San Diego Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera wants to force lobbyists to reveal who is paying them within 24 hours, not months after a vote.

Elo-Rivera's proposed "Follow the Money" ordinance is a direct response to Airbnb's at least $672,198 spending campaign against a vacation rental tax he authored in 2025. A Voice of San Diego investigation published Tuesday, Sept. 8, revealed that Airbnb's spending accounted for roughly a quarter of all expenditure lobbying reported in San Diego since 2019.

Much of that money flowed through intermediaries. The San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce spent $292,119 opposing the tax during the same period, with Airbnb as the sole funder, according to the Chamber's lobbying disclosure. An Airbnb spokesperson told Voice of San Diego the Chamber's $292,119 was included within the $372,198 Airbnb had already reported under its own name.

Separately, the Committee to Expand the Middle Class, an Airbnb political committee, paid $300,000 to Bridge Street Inc., a Los Angeles entertainment company, 12 days before the City Council Rules Committee hearing where the tax was rejected.

The spending was not public until after the Rules Committee voted the tax down on Jan. 28. Councilmembers Kent Lee, Raul Campillo and Vivian Moreno voted no.

Under current city rules, expenditure lobbyists must report spending above $5,000 to the City Clerk. They can wait until the end of the month following the close of a quarter to file. Reports show the amount spent and which city decision was targeted but do not detail how the money was used.

What the ordinance would change

The ordinance, outlined in a staff report dated June 24, would:

• Require expenditure lobbyists to report spending within 24 hours instead of quarterly.
• Lower the reporting threshold from $5,000 to $1,000.
• Require disclosure of the original source of funds, even when money passes through another organization.
• Require lobbyists to name the specific vendors and consultants they paid.
• Force organizations sending mailers, ads or other public messages meant to influence city decisions to identify their five largest funders and provide copies to the City Clerk.
• Ban elected city officeholders and candidates from accepting campaign contributions from registered lobbyists.

The staff report says the source-tracing requirement is modeled after Arizona Proposition 211, known as the "Voters' Right to Know Act." Communications containing AI-generated or AI-altered content would also require a separate disclosure.

"We're not done with [Airbnb]," Elo-Rivera told Voice of San Diego in the Sept. 8 investigation. "Before we go back at them, we're going to make sure the rules are right so people know what's going on."

Airbnb has not publicly responded to the proposed ordinance. Voice of San Diego reported that Airbnb did not answer questions about the $300,000 Bridge Street payment.

The ordinance is scheduled to come before the full San Diego City Council in September, according to Voice of San Diego. No specific meeting date has been confirmed.

The tax that started it

The defeated tax, called the "Vacation Home Operation Tax to Preserve Housing," would have applied to an estimated 10,600 properties citywide and could have generated as much as $135 million a year, according to a memo from Elo-Rivera. The disclosure rules in the proposed ordinance would apply to lobbying campaigns on any city decision, affecting residents across San Diego including La Jolla.

The Airbnb-funded campaign that helped kill the tax included mailers and text messages sent by the Chamber of Commerce. Those materials identified the Chamber as the sender but did not disclose Airbnb as the funder. One attendee at the Jan. 28 Rules Committee hearing later told Voice of San Diego she had been paid to attend and had traveled from Los Angeles with 45 other people.

Chris Cate, CEO of the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce, told Voice of San Diego the Chamber's opposition was independent of Airbnb's funding. The Chamber "took a position on the measure prior to any of that, and we opposed it because it's bad policy," Cate said in the Sept. 8 report.

Residents who want to weigh in on the ordinance can track the City Council's September agenda at sandiego.gov.