system and to atmospheric force things here. So what we did is we created a set of hindcasts we forecast of the 20th century. We call them CS5, 20C, CS5 because they were done with the ECMWFs. It was a version of ECMWFs operational seasonal forecasting system, CS5. A version meaning we're using the same model as such but we run it in a lower resolution because we couldn't afford the higher resolution of the operational forecast. So it's the resolution of TCO 199, 91 vertical levels. That's roughly how many kilometers? I think it was the order of 60 kilometers. And the ocean version, the ocean model has a resolution of one degree with 42 levels. We run forecasts during the 20th century here over the period from 1901 to 2010 for two start dates per year. We initialize on the 1st of May and the 1st of November over these 110 years and let the model run for 24 months. So we have these biennial forecasts here. There's an ensemble size of 10 members because the focus here was really on the new. This was possible due to the availability of the CRR-20C coupled reanalysis from ESMWF which covered exactly this periods which we use to initialize these coupled predictions re-forecast just a few words on the CRR-20C reanalysis. So it's a coupled reanalysis that comprises the atmosphere, land but also wave, ocean and sea ice. It assimilates only surface pressure and marine winds in the atmosphere and for the ocean it assimilates subsurface temperatures and salinity profiles. So with this data, we created our re-forecast experiment our control experiments as labeled CS5-20C. This table here gives an overview of the initial conditions. So in this control experiment the atmospheric land initial conditions as well as the ocean and sea ice initial conditions come from this coupled reanalysis coupled CRR-20C that uses data assimilation atmospheric forcing it's a coupled setup but we then run some sensitivity experiments with a similar setup where we tested the influence of the ocean observations. So we have experiments without data assimilation node DA in the ocean which use the same atmosphere and land initial conditions from CRR-20C and the atmospheric forcing. So this is not a coupled, there wasn't a coupled setup in the initialization came from also from CRR-20C. This is the orange, the second line here. And then we have two experiments where we force the ocean initial conditions with a different atmospheric forcing and instead of coming from CRR-20C it comes from IRR-20C which is the previous generation of atmospheric reanalysis of the 20th century, which was atmosphere only. So they have the forcing that the ocean initial conditions saw is different and we have two experiments here one with ocean data assimilation and one without. So we're interested in the skill and here is perhaps an overview plot of how the NENU 3.4 SST Ensemble Mean Anomaly Correlation skill has changed over the 20th century over our hind cast period based on the November 1st initialization here and let me talk you through this plot. So we see on the x-axis the time of the re-forecast period it goes from 1901 to 2010 and we compute the skill over 30 year moving windows, hind cast windows. So each point in this plot is estimated over a 30 year window and plotted at the center in the middle of that 30 year window. That's why you have these, you know the wide ends at the beginning and the end of the period. And then the y-axis shows the lead time of the forecast our two years and it goes from bottom to top. So we start in November so the first season here is DJF and this is a three months moving window across the lead time here in the vertical axis. The colors indicate the level of skill, the correlation skill and the dashed areas are periods in terms of hind cast periods and lead time where the skill is not significant according to a symbol T test. So what do we see? We see lots of interesting things. You can look at this plot from various ways and let me just start with one perhaps. So if we do cross sections here for different epochs in the hind cast period, you can see how the skill behavior over lead time changes. And this is shown in a plot below. So if we take the last data point here plotted at around 95 which includes the data from the last 30 years in our hind cast period and we do a cross section across lead time. We end up with the red curve in the plot below here. So we see the solid lines is from our simulations and the dotted line, the red dotted line is a simple persistence forecast persisting the initial conditions, the SSTs. And we see that we have to, you know, after the first end so peak season, we reach the predictability sort of barrier, spring barrier here. But after that, we have quite a long, like almost a year long period of a plateau of very high levels of skill, highly significant here. And then we reach the second spring barrier and then we lose the skill after that for the latest forecast period. If we go to say a period here in the middle where we see that we lose lots of skill after the first spring barrier, here's lots of non-significant skill lead times here. This is the blue line in the plot below. And we see already right from the beginning the behavior is quite different. The skill drops much quicker and we observe also like a plateau of skill but is hardly significant here. And it shows like quite reduced levels of skill after this spring barrier out on seasonal, longer seasonal timescales. And then at the very beginning of the century, interestingly, we see in the yellow line here, the first on the seasonal timescales, the first months behave relatively similar to our most recent periods, high levels of skill. We reach a plateau after the spring barrier which is a bit lower than the one for the most recent period but still significant in terms of levels of skill. And then again, and this sort of after the second spring barrier we lose that skill here as well. I mentioned that we did... Oh yeah, this is another way of looking at it. Of course, cross sections, not across lead time but across hind cast period. So this is now looking at the first winter season, peak season of El Nino lead time to four months, cross section here as indicated by the black line. Just look at the red line for now which is our control experiment. And you see similar to findings the people from CPC found. We have a long period from the most recent decades to the roughly 1960s where the level of El Nino skill forecast here is constantly very high. You see that is 0.9 something here for a long period of time. And then around the 1960s, the skill drops a bit and there's a prolonged period of a few decades where the skill is lower to roughly the 1930s and then the skill goes up again and the skill at the beginning of the century is very high. It's almost as high as at the current for the latest periods in that century. The gray ban show gives an idea of the uncertainty. Of course, with the correlation skill we have an upper limit of the uncertainty there at one but you see that also the uncertainty has much increased during that period when we have a bit of a drop of skill. I should say, because this is El Nino when I speak about a drop of skill this is still high levels of skill in terms of other parts of the world. We're still talking about 0.99 correlation skill in the periods where it's lower. You have about three minutes or so to wrap up. Okay, thank you, Judith. If you look at the second DJF season so this is then lead time 14 to 16 months we can do a similar cross section here. Again, just look at the red line and we see some interesting variability as well and during that period in the 1930s, 40s the skill then becomes non-significant here where it is, it still is at the beginning of the century and at the end of the century here. Just to mention we did these experiments to test the sensitivity to the ocean observing system the data assimilation system and we see on the left-hand side at the top the experiment I just showed you the control one the same plot and below there is the experiment where we don't assimilate ocean observations for the initial conditions and you see if you compare these two you see the impact that the ocean observations have for skill especially in the second half of the 20th century when we have relatively good observations in the ocean we see how beneficial the ocean observing system is on these lead times after the first spring barrier in particular but we also see that the levels of skill at the beginning of the century are not much affected by the changes in the observing system or the assimilation of these data here. Just briefly on the right-hand side you see the sensitivity to the atmospheric forcing so using a different atmosphere to force the ocean initial data and there we see a clear sensitivity at the beginning of the century where the sensitivity is most pronounced here and again you can do all kinds of games of doing cross-section and we see for these sensitivities we see a clear separation perhaps it's clear as to see on the bottom right plot that the two lines that have the highest skill are the ones that use data assimilation in the last decades and the last part of our hind cusp periods whereas the two simulations without data assimilation really have lower skill here. This is very different at the beginning of the century at the beginning of the century it's the simulation that used the forcing from the zero 20C atmosphere at a higher skill and the ones that used the forcing from the other atmospheric data set have a lower skill so there's some interesting sensitivity behavior here over time. Also interesting but I won't talk about it now is the behavior for different initialization time of the year in the May start days as we all know and so it has strong sensitivity to a seasonal cycle and it is clearly visible in these other start dates but just to mention as a possible explanation for some of this behavior and I mentioned it in the introduction perhaps we know that the ANSO amplitude the ANSO inter-annual variability has undergone a strong increasing trend from the middle of the century to the end of the century this is here shown in the black line again 30 year moving window and this was hypothesized that this increase in the amplitude the signal strengths is one of the reason why predictability why these skill measures went up for these periods as well and well I won't have time to talk about loads of this I just want to show you if you look at the red line this is the similar estimate from the model that forecast with a lead time two to four months and it's good to see the model are able to simulate that increase in ANSO variability in the second half of the century as well but you also see that at the beginning of the century when the amplitude was also relatively high that is not so well predicted on seasonal time scales with our models here and if we look at the other colors these are the longer lead times we lose that behavior and the amplitude completely but let me briefly summarize so I was trying to show you some results from an interesting data set that we recently produced using the ESMWF forecasting system over a long period hind cast period from 1901 onwards we looked at the multi-decadal variability of ANSO skill and found constant and quite high levels of skill from at least the 1960s onwards up to the first spring barrier and we also noticed a clear benefit of the recent ocean observations with a skill extending up to the second spring barrier here 18 months but also saw a pronounced intermediate drop in skill between the 1930s and 1960s and then before that the earlier decades of the 20th century high skill despite the poor observational coverage which is interesting we saw some sensitivity to the atmospheric forcing especially for the first part of the century and the importance of the spring barrier especially for the May star dates I didn't talk much about it but that was some interesting motivation of maybe looking at longer term predictions skillful predictions also for like perhaps the future operational systems here and there are several hypotheses for the courses of these non-stationarity in the skill to do with the amplitude the interannual variability and we saw the last slide some of these behavior but also with changes in the intrinsic persistence characteristics which I didn't show here but we're looking at these and variability of the discharge and recharge strengths in the endso-cycle and with this I thank you very much Thank you very much We have time for a question or so please oh yeah Zane has one please go ahead Hi Anci I really like that talk I was wondering if you looked at the thoughts some of the talks yesterday when you think about this potential predictability in these runs you know can you have a bunch of ensemble members so have you have you thought about that at all and whether that you maybe wouldn't expect it to change over time but then again like I don't know what to expect so have you looked at that or thought about that Good question Zane I think I did just too many data to remember at the moment I didn't notice anything spectacular but I should have updated myself a little bit on this In terms of non-similarity Nothing spectacular you mean it was just it was just flat pretty much over time there wasn't much change I don't think it was as dramatic as what we saw in the actual predictability estimates Yeah you might expect that Yeah thanks Thank you I actually will ask a related question and this is have you looked at that like some really long simulations I mean with CSM we have like a thousand years and so it would just give you more data to look at that modulation of the NAO and then so NAO is the other talk I know people have done this I mean Richard Greatbatch group they have been looking at some pre-industrial CMAP simulation and so for the teleconnection into the exotropics Unfortunately for the ECMWF model we don't have these long simulations Right, no, no, yeah, no I was doing things No, I'm more coming from the prediction you know the operational aspect of the I fully agree that would be interesting to do and I'm sure people have done and found I mean these earlier earlier works I guess when the initialization was a bit more of a problem people looked at free-running models to check variability there and there's quite a lot of literature out there I haven't looked at it myself Thanks so much Anna, Jacqueline has a question and we'll make this the last in-person question Hi, thank you for the talk I was wondering if you have looked at physical processes you showed that the model has a high score for the leading time so from two to four months and that it's an indication that the model is picking up the ANSO the El Niñon set, right there are physical processes already in the Central Pacific perhaps higher or warmer SSD anomalies or like weaker trade winds I was just wondering if you kind of went beyond just the correlation analysis to look at like what insights do we have from the models itself Yeah, it's very much ongoing work to look at this data and so we have looked at a bit of like trying to see mechanisms with the ocean heat content and the discharge recharge mechanism and especially with the view of trying to explain the different behavior and the different epochs there and there's some indication from the sort of persistence auto correlation behavior that you can see there the atmospheric wind forcing things I haven't had a time yet to look at I mean one of the purpose of this was really also I should have said it's clear that we very much invite people to look at the data it's a huge amount of data available a resource for several questions and we have collaborations with the Australians for instance who look at certain aspects and I don't have enough time to look at all these things but if people are interested we would be very happy to share this for my for more explorations really All right, thank you, thank you so much


I'm discussing all the, all the conversation that we were having. But so, you know, we had in between five and six participants because we struggle with someone's microphones, but we, the majority of the people who were in the conversation leave in center Rosa, and a lot of them. We had great short term rentals and we did have a neighbor to have leaves in front of one of our, of our short term rental so you know how the group was divided. We talked about what was working well with the regulation and in that part, there were three things that were mentioned in this, in this, in this topic. One was that the 198 cap limit actually works well. And some, some people were saying that maybe it should be reduced over time. It was mentioned to that the 1000 feet required minimum distance for non hosted short term rentals in single family dwellings was something that they appreciated. The first comment that was provided was that the application process was really clear and smooth, even though it was a new process and they have said that planners have been very responsive and very informative when when they ask questions about the process on its own. So this was on the side of the positive part of the conversation in terms of what was not working well this was a longer conversation and the first comment was related about the short term rental permit price. And the people in the group agreed that the, the price was very expensive, and the conversation started to go a little further, comparing it to other jurisdictions in the county. And the conversation showed and the data that was provided by by the people in our call that we're the third most expensive jurisdiction in cinema County. The comments with something that they thought we should be changing because it to other jurisdictions, which are clover day in Hillsborough, are actually way smaller cities than the city of Santa Rosa, in terms of what was not working well to one of the comments that was made and supported by other people in our group was that the monitoring element is still not working well. And one of the comments was related to the noise monitoring. We believe that we need a better plan for for addressing this and they mentioned that the monitoring noise can be done by apps, instead of of trying to make neighbors be the ones who have to complain about it or address the situation. And one of the things that was was also included in this part of the conversation is that the city is limiting businesses, instead of providing options to make this a better situation for property owners as well as people who rent their properties. So, in relationship to the number of units that are that can be or that should be permitted in terms of the cap limit. One of our participants mentioned that there was a very difficult situation with having short term rentals because there's already homeowner associations that don't let neighbors render properties and this limits the spaces where the city can have more short term rentals. And the there was also an opposed opinion in relationship to this, that we don't need more short term rentals because we already have 3000 in the county and specifically 1864 permitted units and around 400 are on permitted. So, this was just part of the conversation we had opposed visions very respectful conversation though I want to make that very clear this was a great group in that sense we had different opinions but people were really, really respectful and really I want to say really nice to each other, it was it was really like that. And so in terms of other things that were recommended as solutions for for trying to find like a middle point in between this, this conversations that I just mentioned. People, people provided some proposals. One of our residents said that we should have a separation in between non hosted and hosted short term rentals because short term non hosted ones should be treated as businesses, well hosted ones should be treated in a different way where only licenses can be removed if there's something wrong happening in that property, but if nothing wrong happens they think we should treat them in a different way than we treat non hosted rentals that are the ones that should be paying the TOG taxes and being basically treated as businesses. And we also got to how we can make the, how we can improve the process of applications. Some things were mentioned as our process being user friendly but one of our, our participants mentioned that this was a very difficult process for for elder people, particularly people who have been not familiar with blueprints. This was one of the conversations that was brought up as well as providing the opportunity of signing through electronic methods, instead of having to be a person to sign documents and as well as taking the taxes directly from Airbnb or other applications instead of having to pay them to the to the city separately. And I think at the end we had a very nice conversation of like, how can we support the city to have short term rentals as a as a as an option that supports the the community and supports the income of people who own rooms that that can be rented and and a really good way of visiting the city, as well as not making a labor struggle because the people who visit short term rentals that are hosted actually can have a nice relationship with the, with the people who are operating the short term rentals. However, we also agreed that there's a diversity in the people who have short term rentals as well as the people who host short term rentals in the city so just recognizing that diversity was the last closing comment that we got. And that was it, I'm sorry if I took a long time but this was a very fruitful and very nice conversation thank you for all the people who participated in our group. Okay, thank you next up we have group two that was led by Lou. So, really, the body of the residents in this town and how they can get together and speak civilly and just to contribute for the sake of contributing. I had seven participants, three of them had short term rentals or waiting to get one approved. Three did not have short term rentals but live near one, and then I had a mystery guest that didn't talk at all. I appreciated their presence nonetheless. We went down through the questions and with respect to the question what about the ordinance is working. I got the comments that it brings organization to the system. Several people commented that having the definitions was a positive that that helped, you know, set expectations and understanding. One person said it provided parameters so that that ties into that. People like the idea of the ordinance what they saw, they liked the idea of rules. And there was a there was this comment probably belongs in question to but the idea of creating two different classes, hosted and non hosted work better as a solution, then that having short term rentals and having them incorporated the way they are now I know they're the same, but but that was the comment. And then I got a comment that one of the code enforcement officers is doing a great job so that was very affirming also moving on to question to about what is not working. There was a comment that we don't know if hosted should be thrown in the same boat is not hosted so again that that distinction that even though the ordinance calls them out in slightly different ways maybe there needs to be more distance between those two types of uses. I believe to comment that the thousand foot distance is problematic from a noise perspective. And that maybe it doesn't really solve solve for that problem and there was a suggestion that noise monitors would be a better way to handle that than trying to use a thousand foot radius. The ordinance needs to focus more on the problem issues. And then at one point, it shouldn't penalize everyone for a few bad apples. So, this was something we spent a lot of time on we talked about the fact that there are good actors and bad actors. We don't all agree to those terms, but generally, there was I think most of a consensus that the bad apples shouldn't ruin it for the for the good actors. And an assertion that unhosted rentals really damage just the structure of residential neighborhoods. The underlying piece that people have come to expect in those neighborhoods, the unknowns of strangers in the neighborhood, drunkenness profanity, those sorts of things. There was there was one of one of the people in my room and actually code called code compliance. This past weekend, and we got there 10 minutes too late. And while I was sad that we got there 10 minutes too late. I was glad that we got there and that shows that we're trying to move in the right direction. There's I think a sense that hosted rentals are not the problem here I think there was a lot of agreement on that. We should strengthen the local contact requirements. I'm hearing that a lot of times from local contacts are called. There's not really an adequate response which is a requirement of the ordinance, but perhaps that should still be strengthened. There was a comment that exterior lighting should be a part of the ordinance. There are illumination regulations elsewhere in our municipal code that with respect to strs, there should be some specific regulations that talk about the time limits for those lights, and I thought that was an interesting suggestion. Similarly, there was a suggestion that guest arrival times should be regulated so that they're not arriving at two in the morning, which I also thought was interesting I haven't. I hadn't really considered that that would be a problem. Again, one of the major things with the ordinance not working is that these problems are cyclical due to constant turnover. And because of the constant turnover, no matter how well an ordinance is written the feeling is that you're still going to get bad actors in the form of bad tenants on occasion. And for that reason, perhaps they should not be in residential neighborhoods. The comment was made the full time resident should have greater rights than the revolving door bunch. That's a quote. And then someone said that I was doing a great job and so I'll take it. For the third question, there was a recommended solutions. And we had just a few things there we actually ran out of time, but there was a suggestion that there be different limits on larger residences. We're talking about very large residences, because they are conducive to those large gatherings that we're trying to avoid. There's a suggestion about taking the limit from 10 people down to four to six people with two to three daytime guests. The fact that the ordinance requires residents to babysit. Again, a quote short term rentals is a problem. And while the residents in my group didn't mind calling code enforcement or the police department to report a nuisance. They don't like having to contact the local contacts first. They think that puts them in the middle of the situation and that the ordinance should not require that that calling code enforcement should be the first stop in the residents response process. And that was it. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. And now we will hear from Nancy from group three. Great. Thank you reporting out from group three. We had a majority that live in San Rosa, and that we had to that manage and consider themselves very, you know, long term managers of very effective short term rentals and then we had a couple of residents that have had bad experiences with them in their neighborhood so we had a lot of dialogue back and forth. And then we had one person that wasn't able to it was apparently driving so didn't have input. What was working well with the ordinance was having a hotline. They felt that that was really a helpful addition. What was not working. One person mentioned that she felt that they were up to 50% of short term rentals in their neighborhood. Another person mentioned that entry is not fair given the 1000 foot proximity that's in place now. One person spoke more globally about just not agreeing with the model of allowing short term rentals in neighborhoods and allowing business entities to kind of take over the neighborhood. There's a feeling that, you know, a lot of our zoning is for the single family residences and it shouldn't turn into a business model that we should be looking at commercial areas particularly for non hosted short term rentals. And there was, there were a lot of recommended solutions, primarily the kind of common ground that this meeting is starting to have where people are, are, you know, have a common enemy in the bad actor and that like with loose group this was brought up and a comment that was made by one person that reinforced by others is that the city needs to develop quarterly reports showing where the issues are occurring what types of issues noise parking, etc. So that people are more aware of it and have a better understanding and that there's technology available to address a number of the issues. And the city needs to give most of its focus to going after bad actors so there are other comments but that's a basic summary of very good discussion among the group. Thank you to the participants. Thank you very much. And now we will hear from group or led by sharing. Okay, and I will say that as much as I'd like to go into a lot of detail we have 11 groups in total and I want to make sure we're out of here on time so I will, I will be brief but please don't think that that means that my group didn't have a lot to say because we had a very, very good discussion. We had seven people, two of which are neighbors of short term rentals two of which well three if you count husband wife, and two of which are short term rental operators within the city, and two folks that one operates one out of the area, and another person, both of these would like to potentially operate short term rentals but for one reason or another and in one case it was again the 1000 foot distance are not able to to operate. We talked a lot about the neighbors went, we went around in a circle and as it turns out the two people that went first happened to well the three people husband wife happened to be neighbors to short term rentals so they were able to express how it doesn't really have to be a bad actor it's just the constant turnover of guests that disrupts the neighborhood and affect schools and affects libraries. And, you know, they're their day to day life is much different because of having this transient population come in. They didn't buy their home. Both of them have lived in the city for a while and they feel very disappointed that their quiet oasis is now is not quiet anymore. And again like they're they were saying that you know there's not kids moving in to play with my kids or go to school with my kids and that type of thing so. Participants that is a neighbor came with a came armed with a very good list of what other jurisdictions are doing. And both would like to see prohibition of non hosted in short in residential neighborhoods period. We had two guests are two hosts, one of which is a non hosted short term rental who happens to be operating right next door to one of the neighbors that was in my group so of all the odds but they had a very, they have a very good relationship. They've worked together. This operator sounds like I mean the exact type of operator you would like to have he's, you know, made. He's, he has noise surveillance equipment up he's made, you know, changes to his layouts and that type of thing to try to respond to to what this neighbor has has brought forward so he's you know he's kind of the example of the perfect, the perfect host. And then we had a young woman who is a host of a hosted short terminal and like many, you know, folks before me have said, she feels like the cost and the process is a little bit onerous and makes it not very fruitful for her to to continue being a hosted rental. There are two people that would like to be able to host, but can't one again was based on his belief that because he owns two properties on one parcel that he couldn't. He had an interesting situation and then one young woman unfortunately purchased her house and then the ordinance went into effect and her neighbor decided to become a non hosted which basically kicked her out of consideration so there was a lot more than that and it was again a very wonderful warm civil group and I'm very appreciative. Thank you very much. Now we will hear from group five, who was led by Suzanne. Yeah, so I just will kind of reiterate also some of the concerns that have been brought up, but also, I think we had a good discussion overall. I think our group concluded that there was main concerns over essentially penalties for short term rental renters essentially me and there was maybe a suggestion of how there could be more of enforcement for the for guests. Regarding you know any like noise complaints or things like that. Another suggestion was also having a short term rentals only. Essentially, there being a cap on how many days they can be rented out such as like six to eight weeks. A year to just kind of buffer between essentially residents that are running out their homes versus non residents. The majority of our concerns to were about the about noise. The fees for complaints, the 1000 foot buffer also was also an issue. The concern of false noise complaints if there is kind of a disagreement with neighbors in the area. And, oh, and there was also a suggestion about including on the application about HOA's and you know whether or not STR's are allowed within their association. So those were the overall concerns of my group. Thank you. Now we will hear from group six with led by Susie. Hi everybody. Again I want to apologize for my group I cut them off 57 seconds before we were done. But I think I got everything. First our group consisted of my six people seven including myself, and we were very well balanced, three neighbors, and three operators, two of the operators were non hosted and one was how to hosted unit. So I'm going to start off with what is working and I wasn't as as organized as some of my coworkers I just lumped everybody's comments into one, but I think generally that the group agreed. Excuse me. What is working with the ordinance that allows the city to have a greater level of oversight does a good job of defining how a good neighbor should operate and lets people know what behavior is appropriate, or acceptable in a neighborhood. The fact that we're limiting the number of non hosted permits is good. I did have one member that had gave me some addresses to check into I've asked her to follow up with me and I'm happy to get our status on whether there's a code enforcement activated or a permit's been approved or what. I mean, I think people were happy that the regulations have been added.  So, and then I'm nice segue here it's a really good idea to regulate non hosted units dot dot dot, but that leads us to what's not working and some suggestions to improve. And what I heard is what's not working is enforcement. Lou this is not directed at you or your team. Making it fair making making the you know that our reactions to code enforcement violations making our rules. Fair for everybody. We need more coverage on the weekend, whether it's code enforcement or police department. That's when people have parties. I'm going to get somebody out there right then you know how do you see what actually happened so. Yeah, more coverage on the weekends. And then there's the question why does it take a year to follow up on on permitted locations. That question stems from the address that was given to me in the previous section and I will follow up she has my phone to follow up with me and I'll forward her to whomever I need to forward her to. Excuse me, punishment needs to fit the crime. There's apparently a $500 fee now I don't know. I don't know how these these penalties or violation fees work but what I got in the meeting was that if somebody is throwing a party, and somebody has a, you know, a sign issue that the penalty is the same regardless and that maybe we should revisit how we allocate or allocate our fines. I don't penalize good operators and that I did have one gallon my, my group, who gave some very good suggestions actually I had a couple people to operators in the group that had some great suggestions, but I think I had all model owners, and none of the bad players it sounded like and yet I had three neighbors who were located near near to a bad operator so. I'm going to ask people more honest about the number of guests. I don't know how we do that but I think that that's something that perhaps we could acquire of our hosts.  I vaguely remember somebody complaining of doing a lot of research on a lot of SVR's at the beginning of the. This program just after the urgent urgency ordinance was adopted but I don't know the status of that is so I wasn't able to give up a lot of information. I would request to allow a property manager to qualify as a hosted site. A fee for these are some of the suggestions. The fee for non hosted units should be based on unit size or number of bedrooms, rather than having the same fee applied to people who have, you know, a studio or one bedroom unit and somebody who who rents out a four or five bedroom unit. So that was very interesting. Special events, special events I suppose can be allowed they can be allowed in residential neighborhoods but we need to educate, educate business operators are short term rental business operators on how special events are approved and regulated and that's something that they could probably include brochures and whatnot and let people know it doesn't happen overnight and it does require approval in advance. Let's see this was another interesting one I think this came up to in another group prefer a being allowed to have more overnight guests and no extra day guests because it's a lot easier for an operator to control. When we came up with some of these ideas as a group, I might my my good operators volunteered some things that have worked for them. Providing house rules one of one of the gentlemen that was in my, my group said, he used to get complaints and as soon as he put down in his house rules that your deposit will not be returned. This this or this. He said, it's stopped just stopped and I think that's a great idea. So, the other suggestion is, another SPR operator str, I keep calling messy hours require first and last names for all guests, not just the person renting the unit. I think that that makes a lot of sense on the application so as a requirement. She also had her noise sensors, which I think and cameras for security on the exterior of her unit, but she has noise sensors, and she said she's never had had anybody. She's had to, you know, ask people just, well, you're getting a little bit loud after, you know, whatever the hour is the switching hour, but never any parties or anything like that.  And maybe that can improve so I guess maybe let me summarize by saying, maybe we give some required house rules. Anyways, that concludes my download. And thank you to my group because we were very balanced, like three and three very balanced, and everybody was polite and everybody participated in the discussion. Yay to you guys. Thank you. I'm here. Hi, sorry about that. Now we will hear from Jessica from group seven. Okay, great. Thanks. And I'm going to also try to be brief. We are I know over time so thank you to everybody for for sticking on here with us. So my group, we had six people, really only four of which spoke up, which was totally fine. It was comfortable for those that did speak up in my group. They were short term rental owners, two of which have not unfortunately had the opportunity to get permits yet because of the 1000 foot distance. And so that was a good topic of conversation that we had. Generally speaking, though, the first thing that I heard was an appreciation for regulations so that we don't have a Wild Wild West. There were definitely some concerns about the regulations that we have right now, in particular the 1000 foot radius was brought up as something that the group felt was a hardship. So if we continue to have the 1000 foot rule and or the cap on the number of non hosted rentals, there was a feeling that the city should create some sort of a waiting list for those who have already applied and been waiting for their permits to go through. And then, you know, as far as the existing cap of 198 for non hosted rentals, there was a feeling that if we want to keep the cap, that it should be raised that a city of our size should not have a cap as low as 198. There was a statement about residents being responsible for monitoring and calling property owner or property managers that that that was not a fair process that but noting that property owners are property managers are trying, but oftentimes they have too many rentals to deal with and so they're not really being proactive about dealing with their situations. So we had a mix as to whether the maximum occupancy for overnight guests should be reduced to less than 10, or if it should just be based on the total number of bedrooms so even if a property has more bedrooms so property for example has six bedrooms, you know, should be allowed to do 12. We had kind of a mix on on whether that should be allowed or not. There's also discussion about longer length of stay. Some folks thought that that would be better that there would be less daily disruptions if if renters were required to stay for longer periods of time. So more than just you know single night. And then there was some that thought that limiting the length of stay was not the right thing to do. There's definitely a consensus of the group that this should not be a business. So we shouldn't have multiple or a single business entity or a single entity owning multiple short term vacation rentals. I would hear a lot about these being shared housing. I think that was a term that we was being used that home sharing was was what it was and so you know where the property owner is living in the property for you know a certain period of the year but then renting out as a non hosted during other times of the year that that would make perhaps a better process. I'll also talk about with with regard to back to the cap of 198 from non hosted. Again, the idea of raising it for a city of our size, but really the market would naturally address the number of short term non hosted rentals in the city.  And the thought was that, you know, family events are fine if rules are followed but there shouldn't be any parties at the house. And that is kind of a synopsis of what we we talked about in ours and I will keep it to that so others can talk. Thank you. Now we will hear from Monet from group eight. Thank you Christian so we had five people in my group, one mysterious person who also did not speak and we have a reporter from KRCB, who's writing about short term rental so he was there just to listen to our comments. We also have balance to person who in general were against or opposing short term non hosted, and they were okay with the hosted one and we had two other people who purchased and moved to Santa Rosa before the ordinance came into place. And now they were not able to use their homes for short term rental, one of them has a duplex so lives on the site and another one just purchased a large single family home. The comments were majority similar to others. The ones that who had moved to Santa Rosa and are in favor of the short term rental they said that they believe that 1000 feet buffer is not fair and should be removed and maybe it should be applied to owners or businesses that have multiple short term rentals not to the ones that they only have one short term rental and they live in the city. And also if you have a duplex like two units on one property and if you leave in one of those units, it should be counted as a hosted one because yes there are two separate units but the owner lives on the site. And let me see. And the ones that were opposing or not in support or favor of the non hosted short term rental they believe that this bring lots of strangers to the neighborhood who are not from the neighborhood, and also, there should be something that the owner of the short term rental should update their water facilities because those people who come to the city. They might not be caring about the water draft and use like a water use more than an owner should be using so maybe the owners of the short term rental should update to meet the current building code to help save the water and also short term rentals should not allow any fireplace, fire pit or barbecue because some of this new, okay short term who are traveling to Santa Rosa they don't know what has happened in the past with the fire in the city. And then also one comment was like, maybe we have to ask for a larger trash bin for the short term rentals because some of them have more people and create more trash and some neighbors have witnessed that the short term rentals were dumping trash into other neighbors trash cans. So maybe we should request for a bigger one. And then against similar comments we should not have a cap if you only have one short term rental but you should not also allow an entity a business owner to have multiple short terms rental that's not fair. Also, and let me see. One person said that they don't have anything positive to say about the ordinance. And also as Suzy mentioned they believe that the code enforcement is not sufficient and they are not enforcing the violations they are not good at correcting them. And also is good to provide like an education to a business owner short term rentals to let them know that they are not part of the neighbor who they are just a business trying to run a business from a residential and also two people who are not in favor of the short term rentals they said they should not be allowed within a residential zoning district there should be in a commercial outside of residential but the other comments were similar to other that talk about. So I won't go anymore. Thank you. Now we will hear from Sheila from group nine. Great. Thanks kirsten. Am I the last person I'm just trying to be mindful of time. If you are not you are group nine out of 11. Holy smokes. Okay, I'm going to jam. So, a fairly balanced group to operate hosted one who operates a non hosted one who is a hopeful non hosted person. And then for people who live next to non hosted. I'll just address the hosted right now there was not much conversation about that other than please revise the permit fee for that. Make it different make it less than conversation very similar to the other ones that we had tonight I don't want my group to worry I took very meticulous notes those will be passed on I'm just trying to provide information that was not brought up already. How do we hold people accountable for the violations right now. Sure you can correct me if I'm wrong or do it later. It seems that complainants are supposed to call the property management company or the person who's been assigned as the contact for that non hosted str. I'm just trying to know how does this actually count against that non hosted str how does the city get that on their radar that a complaint has been lodged if it only goes to the manager of the of the str. That was one item. We did discuss sound meters decibel meters and the talk about that was that really that may not be an effective thing to have it marginally effective thing to have at your non hosted str. The host can have it calibrated incorrectly. They can have it positioned in a way that may not reflect the actual acoustics on the site so is it effective. We don't really know. Concerned that the neighbors continue to have to be the eyes and ears for this type of use when really they just want to come home and enjoy their property. Let's see that no non hosted strs in residential zoning districts they could potentially be allowed in mixed use zoning where residents nearby might expect a commercial use. Particularly for larger size parcels the 1000 feet isn't enough because with the larger parcel it's very easy to get to 1000 feet quickly so that could quickly change the fabric of the neighborhood. Someone else thought the fee the application fee was way too high and made it inaccessible to certain people. 198 cap right now seems arbitrary. It's leaving out a lot of people someone also thought that thousands of apartments are being built in Santa Rosa that there's adequate housing. They still don't have a post to an overall cap and that maybe this decision on str should be brought to a vote of the people. Also that maybe only local people should be owning and operating strs no corporate ownership. who lives next to a couple of these, a management company operates these, and whenever this person calls to complain, his calls tend to be transferred around so resolution can take quite a while. That's it for me. You'll get my full notes later. Sherry, thank you. Thank you. Now we will hear from Janden from group 10. Good evening, everybody. Like everyone else, I had a diverse group. I had a couple of operators, and I had a couple of people just listening in, and I had one person who lived next to a STR. Like shout out to my group, we had a lot of solution finders. One of the comments was that we should prioritize on the residents who need to rent their homes out. That was a big discussion, but then our group saying that STR is an economic option for some people who are living alone in their home, and that can be a lively help for them. One person brought up, maybe we should limit the nights per year, perhaps the six months, so we don't have any of that trouble. Another participant said, perhaps money can be collected when the STR is booked as opposed to the operator just collecting the taxes afterwards, and he believes that they'll make it level playing field. Another participant, she said the city should be more mindful of the housing site plan relative to neighboring residents. For example, she lived next to a short-term rental where the entertainment center was directly adjacent to the master bedroom to the neighbor resident, so perhaps city staff can look at site plans to make sure that the entertainment side of the house doesn't mess with the other side of the house for the neighbors. Another person, she just wanted to give us shout out to the staff for being so respectful and understanding of everyone answering the short-term emails and phone calls, and I won't take up anybody else's time. Thank you. Now our last group led by Amy will be group 11. Thanks, Kirsten. I'm going to be super fast, but as Sheila said, I also took notes and so I'll be passing these along to Sheila. As far as what's working well, a couple of the folks on our group mentioned that hosted rentals are working well. They're really seen as a non-issue and that that's been going well. Most of our discussion was around what's not working well, so I did have one participant who was a rental manager, and then the rest of those on the call were residents that had either neighbors or one that actually had a rental, long-term rental next to him, and then bought that property and now runs a short-term rental non-hosted next door, although he is right next door, he can't be considered a hosted rental. So very interesting situations, but as far as what's not working, there was a lot of comments about short-term rentals with parties and having really awful situations that they've had to deal with, and our manager, short-term rental manager person did note that he really feels like the best solution is education and making sure that the hosts are trained and that screening guests is a really good solution and doing things to preempt issues such as noise decibel sensors and outdoor cameras, but really making sure that you're screening those guests because there will be other guests, so making sure that the neighbors are happy is number one. So I thought that was a really great perspective from obviously someone who's really operating well, and then a lot of complaints about parties and also about how the city ignored the original survey results that community really doesn't want to allow short-term rentals in residential areas, and one noted that they had a neighbor who the owner was in Florida and is just not present and not being responsive, and another who said they've had some retaliation against them from the renters who are next door once they complained. So a lot of bad situations, but we did get some good input out of the meeting that we had together, so with that I'll pass it back to the full group to Sherry. Boy, that took me forever to find that mute. So I want to say thank you. We are out of time, however, before I let everybody go, big thank you. Lou Kirk is our assistant chief building official and he's also the head of code enforcement, and for anybody that wants to stay on the call, he is going to provide a brief three to five minute overview of some changes to the code enforcement process on the weekend. So if anybody wants to stick around for that, please don't feel obligated. If you do leave, I do want to thank you so very much. I greatly appreciate this input. Staff really recognizes how hard it is to take this time, especially on a Monday evening during the holiday season, so thank you so much for your excellent feedback. Don't hesitate to reach out to short term rentals at srcity.org, or if you need to speak with me directly, I'm Sherry Mead, so it's smeads at srcity.org, and thank you again. Lou, do you want to take it away? The mute button is elusive, isn't it? Yes. Yeah, really quickly, and this is a common thing, and I thought this group might benefit, and I'm going to keep this under three minutes if I can. Just to let you know, since September, we have revamped our code enforcement processes in a dramatic way. A lot of you are aware of it, but obviously a lot of you are not. The most important thing I wanted to say is that we have a 24-7 hotline dedicated to short term rental complaints. I'm going to give that number to you right now. It's 707, of course, 543-3244. If you don't get that, you can email me later. I'm happy to hand it out for that matter. I'm happy to discuss anything related to SGR enforcement at any point in time. That's why I'm here. But to recap, we have a very robust code enforcement system in place now. We have a contract officer whose sole job is short term rental enforcement. He has been out in the community. He has been making a difference with education and enforcement. And I'll talk really briefly about the differences. I know that there were comments made about the fairness of there being a $500 fine for a huge party, as opposed to a $500 fine for a signed violation. And that's where officer discretion comes in. We go out, and our first goal is to educate. You may have received, those of you that our operators did receive in September, October timeframe, we set out a success guide telling every operator exactly how to navigate the ordinance so as not to get in trouble with the city. And again, if you need a copy of that, let me know. I'll send you a copy. But if, say there's a portion of your advertisement that isn't being included, that's required by the ordinance, we're not going to issue a citation for that. We're going to let you know about it. Now, if a week goes by or two weeks goes by and it's still a problem, then a citation might be issued. We tend to reserve those larger problems. Since September, we've issued 89 citations. We've assessed $33,000 in fines. And again, that's not trying to be punitive. It's trying to be corrective. So for those that don't think code enforcement is out there, I want to assure you that we are. And that, again, with this hotline, we're there for you to address issues that you have. We may not be able to fix them the night we respond. But the bigger problem or the bigger goal here is to get out there and document the violations so that we can engage in a dialogue with the operators, educate them, and try to make sure that that violation doesn't happen again. So that's it. I think I kept it for three minutes. If there's any questions, don't hesitate to reach out. And again, thank you for your time tonight. Great. Again, thanks, everyone. I'm going to sign off for the evening. I think you have contact information. Reach out to us as needed. Thanks so much.