Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986 Sample Ballot--*N 7 ty P com 0 f San LUIS Obispo ,_ ,,� Californipe MA S -,,.,ample k3cal OZ & vot, niation Pamphlet 0 64 S' 0^1-LIDATEDU PRINIARY DJ.ECT,1U""8`y' TUESDAY, Rir�F- 7. 19158 iiia TABLE OF CONTENTS • SAMPLE BALLOT AND VOTING INSTRUCTIONS e CANDIDATES' STATEMENTS • MEASURES, ANALYSES AND ARGUMENTS (if applicable to your ballot) o APPLICATION FOR ABSENT VOTER'S BALLOT THE LOCATION OF YOUR POLLING PLACE IS SHOWN ON BACK COVER RK AND TAKE THIS SAMPLE BALLOT TO YOUP POLLING PLACE 40FC-60670 AOVC 0 I 410111 O tttttt�� E M Cn SID CARD D OFFICIAL BALLOT NONPARTISAN BALLOT SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY JUNE 7, 1988 4V4VJ This ballot stub shall be torn off by precinct board member and handed to the ester. MEASURES SUBMITTED TO VOTE OF VOTERS COUNTY ORDINANCE ADOPTING BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESOLUTION NO. 88-35 Shall an ordinance be adopted approving San Luis Obispo County Board of Super Avisors Resolution No. 88-35 conditionally, YES + approving Shell Western E&P Inc. De- velopment Plan application D860401:2, NO + which is part of the conditional approval of the San Miguel Project? zu ARD OF S NO. 88.36 Shall an ordinance be adopted approving San Luis Obispo County Board of Super- visors upervisors Resolution No. 8&36 conditionally BaPPT"ng a portion of and disapproving a portion of Celeron Pipeline Company YES + of California. Inc. Development Plan ap• plications D860423:1 and D870057D, NO + both of which are a part of the condition- al approval of the San Miguel Project? ORDINANCE ADOPTING BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RESOLUTION NO. 88.37 Shall an ordinance be adopted approving KA San Luis Obispo County Board of Super- visors Resolution No. 88-37 conditionally YES + Capproving Unocal/Shell Western E&P Inc. Lot Line Adjustment. application COAL 86117, which is n part of the NO + conditional apprrn•al of the San Miguel Project? CITY CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PROPOSED MOBILEHOME RENT ORDINANCE Shall the Mobilehome Ad Hoc Commit- YE$ + tees recommended ordinance establish- ing ilobilehome Rent Regulations be adopted? NO + rKUPUSED MOBILEHOME RENT INITIATIVE ORDINANCE EShall the proposed initiative ordinance YES + establishing new Mobilehome Rent Reg. ulations be adopted? NO + IC SIDE 2 3 ^03 attttt� rr_ O FULL TEXT OF MEASURE 0 "BE IT ORDAINED by the People of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Chapter 5.44 MOBILE HOME PARK RENT STABILIZATION Sections: 5.44.010 Purpose and intent. 5.44.020 Definitions. 5.44.030 Exemptions. 5.44.040 (Repealed.) 5.44.050 City Council --Powers and duties. 5.44.060 Base space rent--Determination—Allowable increases without hearing 5.44.070 Application for rent adjustment--Fee--Contents--Notice of re- quest --Hearing. 5.44.080 Application for rent adjustment --Conduct of hearing. 5.44.090 Application for rent adjustment--Evaluation—Relevant factors. 5.44.100 Application for rent adjustment--Hearing--Determination. 5.44.110 Application for rent increase--Hearing--Appeal. 5.44.120 Rent increases not made in conformity with provisions -- Tenant's right to refuse to pay. 5.44.130 Actions brought to recover possession of mobile home space --Retaliatory eviction grounds for denial. 5.44.140 Owner to provide tenants with copy of this chapter. 5.44.141 Amendment. 5.44.142 Severability. 5.44.010 Purpose and intent. A. There is presently within the city and the surrounding areas a'shortage of spaces for the location of mobile homes. Because of this shortage, there is a very low vacancy rate, and rents have been for several years, and are presently, rising rapidly and causing concern among a substantial number of San Luis Obispc residents. B. Mobile home tenants, forced by the lack of suitable alternative housing, have had to pay the rent increases and thereby suffer a further reduction ir. their standard of living. C. Because of the high cost and impracticability of moving mobile homes, the potential for damage resulting therefrom, the requirements relating to the installation of mobile homes, including permits, landscaping and site preparation the lack of alternative homesites for mobile home residents, and the substantial investment of mobile home owners in such homes, this council finds and declares it necessary to protect the owners and occupiers of mobile homes from unreasonable rent increases, while at the same time recognizing the need of park owners to receive a suitable profit on their property with rental income sufficient to cover increases in costs of repair, maintenance, insurance, utilities, employee services, additional amenities, and other costs of operation, and to receive a fair return on their property. D. This council finds that the present low vacancy rate and frequent rent increases are particularly hard upon and unfair to residents of mobile home parks within the city. Large numbers of these residents are senior citizens and others on fixed incomes who installed their mobile homes in the city when the present inflationary rent increases could not reasonably have been foreseen. E. However, this council recognizes that a rent stabilization ordinance must be fair and equitable for all parties and must provide appropriate incentives for mobile home park operators to continue their parks profita- bly, as well as to attract additional investors for new parks. (Ord. 923 §1 (part), 1982: prior code §4800) 5.44.020 Definitions For the purpose of this chapter, certain words and phrases used herein are defined as follows: A. "Capital improvements" means those improvements, not previously located in the mobile home park, that materially add to the value of the property and appreciably prolong its useful life or adapt it to new uses, and which may be amortized over the useful life of the improvement in accordance with the Internal Revenue Code and regulations issued pur- suant thereto: provided, that this definition shall be limited to capital improvements approved by more than fifty percent of the tenants in the affected park. B. "Mobile home park" means an area of land which rents spaces for mobile home dwelling units. C. "Nubile home paPwner" or "owner" means the owner, lessor, operator or manager of a mobile home park. D. (Repealed) D. "Mobile home tenant" or "tenant" means any person entitled to occupy a mobile home within a mobile home park pursuant to ownership of the mobile home or under a rental or lease agreement with the owner of the mobile home. E. ''Rehabilitation work" means any renovation or repair work completed on or in a mobile home park performed in order to comply with the direction or order of a public agency or public utility, or to maintain existing improvements in a safe and usable condition, or to repair damage resulting from fire, earthquake or other casualty. F. "Space rent" means the consideration, including any security depos- its, bonuses, benefits or gratuities, demanded or received in connection with the use and occupancy of a mobile home space in a mobile home park, or for housing services provided, but exclusive of any amount paid for the use of a mobile home dwelling unit. (Ord. 923 §1 (part), 1982: prior code §4801) G. ''Change of ownership" means the sale, rental transfer, or exchange of a mobile home subject to the provisions of this chapter excepting the transfer io tenant's spouse by gift, bequest or devise. H. "Hearing Officer" means the duly appointed hearing officer selected from a panel of qualified hearing officers. A hearing officer shall have no financial interest in either a mobile home park or a mobile home nor have been a resident of nor reside in a mobile home park. I. "Appellate Panel" means a panel of three qualified hearing officers. A panelist shall have no financial interest in either a mobile home park or a mobile home nor have been a resident of nor reside in a mobile home park. J. "CPI" shall be the Consumer Price Index (1967=100) All Items, All Urban Consumers, for the Los Angeles/Long Beach'Riverside standard metropolitan statistical area published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, United States Department of Labor. If the CP! is not hereafter peblished, then any substitute index, or, if none, then the index most I;osels, reseni- .bling the CPI shall become the new CPI. K. "Qualified Hearing Officer". The City Administrative Officer Filar roain- lam a list of available qualified hearing officers. Qualified h; .r,rg Ci..icers ,hall be persons experienced in financial and accountmc method: ::iti. knowledge of mediation process and rules of evidence. 5.4.030 Exemptions. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to the follow;ng teranries in mobile home parks: A. Mobile home park spaces rented for nonresidential uses; B. Mobile home parks managed or operated by the United States Govern- ment, the state of California, or the county of San Luis Obispo; C. Tenancies which do not exceed an occupancy of twenty days anu which do not contemplate an occupancy of more than twenty days. D. Tenancies for which any federal or state law or regulation specifically prohibits rent regulation; E. Tenancies covered by leases or contracts which provide for a tenancy of more than a year, but only for the duration of such lease or contract. Upon the expiration of or other termination of any such lease or contract, this chapter shall immediately be applicable to the tenancy. No rent increases other than that allowed under the provisions of the lease, shall be allowed during the duration of such a lease or contract. F. Spaces in a mobile home park in which at least 66.67% of said spaces are governed by a lease with an initial term of more than one year. G. Mobile home parks which sell lots for factory -built or manufactured housing, or which provide condominium ownership of such lots, even if one or more homes in the development are rented or leased out. (Ord. 923 §1 (part), 1982: prior code §4802) J1 5.44.040 (Repealed) 5.44.050 City Council --Powers and duties. Within the limitations provided by law and in addition to any other powers and duties the Council has, the City Council shall have the following powers and duties: A. To meet from time to time as required to receive, investigate. hold hearings on, and pass upon the issues relating to mobile home park rent stabilization as set forth in this chapter; (Continued Next Page) FULL TEXT OF MEASURE 0, Continued B. To direct staff to make or conduct such independent hearings or investigations as may be appropriate to obtain such information as is necessary for Council to carry out its duties; C. To adopt, promulgate, amend and rescind administrative rules, as it deems appropriate to effectuate the purposes and policies of this chapter. (Ord. 923 §1 (part 1952: prior code §4804) 5.44.060 Base space rent ----Allowable increases without hearing. A. The "base space rent" for purposes of this chapter shall be the monthly space rent charged as of March 15, 1982 plus any increases otherwise allowed, pursuant to this Chapter. The maximum monthly space rent for any space under a lease, upon expiration of the lease shall be no more than the rent charged in the last month of said lease. In parks where there is an exemption because 66.67% of the spaces are governed by a lease with an initial term of no less than one year, then the maximum monthly space rent shall be the space rent designated in leases for comparable spaces. A schedule of current rents in the park shall be posted in a conspicuous place in the park. B. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the maximum monthly space rent may be increased no more than once a year based on the percentage change in the CPI, or 9%, whichever is less, calculated as follows: 1. The maximum monthly space rent may be increased at a rate equal to 100 percent (100%) of the CPI up to 5 percent (5%) and 75 percent (75%) of the CPI in excess of 5 percent (5%) calculated as follows: .a. The change in space rent shall be calculated by dividing the ending UPI index by the beginning CPI index. .b. If the resulting quotient is less than 1.05, then it shall be multi- plied by the space rent. The resulting product shall be the new space rent. .c. If the resulting quotient is greater than 1.05, then the difference betvieen the resulting product and 1.05 shall be multiplied by 75 percent. The resulting product shall be multiplied by the space rent and that product shall be added to the sum derived from 5.44.060 12 abrve The sum shall be the new space rent. d. The oeginning CPI index shall be the index for the month used as I he ending index for the last CPI adjustment. .e. The ending GPI index shall be the index for the month twelve months after the beginning index. 2. Each month the City Administrative Officer shall publish the percent- age change of the CPI allowed under this Section B for the 12 -month period immediately preceding the month for which CPI information has been most recently published. 3. It is the intention of this paragraph 5.44.060 B to allow for automatic increases in space rent based on changes in the cost of living as measured by the CPI. The limitations on such increases are intended to minimize the immediate impact drastic changes in the CPI might have on residents. The limitations are not intended to prevent ultimate adjust- ments to allow owners to receive a fair return on their property. C. The maximum monthly space rent of a tenant may be increased by the owner when there is a change of ownership affecting a mobile home. However, such increase shall not exceed 10% of the then existing space rent and may not be relied upon any more often than once in any 36 -month period as the basis to increase rent. In the event of change of ownership resulting from subletting of the mobilehome space as may be allowed by State law, should such become State law, then upon any such subletting then the space rent may be increased up to 10% of the then -existing space rent. In the event of change of ownership resulting from vacation of the space, then the space rent may be adjusted to fair market rent in the community. D. No owner shall either (1) demand, accept or retain a rent of or from a tenant in excess of the maximum rent permitted by this chapter, or (2) effect a prohibited rent increase by a reduction of general park facilities and services. However, an owner may modify the nature of park services if reasonable allowance is provided to the tenant. For example, if the owner elects to submeter water so that tenants pay for water consumed by them, then tenants shall receive a reasonable reduction from their base space rent. (Ord. 1079 §1, 1986: Ord. 1020 §1, 1984: Ord. 923 §1 (part), 1982: prior code §4805) E. Space rent may be.matically adjusted based on increases in ex- penses for common area utilities; new government mandated services; garbage service and cable television, where applicable. The space rent may be adjusted by dividing the total increase in any such expenses incurred during a twelve-month period by twelve, less the percentage in the CPI index for the twelve-month period. The quotient shall be allocated to the space rent for each space in the park based on the amount the space rent relates to total space rent for the park. Notice of the increase shall be in writing and shall be given as required by law no less than 60 days prior to any such increase being effective. The notice shall state the amount of the rent increase, the new space rent, the amount of the total increase in expenses and the nature of the expense. A copy of the notice shall be given to the City Administrative Officer. The City Administrative Officer shall have the authority to resolve questions regarding computation of the space rent increase based on this section. There shall only be one such increase in any twelve-month period. 5.44.070 Application for rent adjustment--Fee--Contents--Notice of re- quest --Hearing. A. Except for automatic increases in base rent allowed under Section 5.44.060, an owner or tenant may file with the City Clerk an application for a rent adjustment ("application"). The application shall state the amount of the adjustment for each space affected and the reasons for the adjustment. 1. An application shall be accompanied by the payment of a fee as may be established from time to time by the council. 2. An application filed by an owner shall be accompanied by a state- ment stating that the tenant for each space affected has been served either personally or by mail with a notice describing the application and the change in rent or services. 3. An application filed by a tenant shall be accompanied with a state- ment stating that the owner has been either personally or by mail served with the application and with a statement designating not more than three persons to act as representatives for the spaces affected and containing the names and addresses of tenants representing no less than 51% of the spaces affected by the application and supporting the application and established by a secret election. 4. A statement shall accompany the application and shall noiify the receiving party that he/she has 30 days to file an objection and if one is not filed within the time allowed, then the application will be automat- ically granted. B. An objection to the application may be filed with the City Clerk within 30 days after the notice of application has been served. The objection shall identify the portions of the application objected to and shall state the grounds of the objection. 1. A copy of an objection filed by an owner shall be mailed to each of the designated tenant representatives. 2. A copy of an objection filed by a tenant shall be mailed to the owner. The tenant's objection shall designate not more than three persons to act as representatives for the objecting tenants. The objection must be accompanied by a statement containing the names and addresses of tenants representing no less than 51% of the spaces affected by the owners application and verifying that they object to the application, established by secret ballot election. C. If no objection is filed to an application within the time allowed, or if less than 51% of the tenants support an objection to an application, then the application will be automatically granted. D. If an objection is filed within the time provided, then the owner and the tenant representatives shall meet and confer to negotiate in good faith an agreement regarding the application. Either party may request a mediator of their choice to assist in the negotiations, but this is not required. If an agreement is reached within 60 days, then the tenant representatives shall notify all tenants affected by the agreement. The tenants shall have 10 days to approve or disapprove of the agreement. If tenants representing a majority of the spaces affected fail to disapprove of the agreement then the agreement shall be binding on the owner and all tenants affected. The City Clerk shall be notified that an agreement has been reached. The statements made in negotiations and any agreements reached but not approved shall not be admissible in any subsequent hearings regarding the application. (Continued Next Page) 0 FULL TEXT OF MEASURE D. Continued E. If the owner and the tenant representatives fail to reach an agreement within the time provided or if a majority of the tenants disapprove of an agreement reached, then the applicant shall within 10 days notify the City Administrative Officer that an agreement has not been reached. The City Administrative Officer shall obtain a list of no less than five (5) qualified hearing officers. Owners and tenants may each delete one person from the list of qualified hearing officers within seven (7) days and one of the remaining persons shall be selected by the City Administrative Officer as the hearing officer. Appointment of the hearing officer shall be completed no later than twenty-one days atter filing of the notice that an agreement has not been reached. F. The hearing officer shall set a hearing on the application complying with the requirements of this section no less than ten days and no more than thirty days after his appointment. The hearing officer shall notify the owner and tenants, in writing, of the time, place and date set for the hearing. No hearing_ or any part hereof may be continued beyond thirty days. after the initial hearing date, without the applicant's consent. If the hearing officer approves an application as requested or as modified, the same shall take effect as noticed by the owner or as the hearing officer may otherwise direct. (Ord. 1077 §2, 1986; Ord. 923 §1 (part), 1982: prior code §4806) 5.44.080 Application for rent adjustment --Conduct of hearing. A. All review hearings conducted by the hearing officer shall be conducted in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, at Section 54950 et seq. of the California Government Code and according to the rules of the American Arbitration Association. B. All interested parties to a hearing may have assistance from an attorney or such other person as may be designated by the parties in presenting evidence or in setting forth by argument their position. All witnesses shall be swom in and all testimony shall be under penalty of perjury. C. In the event that either the owner or the tenant(s) should fail to appear at the hearing at the specified time and place, the hearing officer may hear and review such evidence as may be presented and make such decisions as if all parties had been present. D. Owner and affected tenants may offer any testimony, documents, written declarations or other relevant evidence. E. Formal rules of evidence shall not apply. F. Minutes shall be taken at all hearings. (Ord. 923 §1 (part), 1982: prior code §4807) 5.44.090 Application for rent adjustment--Evaluation--Relevant factors. In evaluating the application the hearing officer may consider, along with all other factors it considers relevant, changes in costs to the owner attributable to increases or decreases in master land and/or facilities lease rent, utility rates, property taxes. insurance, advertising, variable mort- gage interest rates, employee costs, normal repair and maintenance, and other considerations, including, but not limited to, rehabilitation work, capital improvements, upgrading and addition of amenities or services, net operating income, and the level of rent necessary to permit a just and reasonable return on the owner's property. (Ord. 923 §1 (part), 1982: prior code §4808) A. In applying the foregoing factors, the hearing officer shall utilize the maintenance of net operating income (MNOI) formula. Under the MNOI allowable gross rents are calculated as follows: All operating expenses for the twelve-month period ending December 31, 1981 are subtracted from all operating expenses for the twelve-month period immediately preceding the date of the application for which expense data is available. In the event operating expenses are not available for the period ending December 31, 1981, then expenses for a twelve-month period reasonably close to De- cember 31, 1981 may be substituted. The difference shall be added to gross annual rent based on rental rates in effect on March 15, 1982. The sum shall be the allowable gross annual space rent. The allowable gross space rent shall be fairly apportioned between all spaces in the park. The space rent determined under the MNOI formula shall be adjusted as follows: 1. There shall be an adjustment to allow for inflation calculated as follows. The net operating income (NOI) for the base period shall be calculated by subtracting the park's operating expenses for the twelve- month period ending December 31, 1982, from the park's annual gross space rent based on the space rent in effect on March 15, 1982. The CPI index for the month most recently available prior to filing the application shall be divided by the CPI index for March, 1982. The resulting quotient shall be multiplied by the base period NOI. This shall be the adjusted 40-56 NOL The operatingexpenses for the twelve-month period immediately preceding the date of the application for which information is available shall be added to the adjusted NOI. The sum shall be the inflation adjusted gross space rent. The allowable space rent shall be the greater of the space rent calculated using the MNOf formula and the space rent adjusted for inflation. 2. In calculating MNOI there shall be an adjustment to the gross space rent in effect on March 15, 1982, if the hearing officer determines that the gross space rent in effect on that date did not allow the owner to receive a just and reasonable return on his property. 3. If the hearing 'officer concludes that the MNOI formula, and the adjustments thereto, does not provide a just and reasonable return to the owner, then the hearing officer may apply any reasonable formula, including a return on investment, a return on fair market value, or return on equity, to determine a space rent which will allow the owner to receive -a fair and reasonable return on his property. B. The hearing officer shall not consider income arising from spaces leased in the park pursuant to 5.44.030(E) of this chapter. Likewise, the hearing officer shalt not consider a pro rata portion of the expenses of park operation attributable to the leased spaces. 5.44.100 Application for rent adjustment--Hearing--Determination. A. The hearing officer shall make a final decision no later than twenty days after the conclusion of its hearing. The hearing officer's decision shall be based on the preponderance of the evidence submitted at the hearing. The decision shall be based on findings. All parties to the hearing shall be advised by mail of the hearing officer's decision and findings. B. Pursuant to its findings, the hearing officer may: 1. Permit the requested adjustment to become effective, in whole or in part; or 2. Deny the requested adjustment; or 3. Permit or deny, in whole or in part, requested reductions of, or charges for, facilities or services. C. Any decision of the hearing officer shall be final unless, within fifteen days after mailing of the decision and findings the owner or any affected tenant appeals the decision. (Ord. 923 §1 (part), 1982: prior code §4809) D. The hearing officer's charges shall be paid by the City 5.44.110 Application for rent adjustment--Appeal--Hearinq. A. Any appeal from a decision of the hearing officer shall be filed wiih the City Clerk. The appellant shall also mail a copy of the appeal to the responding party. The appeal shall state the grounds on which it is based. An appeal filed by a tenant shall be accompanied by a statement containing the names and addresses of the tenants supporting the appeal. The appeal must be supported by at least 51 percent of the tenants affected by the appeal. B. Upon filing of a valid appeal, the City Administrative Officer shall obtain a list of no less than seven (7) qualified hearing officers. The hearing officer who previously acted shall not qualify. Owners and tenant represen- tatives may each delete one person from the list of qualified hearing officers within seven days, and three of the remaining persons shall be selected by the City Administrative Officer as the Appellate Panel. Appoint- ment of the Appellate Panel shall be completed no later than twenty-one (21) days after filing the appeal. C. At the time set for consideration of the appeal the Appellate Panel shall review and consider the record of the hearing officer's hearing as well as the decision and finding of the hearing officer. After review and considera- tion the Appellate Panel may either (1) determine that a further hearing shall be held, or (2) ratify and adopt the decision and findings of the hearing officer. If a further hearing is conducted, the Appellate Panel may upon conclusion of that hearing and in no event more than thirty days thereafter, modify or reverse the decision of the hearing officer, only if the Appellate Panel finds that there has been an abuse of discretion or that there is no substantial evidence to support the hearing officer's decision. (Ord. 923 §1 (part), 1982: prior code §4810) The Appellate Panel's decision shall be final and no appeal may be taken to Council. D. If the parry filing the appeal is unsuccessful, then that party shall pay the Appellate Panel's charges. If the responding parry is unsuccessful, then both parties and the City shall share equally in payment of the Appellate Panel's charges. 5.44.120 Rent increases not made in conformity with provisions --Tenant's right to refuse to pay. (Continued Next Page) FULL TEXT OF MEASURE D, Continued O A tenant may refuse to pay any increase in rent not made in conformity with this chapter. Such refusal to pay shall be a defense in any action brought to recover possession of a mobile home space or to collect the rent increase. (Ord. 923 §1 (part), 1982: prior code §4811) 5.44.130 Actions brought to recover possession of mobile home space -- Retaliatory eviction grounds for denial. Notwithstanding Section 5.44.120, In any action brought to recover possession of a mobile home space, the court may consider as grounds for denial any violation of any provision of this chapter. Further, the determination that the action was brought; n retaliation for the exercise of any rights conferred by this chapter shall be grounds for denial. (Ord. 923 §1 (part), 1982: prior code §4812) 5.44.140 Owner to provide tenants with copy of this chapter. Any tenant offered a lease or contract which if accepted and fully executed would be exempt from the provisions of this chapter (Section 5.44.030E) shall at the time of the offer also be provided with a copy of this chapter. (Ord. 923 §1 (part), 1982: prior code §4813) 5.44.141 Amendment The provisions of this Chapter 5.44 may be amended by a majority vote of the City Council. 5.44.142 Severability If any portion of this Chapter is found to be invalid, then that shall in no way affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Chapter. IMPARTIANALYSIS MEASURE 0 The City of San Luis Obispo currently regulates the rents of mobilehome spaces for parks within the City (San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, Chapter 5.44). This measure, if adopted, would replace the existing laws with a new set of regulations. Significant components of the new regulations would be: 1. Rent increases could occur through two basic means; an annual in- crease equal to a given percentage of a specified Consumer Price Index (CPI) (which could vary depending on the level of the CPI) and an increase upon an application by the owner setting forth the reasons justifying such an adjustment. 2. A rent increase proposed by the application method would become effective unless tenants representing 51% of the affected spaces object. It an objection is filed, the tenants and owner must attempt to negotiate a settle- ment. If the matter is not settled, the issues in dispute are heard by a neutral and experienced Hearing Officer selected by the City. 3. The Hearing Officer would take testimony and accept evidence from both parties. He would consider a number of specific factors and would use a method known as the Maintenance of Net Operating Income (MN01) in determining what level of rent would permit a just and reasonable return on the owner's property. 4. The Hearing Officer's decision could be appealed to a 3 -person Appel- late Panel comprised of qualified persons selected by the City. Under certain circumstances the Appellate Panel could modify or reverse the Hearing Officer's decision. The Appellate Panel's decision would be final and not appealable to the City Council. 5. Any park which had more than 2/3 of its spaces on long term leases would be exempt from these regulations. "Long term" is defined as a period greater than one year. Rent for spaces within such a park and not under long term leases would be the rent for comparable spaces under leases. 6. Upon a change in ownership in a mobilehome, rent may be increased no more than 10%; provided, however, this particular increase can occur no more than once every 3 years. If there is a change in ownership resulting from vacation of the mobilehome space, the space rent may be set in accordance with the market level. 7. Amendments to these regulations could be enacted directly by the City Council and would not require a vote of the electorate. There are other provisions of the proposed regulations which merit atten- tion and which should be reviewed in order to understand how the ordinance would work in detail. This Measure, if adopted, would result in some expenditure of public funds in order to administer the regulations in an efficient and timely manner. The exact fiscal impact is not known at this time. This Measure and Measure "E" both address the subject of mobilehome rent control. In order for either Measure to be adapted, it must receive at least 50% of the total votes cast. If both Measures receive greater than 50%, the one which gets the most votes will become the law. If neither Measure gets 50% of the vote, the existing mobilehome rent control regulations will remain in effect. s/ Roger Picquet San Luis Obispo City Attorney ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF 14 SURE 0 Measure D is needed. The existing Rent Control Ordinance has been in place for six years. The City, residents and park owners, have all agreed that it does not work. The City Council asked a joint committee of residents and owners, to recommend changes to the Ordinance. Measure D is the joint committee's recommendation. Measure D is balanced. It is the result of a compromise agreed to by representatives of park owners and residents. The compromise resulted from months of negotiations. Measure D is fair. it protects residents and it also protects owners. Cost of living increases are limited. When a resident moves, increases are limited to 10 percent. Even this increase can only occur once every three years. Measure D encourages negotiations. It forces owners and residents to meet and confer prior to rent disputes being heard by a hearing officer. Measure D is efficient. Rent disputes will be resolved efficiently, using efficient procedures and fair formulas. Measure D eliminates politics. Professional independent hearing officers will hear rent disputes. Appeals will be heard by a panel of hearing officers, not the City Council. The City Council will have more time to consider issues more important to the entire community. Measure D encourages leases. Owners and residents are encouraged to work with each other, rather than against one another. It provides incentives for owners to offer leases. In sum, Measure D is unique and innovative because, through compro- mise, residents and owners have agreed to the terms of a rent control ordinance that is fair to them. It solves problems, it does not create them. Vote YES on Measure D. s/ Patricia Barlow, Former Chairman, San Luis Obispo Rent Review Board s/ William E. Welch, Resident, Laguna Lake Mobile Estates, and Member, Rent Stabilization Ordinance Committee s/ Ed Evans, Owner, Creekside Mobilehome Park, and Member, Rent Stabilization Ordinance Committee sl Elizabeth M. Law, Local Businesswoman s/ Glennadeane W. Dovey, Former City Councilmember NO REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF THIS MEASURE WAS SUBMITTED ARGIIT AGAINST MEASURE 0 The citizens of San Luis Obispo should vote against Measure D because: I. Measure D would soon take away all the protection of the existing rent ordinance. The margin with which the people favor rent stabilizat on shows we're smart enough to see the link between mobile home rent protection and affordability to live in San Luis Obispo. Il. The concept of safe harbor as defined in Measure D is totally unsafe for mobile home residents. Under this concept, one third of the people in a park could be forced to live under conditions which they may be against. III. Measure D would allow a 10% rent increase when a home is sold. This would inhibit a home owner's ability to sell; potential buyers would be scared off. Where's the fairness or logical reason for a landowner to get more re- turn on an investment where he hasn't had Lny additional expense or work to do? IV. Fact: Measure D provides more ways for rents to be increased than anyone who lives in mobile homes can afford! There is, even basically, a larger percentage allowance through the Consumer Price Index. Let's face it, many mobile home residents are seniors. Their real income can not rise at the rate which would occur in rents in just a few years under Measure D. V. All renters lose under Measure D. Many of you will be looking to own a first home. A mobile home is affordable., Join the effort to defeat Measure D or you may find these doors of opportunity closed to you due to skyrocketing space rent. VI. Measure D unduly favors park owners without adequately protecting mobile home residents. We must defeat Measure D! s/ James C. Maxwell, President Golden State Mobile Home Owner's League #517 s/ William G. Roalman Planning Commissioner, San Luis Obispo s/ Richard Clark, Past President 8 yrs. Golden State Mobile Home Owner's League #517 s/ Rose Lorenzo, Secretary -Treasurer G.S.M.O.L #517 s/ John E. Beaton, Vice President Golden State Mobile Home Ovvn-Cs League #517 REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE D Measure D is fair, balanced and efficient. Measure D is the only alternative developed by residents and owners working together. They, and the City Rent Review Board, have worked for months on a workable compromise. The result is a fair, balanced and efficient ordinance. The opponents of Measure D do not want a compromise. They do not want a rent control ordinance that is balanced, tair,and efficient. They want it their way. A law that is not fair to all is good for none. Don't be deceived. Measure D severely restricts rent increases. Rent may increase at, or below, the rate of inflation. If expenses go up, then rents can go up. That is fair. Don't be deceived. Yes, under Measure D rents can increase when a mobilehome is sold; but only 10%, and only once every three years. This protects the value of the residents' mobilehome, but allows a limited adjust- ment in rent for a new resident. That is balanced. Don't be deceived. The safe harbor provisions in Measure D protect everyone. If two-thirds of the residents agree with the owner on leases, then the rent chargeable to the remaining residents is the same as the rents chargeable under the leases. That encourages leases. That is efficient. 40-58 Vote YES on Measure D. It solves problems; it doesn't create them. s/ Patricia Barlow, Former Chairman,0 San Luis Obispo Rent Review Board s/ Dennis B. Wheeler, Jr., Former Member San Luis Obispo Rent Review Board, and Local Businessman s/ Glennadeane W. Dovey, Former City Councilmember s/ William E. Welch, Resident, Laguna Lake Mobile Estates, and Member, Rent Stabilization Ordinance Committee s/ Ladd R. Day, Resident, Laguna Lake Mobile Estates, and Member, Rent Stabilization Ordinance Committee r FULL TEXT OF MEASURES C Ordinance of the City of San Luis Obispo, CA. to establish Mobile Home Rent Stabilization The People of the City of San Luis Obispo do ordain and enact as follows: This Mobile Home Park Rent Stabilization Ordinance rescinds the Mobile Home Park Rent Stabilization Ordinance Chapter 5.44.00 through 5.44.140 along with amendments for Section 5.44 Subsection 5.44.30 (E), Subsection 5.44.70 (B and C) Subsection 5.44.60 (B. 2), as well any and all City Ordinances which ire inconsistent with this initiative Ordinance and replaces it with the following: Sections: 1. Purpose and intent 2. Definitions 3. Exemptions 4. Hearing Officer- Established 5. Duties of Hearing Officer 6. Allowable increases - Allowable decreases - base space rent - deter- mination of current rent 7. Application for rent increase - decrease - fee - contents - notice of request - hearing B. Conduct of hearing - Application for rent increase - decrease 9. Evaluation - Relevant factors - Application for rent increase - decrease 10. Hearing - determination - Application for rent increase - decrease 11. Application for rent increase - decrease - hearing - appeal 12. Rent increases not made in conformity with provisions - homeowners right to refuse to pay 13. Actions brought to recover possession of mobile home space - Retalia- tory eviction grounds for denial 14. Recreational vehicles as residences 15. Civil Remedies 16. Owner to provide homeowners with a copy of this ordinance 17. Safe Harbor 18. Vacancy decontrol 19. Severability 20. Miscellaneous 21. Majority vote needed to make changes in this ordinance 1. Pose and Intent A. There is presently, within the City of San Luis Obispo and the surrounding areas, a shortage of spaces for the location of mobile homes. Because of this shortage there is a very low vacancy rate, and rents have been, for several years, rising rapidly and causing concern among a substantial number of San Luis Obispo residents. B. Mobile home owners, forced by the lack of suitable alternative housing, have had to pay the rent increases and thereby suffer a further reduction in their standard of living. C. Because of the high cost and difficulty of moving mobile homes, the potential for damage resulting therefrom, the requirements relating to the installation of mobile homes, including permits, landscaping and site preparation, the lack of alternative homesites for mobile home residents, and the substantial investment of mobile home owners in such homes, it is necessary to protect the owners and occupiers of mobile homes from unreasonable rent increases, while at the same time recognizing the need of prudent park owners to receive a suitable return on their investment, with rental income sufficient to cover necessary and reasonable in- creases, including but not limited to, insurance, employee expenses and additional amenities provided to residents. D. It has been found low vacancy rates and frequent rent increases are particularly hard on residents of mobile home parks within the City of San Luis Obispo. Large numbers of these residents are senior citizens and others on fixed incomes who installed their mobile homes in the city when inflationary rent increases could not reasonably have been foreseen. E. It is recognized that a rent stabilization ordinance should be fair and equitable for all parties. The Consumer Price Index (C.P.I.) as a guide for a cost -of -living increase is incorporated in this ordinance to accomplish that equitability. 2. Definitions For the purpose of this ordinance, certain words and phrases used herein are defined as follows: A. "City" means the City of San Luis Obispo, California and any of its officers and employees who will be involved in the application or enforce- ment of the provisions of this ordinance. B. "Capital improvements' -those improvements that materially add to the value of the property and which may be amortized over the useful life of the improvement in accordance with the Internal Revenue Code and regulations issued thereto; provided that this definition shall be limited to capital improvements either approved by more than 51 % of the tenants in the affected park or constructed to comply with the direction of a public agency. C. "Mobile home park" means an area of land in which are rented spaces and amenities of the common areas for mobile home dwelling units. D. "Mobile home park owner" or "owner" means the owner, lessor, opera- tor or manager of a mobile home park. E. "Hearing officer" or "Officer" means an individual appointed by the City to conduct meetings between park owners and homeowners and to perform other related activities. F. "Mobile home owner" or "homeowner" means any person entitled to occupy a mobile home within a mobile home park by ownership of a mobile home or under a rental or lease agreement with the park owner. G. "Maintenance expenses" are those expenses required to suitably repair all facilities, services and amenities which have deteriorated beyond the state of acceptable usage and which are owned solely by the park owner, in compliance with the California Civil Code Provision 798.87 of the Mobilehome Residency Law. H. "Space rent" or "Rent" means the charges for the mobile home space and all amenities, facilities, utilities, or services that are provided, includ- ing use of the common areas in a mobile home park. I. "Investment" means the actual cost to the park owner excluding the cost to the owner of all borrowed funds or loans for the purchase of the park at the close of escrow. J. "Recreational vehicle" means any recreational vehicle used for residency in a mobile home park longer than nine (9) consecutive months for the purpose of a residency. 3. Exemptions The provisions of this ordinance shall not apply to the following tenan- cies in mobile home parks: A. Mobile home park spaces rented solely for nonresideniiai uses. B. Mobile home parks managed or operated by the U.S. Government, the State of California, the County of San Luis Obispo, or the City of San Luis Obispo. C. Tenancies which do not exceed an occupancy of twenty (20) days and which do not contemplate an occupancy of more than twenty (20) days. D. Tenancies for which any federal or state law or regulation specifically prohibits rent regulation. E. Tenancies covered by leases or contracts which provide for more than a 12 -month tenancy, but only for the duration of such lease or contract. Upon the expiration of or other termination of any such lease or contract, this ordinance shall immediately be applicable to the tenancy. F. Mobile home parks which sell lots for factory -built or manufactured housing. 4. Hearing Officer - Established A. There is established a qualified Hearing Officer with a background in accounting, to be selected by the City. B. A Hearing Officer may not be or have been affiliated financially by investment or organizationally for personal gain with the real estate or rental housing industry. Appointee shall not be a mobile home owner or renter in a mobile home park, or have any financial interest (as defined by State law) in any mobile home or mobile home park. The Hearing Officer shall file a declaration to this effect with the City Clerk in a form approved by the City Attorney. C. The Hearing Officer shall be compensated for his or her time plus reimbursement for travel and other expenses while on official duty. 5. Duties of the Hearing Officer A. Shall be directly responsible for the administration of the Rent Stabiliza- tion Ordinance subject to reporting and supervision as the City shall direct. B. Determine that a meeting between the park owner and the homeowners has taken place in an effort to come to an agreement before applying to the Hearing Officer for a hearing. (Continued Next Page) FULL TEXT OF MEASURE E, Continued C. Obtain and review applications from park owners and homeowners for a rent increase or rent decrease and ordinance violations. D. Obtain all relevant documents, including Income Tax reports, needed to make findings and conduct an informal hearing. E. Hold hearings with the involved parties to consider the applications and make decisions based on the findings. F. Decisions of the Hearing Officer are appealable to the City Council. Any final decision of the Hearing Officer or the City Council shall be enforced by the city. G. The performance of the Hearing Officer is to be reviewed by the City Council at least every two years. H. All decisions of the Hearing Officer shall be in conformity with the relevant portions of the Civil Code and applicable portions shall be cited in all decisions. 6. Allowable increases - Allowable decreases - base space rent - determina- tion of current rent A. 1. The "base space rent" for purposes of this ordinance shall be the monthly space rent charges as of March 15, 1982. 2. The current rent shall be determined by adding the allowable Consum- er's Price Index increases each year, and;.hardship increases as permitted by this ordinance and any preceding ordinance. B. Except as otherwise provided in this ordinance, the maximum monthly space rent may be increased or decreased no more than once a year by the lesser of the two following methods: (1) Eight percent (8%) of the existing space rent or; (2) Three-fourths (seventy-five percent) (75%) of the cost -of -living increase (Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Cities National- Con- sumer Price Index for the urban consumers), for the preceding twelve (12) month period ending four (4) months prior to the date of the proposed increase. (3) A decrease in the existing space rent equal to three-fourths (seventy-five percent) (75%) of the cost of living decrease (Bu- reau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Cities National Index for urban consumers), must be given when the Consumers Price Index is reduced. (4) All official Consumer Price Index rent rate increases or decreases are to be issued by the Hearing Officer by September 1. Park owners shall give at least a 60 -day notice of the rent increase to be effective on January 1. Rent increases cannot be retroactive. C. No owner shall either (1) demand, acceptor retain a rent or charge from a homeowner in excess of the maximum rent permitted by this ordinance, or (2) effect prohibited rent increase indirectly by a reduction of general park facilities and/or services. D. There shall be no reduction of general park facilities, services, or amenities except as allowed as a result of a hearing. 7. Application for rent increase - decrease - fee - contents - notice of request -hearing A. A park owner who has been required to make expenditures as defined in 2G or has incurred costs of such amounts that he will be unable to operate the park given the maximum increase permitted in 68, if he seeks relief, shall file with the Officer an application for a rent increase, or application to reduce, or charge for, certain services or facilities, (in either event referred to hereinafter as "application" or "application for rent increase"). B. An application for rent increase or decrease pursuant to this section shall be accompanied by the payment of a fee of $125.00 plus 51.00 per mobile home. The application shall specify, the address of the mobile home park, the space number or numbers, the proposed effective date and the facts supporting the application. The applicant shall produce at the request of the Officer any records, evidence including but not limited to receipts, reports or other documents including income tax returns as needed and that the Officer may deem necessaryto make a determination whether to approve the application. C. The owner shall serve each affected homeowner either personally, or by mail, with notice of the change in rent, services or facilities requested at the same time the application for approval of same is being filed with the Officer. Proof of such service shall be filed with the Officer concurrent with the filing of the application. Copies of the application shall be available free of charge to any affected homeowner requesting the same at the business office of the park. 40-60 D. The Officer shall shearing on the application complying with the requirements of this section no less'than ten (10) days and no more than thirty (30) days after receipt of the application and proof of service and the homeowners have been notified, in writing, of the application to the Hearing Officer. The Hearing Officer shall notify the owner and home- owners, in writing, of the time, place and date set for the hearing. No hearing or any part thereof may be continued beyond thirty (30) days after the initial hearing date, without the consent of both parties. If the Hearing Officer approves an application as requested or as modified, the order or ruling shall take effect sixty (60) days after the Officer's approval and after the homeowners are notified, in writing, by the owner, subject to any requirements by the Hearing Officer. E. An application for a rent decrease by the homeowners shall be accom- panied by documentation showing reduced services, facilities or amenities that are no longer available, or anything that caused a reduction in the value of their homes; for example, the deterioration of streets. It shall show the effective date of the decrease in services, amenities or value of homes. The application will be accompanied by a nominal fee of twenty-five dollars ($25.00). F. The homeowners or homeowner's association shall notify the owner, in writing, at the same time that an application is filed. G. The Hearing Officer shall set a hearing on the application complying with the requirements of this section no less than ten (10) days and no more than thirty (30) days after receipt of the application and proof that the park owner has been notified of the application to the Officer. The Officer shall notify both parties, in writing, of the time, place and date set for the hearing. No hearing or any part thereof may be continued beyond thirty (30) days after the initial hearing date, without the consent of both parties. If the Hearing Officer approves an application requested or modified, the same shall take effect retroactive to the date of the loss of facilities, services, amenity or value of homes. 8. Conduct of Hearing - Application for rent increase - decrease A. All interested parties to a hearing may be represented by an attorney or such other persons they designate. All witnesses shall be sworn in. B. In the event the park owner or the homeowner(s) shall fail to appear at the hearing at the specified time and place, the Hearing Officer may hear and review such evidence as may be presented and make such decisions as if all parties had been present. C. Parties may offer any testimony, documents written declarations or other relevant evidence. D. Minutes shall be taken at all hearings. Tape recordings shall also be made and shall be held available for transcription when requested by any party. 9. Relevant factors � Application for rent increase - decrease - evaluation In evaluating the application the Hearing Officer shall consider in concur- rence with the Mobile Home Residency Law, Civil Code No. 798.31 which states in part "A homeowner shall not be charged a fee for other than rent, utilities, and incidental reasonable services actually rendered." 10. Hearing - Determination - Application for rent increase - decrease A. The Hearing Officer shall make a final decision no later than twenty (20) days after the conclusion of the hearing. The decision shall be based on the findings of the Hearing Officer. The findings shall be based on the evidence submitted and obtained at the hearing. All parties or their designated representatives shall be advised by mail of the Officer's decision and findings. B. In carrying out the decisions, the Officer may: (1) Permit the requested rent increase or decrease to become effec- tive, in whole or in part; or (2) Deny the requested rent increase or decrease; or (3) Permit or deny, in whole or in part, requested reductions, of or charges for, facilities, services, or amenities. 0 C. Any decision of the Hearing Officer shall be final unless, within fifteen (15) working days after mailing of the findings and decision, the owner or any affected howeowner appeals the decision to the City Council. Any final decision shall be enforceable by the city. 11. Application for Rent Increase - Decrease - Hearing - Appeal (Continued Next Page) FULL TEXT OF MEASURE E, Continued A. B. 12 13 14 15 Any appeal from a decision of the Hearing Officer shall be filed with the City Clerk. The date for consideration of the appeal shall be set by the City Clerk at a date no less than ten (10) days nor more than thirty (30) days after the expiration date for filing of an appeal. Written notice of the date, time and place shall be given by the City Clerk to the owner and all affected homeowners or their designated representatives. At the time set for consideration of the appeal, the City Council shall review and consider the record of the hearing, findings and decision of the Hearing Officer. After review and consideration, the Council may either (1) determine that a further hearing shall be held within a reason- able time, or (2) ratify and adopt the findings and decision of the Hearing Officer. If a further hearing is conducted, the. Council shall upon the conclusion of that hearing, and in no event more than thirty (30) days thereafter, affirm, modify or reverse the decision of the Officer, shall make findings and issue rulings and orders consistent with such findings. Rerft increases not made in conformity with provisions - Homeowner's right to refuse to pay A homeowner may refuse to pay any increase in rent not made in conformity with this ordinance. Such refusal to pay the owner shall be a defense in any action brought to recover possession of a mobile home space or to collect the rent increase. The disputed 4unds shall be put aside to be disbursed when a final decision is made under this Ordinance or other legal procedure. Actions brought to recover possession of mobile home space - Retalia- tory eviction grounds for denial Notwithstanding Section 12, in any action brought to recover posses- sion of a mobile home space, the court may consider as grounds for denial any violation of any provision of this ordinance. Further, the determination that the action was brought in retaliation for the exercise of any rights conferred by this ordinance shall be grounds for denial. Recreational Vehicles as Residences Recreational vehicles in a mobile home park that are used for a residence nine (9) months or longer shall have the same consideration as a mobile home for rent stabilization purposes. Civil Remedies If any park owner demands, accepts, receives or retains any payment of rent in excess of the maximum lawful space rent, as determined under this ordinance, then the homeowner in such mobilehome parks affected by violation individually or by class action, may seek relief individually or by class action in a court of appropriate jurisdiction for injunctive relief and damages, in addition to any enforcement action by the city under this ordinance. 16. 17 18. Owner to provide homeowners with a copy of this ordinance Any homeowner offered a lease or contract which, if accepted and fully executed, would be exempt from the provisions of this ordinance (Sec- tion 3 (E) shall, prior to the execution of such lease or contract, also be provided with a copy of this ordinance. Receipt shall be acknowledged in writing with copies to both parties. Safe Harbor In the event that any homeowners in a mobile home park enter into leases with their park owner, homeowners who do not enter into such leases shall nevertheless, be entitled to rent stabilization protections of this ordinance. Vacancy Decontrol In the event that a homeowner sells, conveys, or otherwise transfers ownership of his or her mobile home, or the right to occupancy, the park owner shall not be permitted to establish a new base rent for the mobile home space and shall not be entitled to otherwise increase the space rent in contravention of this ordinance. 19. Severabili If any provision of any clause of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held to be unconstitutional or to be otherwise invalid by a final judgment of any court of competent jurisdic- tion, or should be invalidated by any legislation, then such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or clauses of applications thereof which can be implemented without the invalid provision or clause or applica- tion, and to this end, the provisions and clauses of this ordinance are declared to be severable. 20. Miscellaneous 9W (1) At the termination of a lease, if a new lease is not contracted, accepted, and fully executed, the homeowner comes under the jurisdiction of this rent stabilization ordinance. (2) Charges and rents shall be based on the provisions of Section 6 of this ordinance. 21. Majority vote needed to make changes in this ordinance This Ordinance for rent stabilization of a space or spaces• in a mobile home park cannot be changed or amended in whole or in part without a majority vote of the people of the City of San Luis Obispo, California. IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS MEASURE E The City of San Luis Obispo currently regulates the rents of mobilehome spaces for parks within the City (San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, Chapter 5.44). This measure, if adopted, would replace the existing laws with a new set of regulations. Significant components of the new regulations would be: 1. Rent increases could occur through two basic means; an annual in- crease equal to a given percentage of a specified Consumer Price Index (CPI) and an increase upon an application by the owner setting forth the reasons justifying such an adjustment. 2. A rent increase proposed by the application method would be consid- ered by a neutral and qualified Hearing Officer selected by the City. The Hearing Officer would take testimony and accept evidence from both parties. The Hearing Officer could use any number of several unspecified methods to determine whether the owner has incurred costs of such amounts that he will be unable to operate the park and still receive a suitable return on his investment. 3. The Hearing Officer's decision could be appealed to the City Council. The Council could affirm, modify or reverse the decision of the Hearing Officer. 4. Any space in a park on a long term lease would not be affected by these regulations. "Long term is defined as a period greater than one year. Any space in a park not on a long term lease would be affected by these regulations no matter how many other spaces within the same park were on long term leases. 5. A change in ownership in a mobilehome, in and of itself, would not allow a rent increase to occur. 6. Amendments to these regulations would require approval from a major- ity of the electorate. There are other provisions of the proposed regulations which merit atten- tion and which should be reviewed in order to understand how the ordinance would work in detail. This Measure, if adopted, would result in some expenditure of public funds in order to administer the regulations in an efficient and timely manner. The exact fiscal impact is not known at this time. This Measure and Measure "D" both address the subject of mobilehome rent control. In order for either Measure to be adopted, it must receive at least 50% of the total votes cast. If both Measures receive greater than 50%, the one which gets the most votes will become the law. If neither Measure gets 50% of the vote, the existing mobilehome rent control regulations will remain in effect. s/ Roger Picquet San Luis Obispo City Attorney k ARGUMENT IN FAVOR U*EASURE E Measure E deserves your support because: (1) Prevents rents from unreasonably increasing in mobile home parks. (2) Provides security for residents on fixed incomes. (3) Vacancy decontrol is not allowed unlike Measure D. When a new mobile home resident moves in they will continue to pay the same space rent as the previous resident. If residents rent out their homes, the rents charged would not increase, unlike Measure D. (4) It gives elected officials a part in choosing a Hearing Officer in event of rent disputes. (5) Measure E Ordinance cannot be changed without voter approval of the electorate. Mobile Home Park Residents can directly participate in changing rent stabilization ordinance under Measure E. (6) Measure E does not allow Safe Harbor, which is when two-thirds of residents accept a lease it requires all others to be bound by the lease regardless of its terms. (7) Measure E prevents the abuse of increased costs of common area utilities without a hearing, unlike Measure D, which requires only a computation by the City Administrative Officer. Park Owner may now modify the nature of park service without any consideration from the Tenants. (8) Measure E protects residents from any rent increase for more than 75% of the Cost Of Living (CPI) Index, rather than 100% as in Measure D, and provides for rent increases only when the park owner shows a hardship. (9) Any rent increase above the regular 75% of the CPI must be reviewed and decided by the Hearing Officer with direct appeal to the City Council. (10) Measure E Permits free discretion by the Hearing Officer in hardship rent increase cases. (11) Measure E imposes fair standards which will promote park owner Leases. (12) We urge your Vote on Measure E. s/ Leola Rubottom s/ Allen K. Settle, Councilmember, SLO s/ Penny Rappa, Councilmember, SLO s/ Florence Willmot, Senior Citizens Advocate REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE E Don't forget. San Luis Obispo has an existing rent control ordinance. It doesn't work. It needs to be changed; to make things better, not worse. Measure E makes it worse. Measure E limits rent increases to 75% of the CPI. So does the existing ordinance. It doesn't work. Measure E keeps politics in by allowing appeals to the City Council. So does the existing ordinance. It doesn't work. Measure E prohibits any rent adjustment when a resident moves. So does the existing ordinance. It doesn't work. Measure E does not encourage leases by allowing a safe harbor. So does the existing ordinance. It doesn't work. Measure E is subject to controversy and legal challenge. So is the existing ordinance. It doesn't work. Measure E is promoted by uncompromising proponents with selfish finan- cial interests and is endorsed by politicians looking for their vote. So was the existing ordinance. It doesn't work. Measure E can only be amended by the voters. If Measure E doesn't work, you're stuck. The proponents of Measure E ignore the solid recommendations of the Rent Review Board and the Joint Resident/Owner Committee. Too often the resident proponents have chosen to ignore these recommendations. Why? Too often the Councilmembers endorsing this Measure have refused to consider the recommendations they solicit. Why? You have a choice. Measure D contains the recommendations rejected by the proponents of this Measure. Vote No on Measure E. Vote Yes on Measure D. Vote for a reasonable compromise that will work. s/ Elizabeth M. Law, Local Businesswoman s/ Dennis B. Wheeler, Jr., Former Member, San Luis Obispo Rent Review Board, and Local Businessman s/ Lynn R. Cooper, Former Mayor of the City of San Luis Obispo s/ Thomas C. Swem, Past Chairman, San Luis Obispo Mobile Home Rent Review Board s/ Charles W. Long, Owner, Village Mobile Home Park and Member, Rent Stabilization Ordinance Committee 40-62 All RwVIAENT AGAINST MEASURE E Don't be misled. San Luis Obispo has an existing rent control ordinance, and has had such an ordinance for six years. It hasn't worked. It has been controversial, out of balance and unfair. It has cost the City extensive amounts of time and money which could have been much better spent on services more essential to the community. Measure E may add to these problems; it does not solve them. This measure lacks balance. It is being proposed by uncompromising residents. The lack of balance may cause it to be the subject of substantial legal challenge and controversy. Legal challenges may cost the City money that could be spent on other essential services. This measure is unfair. It leaves owners unprotected. It will not allow owners to receive a fair return on their property. This measure keeps politics in. Appeals will still be heard by the City Council. The City Council may continue to be bombarded with the debates and controversy surrounding a rent control ordinance. The City Council's time may be monopolized with rent control issues rather than addressing other issues essential to this community. This measure could be cumbersome and expensive to administer. It lacks efficient procedures and specific formulas that ease administration. This Measure promotes controversy. It is being proposed by residents who too often have refused to negotiate with owners. It substantially ignores the recommendations of the Rent Review Board and the recommendations of a joint committee of residents and owners. Vote NO on Measure E. It is a source of problems, not solutions. s/ Patricia Barlow, Former Chairman, San Luis Obispo Rent Review Board s/ Ed Evans, Owner, Creekside Mobilehome Park, and Member, Rent Stabilization Ordinance Committee s/ Elizabeth M. Law, Local Businesswoman s/ Thomas C. Swem, Past Chairman San Luis Obispo Mobile Home Rent Review Board s/ Lynn R. Cooper, Former Mayor of the City of San Luis Obispo REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE E Criticism of the existing ordinance is wrong. It protects residents. Gone is the admittedly inadequate Rent Review Board concept. Measure E continues protection and furnishes fair balance Py its concept for an experienced paid hearing officer, retained continuously and subject to Ciiy performance eval- uation..Measure D fails, with its expensive emergency retentions of a suc- cession of different officers. Measure E enhances fair balance by stressing free latitude for the hearing officer's experienced judgement, and requirement for preliminary negotia- tion before hearings. Measure D's boasted unnecessary administrative details and restrictive formulae cannot substitute for the free application of experiencedudf gement by Measure E. Measure E's cast is minor compared to Measure D's expensive, sporadic, emergency hiring and the repeated expense of three paid officers for each appeal. Measure E. guarantees unrestricted appeals to the City Council, with full evaluation of all evidence at all hearings, compared to Measure D, which grants only illusory appeals as follows: 1.Measure D's hired appeal panel can only A. Uphold hearing officer decisions, and B. May not reverse or change hearing officer decisions without KLet inQ that there has been: (1) Abuse of discretion, or (2) No evidence to support such decisions. (Measure D thereby prevents the appeal panel from considering the full value of all the evidence. ) 2. No decisions are appealable to the City Council under Measure D. All of this is unfair. Vote Yes for Measure E. Vote No against Measure D. s/ Leola Rubottom, Associate Director of Golden State Mobile Home Owners League, Inc. Region 8 s/ Penny Rappa, Councilmember, San Luis Obispo s/ Florence Wilmot, Senior Citizens Advocate s/ Allen Settle, Councilmember, San Luis Obispo S/ James C. Maxwell, President Golden State Mobile Home Owner's League #517