Renters, Landlords Rebuke Rental Registration as Fee Vote Slides to Oct. 6
City Council • Desert Hot SpringsSeptember 15, 2026
Locunity is an independent informational service and is not an official government page for this commission. All information is sourced from public footage and an analysis of official agendas with the aid of responsible, fact-checked AI. to report an error or omission.
Desert Hot Springs' rental registration program drew the night's sharpest criticism. Renters, landlords and a property manager raised privacy, fee and displacement objections even though the fee item itself was pulled over a posting error. The City Council also advanced a 231-acre Highway 62 rezone that would bar data centers and warehouses, received a clean audit amid oversight complaints, and heard a running argument over transparency that ended with the mayor seeking a discussion of surging public records requests.
- Rental registration fees pushed to Oct. 6 after a posting error; renters and landlords oppose the program
- Highway 62 rezone covering 231 acres introduced unanimously to exclude data centers, warehouses and manufacturing
- Clean audit opinion and $80.5M net position received, but critics fault the auditor's absence
- Consent calendar approved unchanged despite a request to pull the records retention policy and the contracts list
- Mayor seeks agenda item on 695 public records requests, up from 434 in 2025
Rental Registration Faces Wall of Opposition
Item 7, which would set permit fees for the city's rental registration program, never reached a vote. It was pulled because of a posting issue and is scheduled to return Oct. 6. Opponents used general public comment anyway, turning the evening into a referendum on the program itself.
Why it matters: The fee is what turns an adopted ordinance into a working program and determines what owners pay. A nexus study, which ties a fee to the city's cost of providing the service, comes next, so the fee hearing is the next real pressure point.
Where things stand: Critics focused on three areas: privacy, process and money. One commenter called the ordinance rushed and said it was drafted without engagement from owners or tenants. Another raised Fourth Amendment objections to provisions allowing entry through administrative warrants.
"I'm asking you to require that any entry on any home go through a judicial warrant based upon probable cause," said a public commenter.
A property manager pressed the council on notification, violations, fines and displacement. "Will the city provide relocation assistance to renters who are displaced because their home fails an inspection?" asked a property manager.
On money, one commenter flagged staff fiscal figures that cited revenue of $130,000 a year in one place and about $65,000 over five years in another. The commenter put the gap at $585,000.
Tenants as opponents: A program pitched in part as tenant protection drew opposition from tenants. A long-term renter urged less intrusive alternatives, and a 74-year-old renter opposed the ordinance on privacy grounds.
The other side: Mayor Scott Matas cited cases of tenant abuse in defending the program but signaled flexibility. "The ordinance is a working document. It can be fixed in the future," said Mayor Matas.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: The council took no action. Landlords and property managers still face undetermined fees and fine structures. Renters' concerns center on inspection access and possible displacement. The city still needs a defensible fee basis to fund the program.
What's next: Fees return to the council Oct. 6. The nexus study on fees is the next step, and the mayor's comments leave room for amendments to the ordinance.
Highway 62 Rezone Aims at Tourism, Not Data Centers
The council unanimously introduced Zoning Amendment 26-1. The ordinance would rezone about 231 acres along Highway 62 from commercial business park to commercial highway.
Why it matters: If adopted, the change would exclude warehouses, manufacturing and data centers from the corridor. The goal is to steer the area toward a tourism gateway at the city's entrance. Large data center and logistics proposals are a growing land-use battle in many inland communities, and this vote moves Desert Hot Springs firmly against them on this stretch.
Where things stand: Planning Manager Patricia Villagomez presented the item. Staff tied it to the city's strategic plan and to an urgency ordinance from October 2025 that was extended in November. Staff said the change is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the state's environmental review law. No one testified during the public hearing.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: Mayor Pro Tem Dirk Voss moved to introduce the ordinance by title only, and Councilmember Gary Gardner seconded. The motion was declared passed unanimously; individual votes were not announced. Owners hoping for industrial or data center uses lose that option. Hospitality and tourism-oriented businesses stand to gain.
What's next: Second reading and adoption are expected at the next meeting.
Clean Audit, but Critics Want the Auditor in the Room
Administrative Services Director Geoffrey Buchheim presented the audited financial statements for fiscal year 2024-25, prepared by the Poon Group. The auditors issued an unmodified opinion, their highest level of assurance that the statements are fairly presented. The city reported an $80.5M net position.
Where things stand: The report included restatements of prior-year figures of $541,000 and $625,000. The council received and filed the report, so no vote was taken.
The other side: Two public commenters urged the council to postpone the item until the auditor could appear in person. One said findings from prior audits remain unresolved. Mayor Matas said he had read the report and was confident in it.
Why it matters: An unmodified opinion is a baseline of fiscal credibility. Critics, however, argued the council gave up its chance to question the auditors directly. That complaint fits a broader transparency theme that ran through the meeting.
What's next: The 2024-25 single audit, a separate review of federal grant spending, is still pending. It is due to the State Controller on Oct. 9.
Transparency Complaints Shadow Consent Vote, Records Debate
Where things stand: Before the consent vote, a public commenter asked the council to pull two items. He objected to item 13, a records retention policy he said gives staff too much discretion. He also objected to item 16, a contracts list he said omits Flock Safety, Axon and OpenGov. Mayor Matas explained that consent items are vetted in advance. The council approved the agenda and consent calendar as presented, on a motion declared passed unanimously. A senior center art teacher also spoke in support of renewing the art program under item 15.
The other side: During general comment, speakers criticized the mayor's handling of public comment. One commenter said he had been cut off improperly and cited the First Amendment and the Brown Act, California's open meetings law. Another urged trash cleanup and called for street safety improvements on Pomelo Drive and Verbena. Staff said an engineering review found no safety concern on Pomelo.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: Mayor Matas defended the meeting rules and asked for a future agenda item on the rise in public records requests. "As of September, we've received 695 requests," he said. That compares with 434 in all of 2025, and the increase is driving staffing costs. The request highlights a growing tension: residents who track surveillance and software vendors rely on public records, while the city faces rising costs to respond.
What's next: No date was set for the public records item.
- Desert Nights on the Boulevard: Council approved a $144,600 agreement with Take 5 Entertainment for season two, covering 12 headline concerts and five local band shows. The budget includes $132,000 for headliners, $6,600 for local bands and $6,000 for marketing. Councilmember Jan Pye requested a Motown act.
- Facility rental fees: Council approved an amended resolution that replaces the 2017 rate of $12.50 per hour with fee schedule rates of $54.59 per hour for private renters and $27.29 per hour for nonprofits. The city manager keeps authority to grant waivers.
- Police hires: A community service officer and a police officer were sworn in.
- Parade honor: A local journalist was named grand marshal of the 2026 Christmas Parade, which is set for Dec. 12.
- Closed session: The council discussed two existing lawsuits, anticipated litigation, a property negotiation on San Jacinto Lane and the city manager's evaluation. No reportable action was taken.
Looking ahead: The rezone returns for second reading at the next meeting. Rental registration fees come back Oct. 6, and the single audit is due to the state Oct. 9.