• 0
  • Home
  • About Us
  • What We Do

Shopping Cart

GPAM
  • Home
  • About Us
  • What We Do

California reaming: Pacaso taking punches in home state

Pacaso’s Spencer Rascoff and Austin Allison (LinkedIn, iStock)

The proptech startup Pacaso has made a few enemies in its efforts to help its customers realize their dream of second-home ownership.

Now comes the blowback, as legal and legislative actions in its home state of California spell trouble for the young company.

This month in Napa Valley, the planning commission for the city of St. Helena recommended expanding its rule banning timeshares to include Pacaso’s fractional ownership model. The proposal will soon go before the city council.

Down south, Palm Springs voted to extend its ban on timeshares to Pacaso’s business. It also issued a cease and desist letter to the company, which has sponsored four properties in the area.

The actions could trigger other roadblocks for Pacaso, which became something of a sensation last year when it achieved a $1 billion valuation less than 12 months after its launch — the fastest any proptech has reached “unicorn” status. The company operates in at least six other markets in California.

Read more
  • M&A will define proptech landscape in 2022: MetaProp survey
  • How to build a home in 30 days: Con-tech startup Diamond Age raises $50M
  • Knock it off: Homebuying startup ditches IPO plans

San Francisco-based Pacaso, founded in 2020 by former Zillow executives Spencer Rascoff and Austin Allison, says it generated nearly $300 million in revenue in 2021 selling one-eighth shares of vacation properties across the U.S. to aspiring second-home owners — often over the protests of locals who saw its arrival as an invasion of their communities.

Demonstrations attended its recent debut in Maui, but the uproar has been particularly loud in its home state, where a loose association of anti-Pacaso civilian groups has coalesced to fight the company on the basis that it is a commercial enterprise operating in residential, or rural, areas.

The groups also assert Pacaso is hurting neighborhoods by removing already limited housing stock from tight markets — a claim the company disputes, citing its focus on a small group of luxury properties that are empty much of the year.

Pacaso preemptively sued St. Helena last April after the city of 6,000 signaled it would seek to freeze the company’s activity there. Pacaso maintains that it is in the business not of timeshares but of co-ownership —– a new asset type as of last summer, after Pacaso pushed to have it recognized by the Real Estate Standards Organization.

This crucial distinction is what St. Helena and Palm Springs now seek to eliminate or render moot.

If St. Helena’s planning commission gets the city council to include fractional ownership in the city’s timeshare ordinance, it would be the first change to the law since 1982.

Colin Tooze, a spokesman for Pacaso, said that would represent selective application of the law. Nearly 10 percent of residential parcels in St. Helena are owned by limited liability companies, and more than 40 percent are owned in a trust, he said, citing Napa County Tax Assessor records. His argument is that those ownership models are similar to Pacaso’s, yet no one is moving to ban them.

Pacaso “attempted to settle our differences through genuine compromise and dialogue,” Tooze said in an email. “We certainly haven’t always seen eye-to-eye with local officials in St. Helena.”

Tooze attributed the setback in Palm Springs to city staffers who have a “regrettably one-sided and inaccurate view of Pacaso’s business.” The company has been trying to work things out with the Palm Springs City Council, he said.

“We’re confident that members of the council understand that it’s not the proper role of local government to decide who is allowed to own property,” he said.

The actions in St. Helena and Palm Springs could set a precedent for other locales that take issue with Pacaso. The company plans to launch in 30 new markets this year, nearly doubling its footprint.

Tooze said the company will continue to “invest in building relationships with partners at all levels of government.”

“We are committed to dialogue and to working collaboratively with local leaders to make sure that we understand their priorities,” he said.

[contact-form-7 404 "Not Found"]

The post California reaming: Pacaso taking punches in home state appeared first on The Real Deal Los Angeles.

Powered by WPeMatico

  • 22 March 2022
  • The Real Deal
  • Uncategorized
  •  Like
Why Amazon pulled out of warehouse deal in West Covina →← Judge Approves Sale of The One
  • Recent Posts

    • SoCal resi market sees wave of deal cancellations continue July 2, 2025
    • Related, Newland acquire former Forever 21 HQ in $120M deal July 2, 2025
    • LA office availability increases “amidst uncertainty over industry consolidation” July 2, 2025
    • California legislature overhauls CEQA to pave way for construction boom July 1, 2025
    • Trousdale Estates nabs neighborhood’s priciest trade this year with $32M close July 1, 2025
  • Recent Comments

    • Archives

      • July 2025
      • June 2025
      • May 2025
      • April 2025
      • March 2025
      • February 2025
      • January 2025
      • December 2024
      • November 2024
      • October 2024
      • September 2024
      • August 2024
      • July 2024
      • June 2024
      • May 2024
      • April 2024
      • March 2024
      • February 2024
      • January 2024
      • December 2023
      • February 2023
      • January 2023
      • December 2022
      • November 2022
      • October 2022
      • September 2022
      • August 2022
      • July 2022
      • June 2022
      • May 2022
      • April 2022
      • March 2022
      • February 2022
      • January 2022
      • December 2021
      • November 2021
      • October 2021
      • September 2021
      • August 2021
      • July 2021
      • June 2021
      • May 2021
      • April 2021
      • March 2021
      • February 2021
      • January 2021
      • December 2020
      • November 2020
      • October 2020
      • September 2020
      • August 2020
      • July 2020
      • June 2020
      • May 2020
      • April 2020
      • March 2020
      • February 2020
      • January 2020
      • December 2019
      • November 2019
      • October 2019
      • September 2019
      • August 2019
      • July 2019
      • June 2019
      • May 2019
      • April 2019
      • March 2019
      • February 2019
      • January 2019
      • December 2018
      • November 2018
      • October 2018
      • September 2018
      • August 2018
      • July 2018
      • June 2018
      • May 2018
      • April 2018
      • March 2018
      • February 2018
      • January 2018
      • December 2017
    • Global Property and Asset Mangement, Inc.
      137 North Larchmont
      Los Angeles, California 90010
      +1 213-427-1127

    © 2025 GPAM