Beverly Hills Rental Ban Challenged in Federal Court

A federal lawsuit filed August 31 places Beverly Hills’ residential rental restrictions before the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

The case, Beverly Hills Vacation Rental Alliance v. City of Beverly Hills, challenges Ordinance No. 25-O-2918, which prohibits residential rentals with an initial lease term of less than 12 consecutive months. The case was assigned number 2:26-cv-09699.

The restriction applies to single-family homes, multifamily units, rooms, guest houses and accessory dwelling units. It also covers the temporary rental of residential amenities such as pools and yards. A lease may convert to month-to-month only after its initial 12-month term has concluded.

The Beverly Hills Vacation Rental Alliance alleges that the ordinance violates constitutional protections involving due process, privacy and equal protection. It also alleges that the restriction constitutes an unlawful taking of private property under the Fifth Amendment. These allegations have not been decided by the court.

The lawsuit asks the court to declare the ordinance unconstitutional and permanently prohibit Beverly Hills from enforcing its short-term and mid-term rental restrictions.

The ordinance was considered by the Beverly Hills Planning Commission during a public hearing on November 14, 2024. The City Council conducted a public hearing on July 1, 2025, and adopted the ordinance on August 5, 2025, by a 4-1 vote. Councilmembers Mary Wells, Craig Corman and Lester Friedman joined then-Mayor Sharona Nazarian in supporting the measure. Then-Vice Mayor John Mirisch voted against it.

The ordinance took effect September 5, 2025. City records state that the restrictions were adopted to preserve residential neighborhood character, limit disturbances and maintain housing for long-term residents.

In addition to municipal enforcement, the ordinance allows any person who collects and remits transient occupancy tax to the city to seek an injunction or other relief against a prohibited rental. A prevailing party may recover damages, legal costs and attorney fees.

Renting or advertising a residential property for less than 12 months can also result in administrative fines of up to $5,000 per day. Each day that a prohibited rental operates or remains advertised may be treated as a separate violation.

The filing begins the federal court process. No ruling has been issued on the association’s claims or its request to stop enforcement of the ordinance.