Court Rules Hermosa Beach Short-Term Coastal Rental Ban Unenforceable

A Hermosa Beach resident has won a significant legal victory against the city's short-term rental enforcement regime, with a Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruling that the city's ban on short-term rentals in the coastal zone cannot be enforced until it receives approval from the California Coastal Commission.

THE QUICK VERSION (Click to view)

A Los Angeles Superior Court judge tentatively ruled March 26 that Hermosa Beach's short-term rental ban is unenforceable in the coastal zone because the city never obtained Coastal Commission approval before enacting it in 2016.
The ruling dismisses a $2,500 citation against Manhattan Avenue homeowner Todd Koerner and issues a permanent injunction blocking coastal zone enforcement citywide.
The city's own former hearing officer had previously warned the ban was legally invalid; the code enforcement officer who cited Koerner knew this at the time.
Around 200 Hermosa Beach short-term rental operators — mostly in the coastal zone — now have grounds to challenge citations.
The city can still pursue a legal ban through the Coastal Commission, but the process is lengthy and approval is far from guaranteed. A final judgment hearing is set for May 5.

The tentative decision, issued March 26 in Koerner v. City of Hermosa Beach, orders the city to dismiss a $2,500 citation issued against Todd Koerner, who has rented a spare bedroom in his Manhattan Avenue home on Airbnb since 2012. It also directs the court to issue a permanent injunction blocking enforcement of the ban across the entire coastal zone — not just at Koerner's property. The coastal zone covers most of the city west of Ardmore Avenue, representing over 40% of Hermosa's land area. Koerner's property at 237 Manhattan Avenue sits well within it.

The Core Legal Issue

At the heart of the case is the California Coastal Act, a 1976 state law that governs land use in the coastal zone and requires local governments to obtain a Coastal Development Permit before making changes that affect the intensity of use of coastal land. The Coastal Commission, a state agency, holds ultimate authority over those decisions.

The city enacted its short-term rental ban — codified as section 17.42.180 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code — in 2016, prohibiting the offer, rental, or advertisement of any stay of less than 30 days in residentially zoned areas. It did so without seeking Commission approval.

The court found that was a legal error. Because the city's pre-2016 zoning code permitted residential rentals without any distinction between short-term and long-term stays, banning short-term rentals constituted a change in the intensity of use of land — which qualifies as "development" under the Coastal Act and requires a permit.

The ruling follows a line of California appellate decisions that have consistently rejected similar arguments from coastal cities. In Keen v. City of Manhattan Beach (2022), the court of appeal held that a city's permissive zoning code, if silent on rental duration, must treat short- and long-term rentals the same. Judge in the Koerner case applied the same logic: Hermosa Beach always permitted residential rentals; it cannot credibly claim it always banned short-term ones.

The City's Defense, and Why It Failed

The city argued that short-term rentals were never permitted under its zoning code because the municipal definition of "dwelling" excluded hotels, boarding houses, and lodging houses — categories it equated with short-term occupancy. It also argued that its 2016 ordinance merely clarified an existing prohibition rather than creating a new one.

The court rejected both contentions. A room rented short-term in a private home, it found, is a residential use — not a hotel or boarding house. The municipal code's definition of "dwelling" contains no minimum length of stay. And because the city could not point to any pre-2016 ordinance that distinguished between short- and long-term rentals, the ban could not be characterized as a clarification of existing law.

A Pattern the City Chose to Ignore

What makes the ruling particularly pointed is what the administrative record reveals about the city's awareness of its legal exposure. In earlier, unrelated citation cases, the city's own appointed hearing officer — Steve Napolitano, ironically now the city's manager — had already concluded that the STR ban was invalid in the coastal zone absent Coastal Commission approval. The code enforcement officer who cited Koerner in September 2024 knew about those rulings when he issued the citation.

Despite that, the city continued enforcement, escalated fines to as much as $20,000 per violation, and — when the City Council discussed in early 2025 whether to carve out owner-occupied homes from the ban — ultimately voted only to receive a report from the city attorney and take no action.

What Happens Now

The ruling does not permanently prohibit Hermosa Beach from banning short-term rentals. It requires the city to seek approval through the proper channel: either a Coastal Development Permit or an amendment to its Local Coastal Program certified by the Commission. That process is lengthy and uncertain, and the Commission has historically been protective of lower-cost visitor accommodation as a matter of coastal access policy.

What is an LCP ? (click to view)

Local Coastal Program (LCP): a planning document that coastal cities and counties submit to the Coastal Commission for certification, meant to govern development in their coastal zone
Has two components: a Land Use Plan (LUP) setting general policies, and an Implementation Plan (IP) with specific zoning ordinances and regulations to carry them out
Hermosa Beach has a certified LUP but has never completed its Implementation Plan, leaving the LCP uncertified for 43 years
Without a certified LCP, the Coastal Commission retains direct permitting authority over virtually all significant development in the city's coastal zone
Once certified, a city theoretically regains local control over most CDP decisions, with the Commission shifting to an oversight/appeal role
Certification is not automatic: the Commission must find the plan "consistent with and adequate to carry out" the Coastal Act
The Commission can impose "suggested modifications" on a submitted plan; if the city doesn't accept them, the plan is denied
Even after certification, the Commission retains appeal jurisdiction over development in sensitive coastal areas and can require LCP amendments at any time
The Shear Development case currently before the California Supreme Court tests whether the Commission can override a local government's interpretation of its own certified LCP
In practice, LCP certification can function as a negotiation where the Commission extracts concessions on parking, encroachment fees, housing density, and public access as the price of granting local control
Hermosa Beach's 2019 parking management study was explicitly designed to "assist in obtaining Coastal Commission approval of its Local Coastal Program," illustrating how the Commission uses certification as leverage

In the meantime, the injunction applies citywide within the coastal zone. Hermosa Beach had approximately 200 short-term rentals in late 2023, predominantly in the coastal zone, according to figures cited in the petition. Every one of those operators now has grounds to challenge any citation they have received or may receive.

The court set an Order to Show Cause hearing for May 5, at which point a final judgment and writ of mandate are expected to be formally entered. The city will have the opportunity to appeal, though it faces significant headwinds: three separate courts of appeal have now ruled against coastal cities making substantially the same arguments Hermosa Beach advanced here.

Koerner, who testified that his multiple sclerosis prevents him from working and that no neighbor had ever complained about his guests, has operated his Airbnb listing continuously for more than 13 years.

The City recently increased its budget for legal costs, citing 'significant litigation', without detailing specific cases. Former city attorney Patrick Donegan had previously advised that the city's position on short-term rentals was defensible, and the city continued its legal fight. The city is still represented by Best Best & Kreiger Law (Donegan's former firm), although it is not yet known whether the city will continue the legal fight.

Attorney Frank Angel : "If you play with fire, you will get burned."

Koerner is represented by attorney Frank Angel, who has become a significant figure in STR legal battles. He represented the plaintiff in the decisive Manhattan Beach case in 2022, and rebuked Hermosa Beach in 2024 during a previous case, saying "we warned that city officials were playing with fire. If you play with fire, you'll get burned."