Dozens of neighbors told the Pacifica City Council on Oct. 27 that repeated disturbances from a short-term rental at 1987 Beach Boulevard have made adjacent homeowners unsafe and that the city should not renew or should revoke the property’s STR permit.

Caitlin Quinn, who said she bought the home three years ago, described sustained problems at the neighboring STR operated by Marbella Lane and told the council that police have responded to the property “21 times within the past 3 years.” Quinn said the most recent incident, on Oct. 19, involved a guest trespassing on her property and disabling two security cameras; she said police classified that incident as a trespass and issued a case number but that the operator allowed the guest to remain at the property for five more nights. “How can what happened at 1987 Beach last Sunday . . . not be termed detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare, and at the very least, not be considered a nuisance,” Quinn said.

Neighbors who spoke after Quinn echoed those concerns. Neighbor Brian Rainero described a pattern of disturbances and said the property is “notorious” in the community. Lila Venero told the council the repeated incidents had caused residents stress, sleep loss and concerns about retaliation from hostile renters. Cindy Abbott, who has filed complaints and a lawsuit related to the property, urged city staff to act quickly as short-term rental permits come up for renewal.

Speakers cited the city’s coastal-zone STR ordinance (commenters referenced “Ordinance No. 835” in oral remarks) and asked the council to schedule or direct staff to schedule a revocation hearing where facts and police reports could be considered. Multiple commenters asked the council to explain the city’s policies and criteria for holding revocation hearings and to clarify how enforcement decisions are made.

City staff did not take a formal enforcement action during the meeting. Council members did not vote on the matter at the Oct. 27 session; the issue was raised in public comment and will remain with staff and the city’s enforcement process unless council places it on a future agenda.

Why it matters: Neighbors and advocates say repeated nuisance incidents at a single STR address have tangible effects on safety and quality of life. Revocation or nonrenewal of a permit would be a formal, enforceable remedy that residents are requesting; enforcement decisions also affect perceptions of equitable code application across the city.

What to watch for: Whether staff schedules a revocation hearing or brings an enforcement report back to the council; any formal correspondence from code enforcement or the planning division about permit status.