Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/28/1988, E-1 - EMERGENCY MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 27, 1988MEET'" S8 AGENDA /`- DA ee ITEM � city of sAn tuis ouspo 990 Palm Street /Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA/9�3403.8100 (805) 549 -7140 January 28, 1988, MEMORANDUM To: Members of the Public From: Roger Picquet, City Attorney Subject: Emergency Meeting of the City Council January 27, 1988 The City Council held an emergency meeting under Section 54956.5 of the Government Code on January 27, 1988, to discuss the eminent transportation of extremely dangerous rocket fuels through the City. It was determined that the transportation of these fuels constituted an activity which threatened to severely impair public health and safety and posed a threatened disruption to all public facilities. Persons attending were all Councilmembers ( Councilmember Rappa by conference phone), the Fire Chief and the City Attorney. The meeting began at 5:35 p.m. and adjourned at 5:55 p.m. to 11:00 a.m. on January )k!7 1988. Due to the immediacy of the threat and the lateness of the hour, no formal notification was possible. No Council action was taken and a general discussion was held regarding possible legislative, administrative and legal strategies regarding this issue. RP:ajr c: City Council CAO City Clerk • city of sAn MEE' AGENDA��/ DATE a•- ITEAII # luis OBISPO 990 Palm Street /Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100 S l g*q January 21, 1988 Mr. James Smith, Commissioner California Highway Patrol 2555 First Avenue Sacramento, CA 95818 Dear Commissioner Smith: On behalf of the Mayor and City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, I would like to restate our continuing interest in the matter of rocket fuel transportation through our City and County, and our continuing desire to be appropriately involved in the risk assessment process, now under the auspices of the California Highway Patrol. We would appreciate being kept informed as to the nature and timing of this process, and how we can be appropriately involved. We hope you are in agreement with the risk assessment analysis performed by the Transportation Section of the Department of Defense, that Highway 166 be the selected route. The use of Highways 46 and 101 for this purpose should be discontinued because of the dangers on Highway 46 and the Cuesta Grade and because the rocket fuel would pass through major population centers. Your assistance in keeping us informed and appropriately involved will be most appreciated. 1—n rely, ohn D n City Administrative Officer h c. City Council Chief LeRoy Short, CA Highway Patrol -at y t3ispo oela' COUNCIL CHAMBERS • CITY HALL • 990 PALM STREET • SAN LUIS OBISPO • CALIFORNIA * *Lead PeAzon - Item to come back to Councit *Denotes action by Lead Pennon AGENDA No aatenizfz - In{toamation only ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, JANUARY 25, 1988 - 4:00 P.M. ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Peg Pinard, Vice -Mayor Penny Rappa, .Jerry Reiss, Allen K. Settle and Mayor Ron Dunin 1. MOBILEHOME RENT REGULATIONS (HENDERSON /PICQUET /324 -45 min.) Consideration of placing rent regulations on the ballot (con't from 1- 19 -88). RECOMMENDATION: Review options and give direction to staff as deemed appropriate. PICQUET ** Appn.o.ved 6ta66'a recommended option 06 to place two binding meazuAez on VOGES ** the June 7 baQ,Q.ot apeci.6.ieaUy 1) the Mobieehome Ad Hoc Comm.ittee'a HENDERSON ** tecommended amendment6 to the existing mobitehome )Lent tegulatio" and 2) the pupoaed .initiative on.di.nanee e,6tabtishi.ng new mob.itehome rent h.egutati.o" . 2. WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (HETLAND /526 -20 min.) Consideration of authorizing staff to negotiate a contract for the implementation of the Wastewater Management Plan with the firm of Brown and Caldwell Consulting Engineers (estimated at S1.2 million). (Proposals are available in the Council office for inspection.) RECOMMENDATION: Certify the ranking of firms and authorize staff to negotiate a contract with Brown and Caldwell Consulting Engineers as recommended. HETLAND ** Ranking o6 64'nma eenti6.ied and 6tass authoAized to negotiate a contnaet VOGES ** with Brown and Catdwet2 Comutti.ng Eng.ineeAz a*e to come back to r Councit son 6.inae adoption. C 0 M M U N I C A T I O N S - (15 minutes) COMM DUNN* COMM PICQUET* COMM HETLAND* During the balance of this City Council meeting, any Councilmember or the City Administrative Officer may informally update or inform the City Council of written or oral communications and ask for comment and /or discussion. General direction may be given. An item requiring formal approval may be continued to the next Regular meeting or upon council consensus, action, including direction to staff. may be taken immediately. 1. GRAFFITI - OVERPASS Stars diAeeted to white Zetten. to SoutheAn Paai6.ic nequeating n.emova2 o6 g)Lassit-i- oveA the Johnaon Avenue RaitAoad Ovecpaaa. 2. ADVISORY BODIES 3 CGMb1 4. L- t: r .n r Stars to nev.iew tetw o6 o6b ice son the Hou.6 ing Authority. WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD Sta65 d Aected to pZa.ee the Wastewater. Management Ptan on the c)ateA Quality ContAot Boaa,d'z agenda at their 2/19 meeting to determine .t6 they wowed be n.eeepti.ve to the C.ity'z kecommended changes regarding wa to di.acha&ge hequAement6. CounciZ agreed to meet on Tueaday, 2/9 at 3:30 p.m. to diz cuza Capdtati Projectz. 1, 1988 AT" 12:10 PM TO DISCUSS CIRCULATION ELEMENT PAGE 1 of 1 nartru± MEMORANDUM- morma 'p'T° 80 69M.CA Y- -- TO FROM SUBJECT R.P U' S. DATE 1/25/88 An additional 24 postcards have been received by the Clerk's office (both in- person and by mail) from mobilehome owners. These cards state the signatories had not been included in the Ad -Hoc Committee's discussion and did not feel they had been represented. The postcards are available in the Council office for inspection. I will continue to date stamp those that we receive and make them available in the Council office. PV: dc MEETING .:AGENDr4 /LE_ DATE JAN 25 .88 p� - 1' '�IYI O Ski- crty �1nIs SFAft-1 990 Palm Street /Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 -8100 (805) 549 -7140 January 25;-1988 MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Roger Picquet, City Attorney 1 Subject: Mobilehome Rent Control Issues Once again this subject has come back for Council discussion, deliberation and possible action. The purpose of this memo is to briefly discuss some of the basic mobilehome rent control issues from an impartial "overview" perspective. BACKGROUND. A review of mobilehome rent control in this City and State might be :_helpful. In the late 70s and early 80s a number of economic and social factors combined to induce many cities in California to adopt rent control or rent stabilization measures. Among these were several successive years of double digit inflation, a perceived pattern of rapid sales among parks and an increase in the number of older citizens on fixed incomes residing in mobilehome parks. In many communities there was a shortage of mobilehome spaces to which owners could move at their option. Mobilehome tenants were considered "captive tenants" subject only to the property owners' caprice and whim regarding rents. Following the adoption of regulations a number of court cases addressed mobilehome rent control. For example, the role of "fair market value" in setting rents was vigorously contested. The California Supreme Court eventually held that any methodology or standard for rents was constitutionally acceptable so long as it provided "a just and reasonable return" for a park owner. At the state level, the Mobilehome and Recreational Vehicle Residency Acts were strengthened to give many protections to residents that had been sadly lacking. In San Luis Obispo rent control was first adopted in 1981 as an urgency measure. It was invalidated by the Superior Court on a technicality. In early 1982 Council adopted Chapter 5.44 and has made periodic amendments. The regulations provide the residents with strong protection while allowing owners to increase rents two ways: automatic (annual) CPI -based increases or discretionary "hardship" increases. Last year the Mobilehome Rent Review Board made a series of recommendations to the Council after an extensive period of debate and study. It is these recommendations which triggered much of the activity before you now. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council January 25, 1988 Page 2 In the past 6 years many of the economic conditions which fostered the adoption of rent control have changed. Inflation has been quite mild and park sales minimal. On the other hand, a new economic factor has been introduced, specifically, many residents feel that rent control enhances (increases) the value of their homes and that without it a serious financial loss will occur. This is particularly true for those who have purchased since early 1982. Since adoption of Chapter 5.44 Council has dealt primarily with two opposing groups, residents (tenants) and park owners. It has tried numerous times to provide incentives for both groups to get on long -term leases and thereby eliminate the necessity for rent control. To date these efforts have been unsuccessful (at least for some of the larger parks) and Council is constantly under pressure from both groups as each seeks to gain an advantage over the other. The Council may want to verify that mobilehome rent control is still a policy desired by a majority of the Council or even the community. If it is not, then discussions on implementation are moot. If it is, then Council should look at the various elements of rent control in terms of how does it best serve and further the general purposes and policies stated in the regulations. GENERAL DISCUSSION. Attached to your staff report of January 19, 1988, is a brief matrix comparing Chapter 5.44 and the various alternatives. Without getting too detailed, some of these deserve additional amplification. A. Methodology. As noted above, the courts have consistently held that in order for rent control ordinances to pass constitutional muster, they must provide for a just and reasonable return for the park owner. The current regulations do that by, in effect, allowing the Council to use any appropriate methodology. The down side to this tremendous amount of flexibility (as the Board found out) is that the various methodologies can be complex to understand, difficult to apply and extremely time consuming overall. The Board recommended that the Council adopt the Maintenance of Net Operating Income standard (MNOI) modified with what is called a CPI adjustment. The modification protects this method from possible legal attack that the mere passage of time renders the standard obsolete. Straight MNOI preserves operating income in terms of absolute "fixed" dollars while the modified MNOI puts the allowed increase in current dollars. With the provision for CPI based adjustments, it is unlikely that a court could find that the method resulted in an illegal "taking ". The Ad -Hoc Committee's recommendation is the same. The proposed initiative ordinance, on the other hand, is unclear as to what methodology or standard would be applied. Although it is possible that a court would find that the initiative provides inherent discretion to effect a fair and reasonable rate of return, the language of the proposed ordinance seems to state otherwise. It is subject to an interpretation that only actual increase in costs are recoverable. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council January 25, 1988 Page 3 B. "Safe Harbor ". The "safe harbor" concept provides that if a park owner gets a specified number of spaces on long -term lease, then the entire park is removed from rent control. Under the current regulations all spaces in a park must be on a lease in order for the park owner to be completely removed from rent control restrictions. Without "safe harbor" or a similar mechanism it is possible that a park owner will feel that it is a disincentive to offer any long -term leases since the cost of obtaining the hardship increase is effectively the same for one or 100 spaces. (Council dealt with this issue several years ago in a specific application and came down on the side of the owner.) The recommendations of the Board and Ad -Hoc Committee were for a safe harbor provision. The proposed initiative ordinance would specifically prohibit any such provision. C. Appeal process. The Council has absolute discretion to determine which step of the administrative process will have the final decision - making authority. Decisions concerning rent increases or decreases can be very technical and not necessarily policy -based issues. A strong position can be taken that once the Hearing Officer makes his or her decision that no appeals to Council are appropriate. This can : "de- politicize" a specific application. The current regulations provide that the Council is the hearing body. The Board did not directly address this issue but had relied heavily on the City of Lancaster regulations in their recommendations. That ordinance did not provide for an appeal to the Council. The Ad -Hoc Committee's recommendation is to create a three - member appeal body to review decisions of a hearing officer and whose decision would be final. The proposed initiative would have decisions of the hearing officer appealable to Council. D. Amendments. An initiative ordinance by law can only be amended by subsequent vote of the people. Amendments adopted by a Council can be further amended by the same or later Councils for detailed regulations such as rent control. Often, a City Council, as the City's legislative body, and as the elected representatives of the people, feels strongly about preserving their legislative prerogative and has reservations about an ordinance (initiative) which can only be changed, even in minor detail, by another vote of the people. While these direct plebiscites may have a certain populist appeal, they compromise the flexibility of the governmental process, when the City Council can change an ordinance when experience indicates change is needed. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council January 25, 1988 Page 4 CONCLUSION. The issues in rent control are often entwined and complicated to understand. Hopefully, the above discussion makes this task somewhat easier. This memo is respectfully submitted in an attempt to highlight some of the current issues without repeating all of the steps and work Council has undergone over the past 2 -3 years. It is difficult to develop policies which directly affect two separate and oftentimes opposing groups within the community while at the same time bringing the controversy between them to a satisfcatory resolution. RP:ajr c: CAO City Clerk Novewb" 30, 1987 .as [vie MZdp0, CA Pony ,CAC 4ib .[uk 0 Path Stmet Y.O. B= 8100 San Luigi Obsepo, Do" Ale Vogee: CA 93403 -8100 WONG AGENDA �J e JAN�23 IS ITEM '/r �.d� PteaAe fAnd awi -med a copy 4 the p4opo4ed Rent Stabiliptum 7&A .ce a 4iaeaoe t 4 the Rest Stabil i ption Ondin nm that } bw 3 400 vote" in t1m CA4 Sa " Obiepo tyre i e�d eP¢eRt_ ati ve Am Lagwa, C/ udA, Sitl� Ci tand AbbiCe/ta�ee Reeidante. A& o, included in the et4 ate *gpAtiam and p wAa. alow spade Gi om Attaumy, Ropm ftcwf. ll� tcepec#61teet that a i lbe Qvp t tJe Xoaabe # MWPC, RM &UAA and each 4 m m cn along. with a coN to the CAt# Attavwy. t� Lea& Rubartta x S4-1-61S7 �%- RECEIVED NOV- 3 0 07 oTV CLERK .. SM wIs olusro. CA 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 are 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 - determination of current rent 7. Application for rent increase - descrease - fee - contents - notice of request - hearing 8. 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 - appleal 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 - Retaliatory 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. Purpose 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. -1- 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 recogniz- ing the need of prudent park owners to receive a suitable return on their investment, with rental income sufficient to cover necessary and reasonable increases, 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 cit- izens and others on fixed incomes who installed their mobile homes in the city when inflationary rent increases could not reasonably have been forseen. 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 ordin- ance to accomplish that equitability. 2. Definitions For the purpose of this ordinance, certain words and phrases used herein are defined as follows i 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" are those improvements that materially add to the value of the property and which may be amortiged over the useful life of the improvement in accordance with the Internal Revenue Code and regula- tions issued thereto; provided that this definition-shall be limited to capital improvements either approved by more than 519 of the tenants in the affected park or constructed to comply with the direction of a public agency.g 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, operator 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. -2- 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, including 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 ten- ancies in mobile home parks: A. Mobile home park spaces rented solely for nonresidential 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 manufactued hous- ing. 4. Hearing Officer - Established A. There is established a qualified Hearing Officer with a background in accounting, to be selected by t•he City. -3- Be A Hearing Officer may not be or have been affiliated financially by in- vestment 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 re- imbursement for travel and other expenses while on official duty. 5. Duties of the Hearing Officer A. Shall be directly responsibile for the administration of the Rent Stab- ilization Ordinance subject to reporting and supervision as the City shall direct. Be 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. 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 - 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 Con - sumer's Price Index increases each year,,and harship increases as permitted by this ordinance and any preceding ordinance. Be .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: -4- (1) Eight percent (8%) of the existing space rent or= (2) Three- fourths (seventy -five percent)(75g) of the cost -of- living increase (Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Cities Nat - tional Consumer 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 (Bureau 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 de- creases are to be issued by the Hearing Officer by September 1. Park owners shall give at least a 60-day notice of the rent in- crease to be effective on January 1. Rent increases cannot be retroactive. Co No owner shall either (1) demand, accept or retain a rent or charge from a homeowner in excess of the maximum rent permitted by this ordinance, .or (2) effect a 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 - 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 6B,.if he seeks relief, shall file with the Officer an application for a rent increase, or ap- plication 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 $1.00 per mobile home. The application shall specify, the address of the mobile home park, the space number or numbers,.the proprosed 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 re- ceipts, reports or other documents including income tax returns as needed and that the Officer may deem necessary to make a determination whether to approve the application. -5- C. The owner shall serve each affected homeowner either personally,,or by mail, with notice of the change in rent, services or facilities request- ed 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 applica- tion shall be available free of charge to any affected homeowner request- ing the same at the business office of the park. D. The 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 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 mod- ified, 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 accompanied by documentation showing reduced services, facilities or amentities 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,.pla.ce and date set for the hearing. No hearing or any part thereof may be continued be- yond 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 con- currence 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 effective, in wholc 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. 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 homeowner appeals the decision to the City Council. Any final decision shall be enforceable by the city. S1. Application for Rent Increase - Decrease - Hearing - Appeal A, 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. -7- B. 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 reasonable 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. 12. Rent increases not made In co= ormizv wizn provisions - A homeowner may refuse to pay any increase in rent not made in conform- ity 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 funds shall be put aside to be disbursed when a final decision is made under this Ordinance or other legal procedure. 13. Actions brought to recover possession of mobile home space - Retaliator Notwithstanding Section 129 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 ordinance. Further, the deter- mination that the action was brought in retaliation for the exercise of any rights conferred by this ordinance shall be grounds for denial. 14. Recreational Vehicles as Residences Recreational vehicles in a mobile home park that are used for a resi- dence nine (9) months or longer shall have the same consideration as a mobile home for rent stabilization purposes. 15. 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 viol- ation individually or by class action, may seek relief individually..or by class action in a court of appropriate jurisdiction for injunctive re- lief and damages, in addition to any enforcement action by the city under this ordinance. 16. Owner to provide homeowners with a copy of this ordinance Any homeowner offered a lease or contra.ct'xhich, if accepted and fully executed, would be exempt from the provisions of this ordinance (Section 0 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. 17. Safe Habor 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 ord- inance. 18. 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. Severability 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 jurisdiction, 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 application, and to this end, the provisions and clauses of this ordinance are declared to be severable. 20. Miscellaneous (1) At the termination of a lease, if a new lease is not contract- ed, accepted, and fully executed,.the homeowner comes under the jurisdiction of this rent stabilization ordinances (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;rvote of the people of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, -9-