HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-22-1987 MHRRB Minutess
�:•'•�:: =ilift=�x��ll 3'• i l �-�
TAPF i
city of sAn Luis oBispo
990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100
M I N Li T E 5
MEaD I LE-H0ME- RENT rRE ." 1 EW B 0 D
jANAURY 2222,, 198-1
WELCOME-' I NT`DDLJvT i ONS
Chairperson i•'at Barlow ca -7 ' ed -he f eou.a a r€ee Z i n9 OT
the Mobile orae Rent Review Board to Order at 2:00 P.M.
with the fol l omini ng in attendanc:e�
BOARDME: �DERS: Barlow, Gruen. Vjr i = at
STAFF: Henderson, Guvre-Powel i
IT. E=EPPROVAL OF M i NUTEv
The minuites minLite- o} the a7Beetin5-i of- De -c -ember 14y 1996"- :'dere
approv=ed as amaiied a-OnSerSUS of T!-tE Board.
F I . R: 'If X E�? OF F'AC�..ET
M Henderson reviewed t`e cort-.nts rof the. pao::=t
Presented ed to the Boar d 4 i nL.i _ids a _Eg: 1. �.epor t from. 'W -'M
on "Fair and i-ieasi--,njc--b a R;et-uir a"„ Ordinances -From
ether -I I e-' _ : s`ii s a€f=te- q :. Let er -cro€T: Mr. and Mrs
i �i c -a- re: status of S .4f ISE Lr e a n a i re MHT J. Let ter f roan
L-eola rr`-.LiboLtom and Fra ii PeaLivais; tom. UorrE=•spondef Le
between ':tto-. nev FiCaLiet and .--Mr. Fender son;
Staff . epo:rt 4--c! Boar d= S. 5ta� f report to t i ty cEoLin !
un i ver L I t 1 aL reL;i Q. Lr Litl i ne --Lles .a! €C_
-Lida =e -ted procedL:re for the oLirrent ineeting.
T 5 5S7D E -a .1n T-y+..5i-i. T� THE
RENT
-T T" I T iEv"
i. COQ JLs RATION OF AiD US!M Elm TO a, E i F?aE -M€ts�iL-I?€rt€ imU
------------------------------------------------------
0 RD I F-,AMOE
CFialroer Surf Dar-ioin read the outlin-e Ot 3SSleS
identified by CuLin�ii as requirir-=Q -1--he consideratloin of
the Boars:. . r. Henderson identified this ii -t as
3YL€i d -' i ne to be Wised b-,• the Bo --rd i r aDreei nD t€ aat
t`_
these issues were - Ev75?=' �= Eat iia irlL_ 3 had di �r eC led -1-- e
Boardt E_ J _ r._. t t C� i'_
E d L iEreview. r�� reminded aceta t' a� � L:ai +� G E the L�s�in�i
MClB I LEHOME EENT REVIEW BOARD
JANAUARY 221 1987/PAGE 2
TAPE #2°
directive that these items be considered and ready for
presentation to the Council in April. As such, he was
proposing two additional meetings of the Board in order
to meet this deadline: February 5, 1:30 p.m.; and
February 19, 1:30 p.m. He reminded the Board that any
action ori their part at this meeting would require a
33-0 mote, and that some of the items on the list would
merit consideration by the full Board.
The Hoard discussed the items on the list. Boardmember
Grden proposed adding "new approaches" at the top of
the list. Boardmember Wright disagreed, stating that it-
was
twas her understanding that the Council wished the Board
to clarify the current ordinance, and that any- further
word= would render the Board unable to meet the
Council's directive within the 90day- deadline.
Boardmembers Barlow and Grden discussed how additional
items might be added to the list, such as "new
approaches", as it was their feeling that a new
approach might address the items on the Council's list
of issues. Chairperson Barlow suggested a memo to
Council inviting feedback: on the possibility of adding
consideration of "new approaches".
The Board, following considerable discussion,
prioritized the items on the list as follows: 1.
Formula based on need; 2. Safe harbor; Vacancy
decontrol/change of occupancy; 4. Methodology; 5.
Leases !added by Boar -d); 6. Utilities
Consumption/Allowance; 7. Staff support; 8. CPI timing;
9. Recreational vehicles. The issue of a Hearing
Officer/Mediator was added to the list informally for
Board study.
At this time, Chairperson Barlow opened the meeting for
public input on the items on the list.
P_a_ul_Beavais_:(Creek_side) Encouraged City involvement in
facilitating/dealing with issues pertaining to home
owner owned parks, thus eliminating the need for a
Board or ordinance.
David_BrYmer: (Chiulmash) Commented that safe harbor and
vacancy decontrol had the potential to destroy the
Ordinance. Distrusts leases that have been previously
presented by park: owners.
Charles_Lonq: Concerned that tenants not buying will
not be protected under tenant ownership of park:. He
supports the protection of those tenants under the
MOB I LEHOME RENT REVIEW BOARD
JANUARY 22--�, 1987/PAGE
ordinance.
Leola Rqb. ottom: (Creek:side) Supports tenants being
protected under the ordinance in condos and co-ops.
C. J . _Fenderson: (Oceanai re) Supports inclusion o -F RVs
as identified i n the State Civil Code :.ander the
ordinance. Spoke of the version of vacancy decontrol he
imposed in his park: prior to rent control. Feels he can
not offer a lease that would provide more tenant
protection than the ordinance, so there's no incentive
for tenants to agree to a lease.
Ed Evans: Creek:side) Wished clarification on what the
Hoard would be considering under CPI timing on the
list. He felt that the issue of percentage of C -PI
should be considered, as there was a "taking" of value
of the dollar from the owner whenever less than 10 -OX. of
the CPI is allowed.
The Board recessed for a 10 minute break: at 3:330
At -:40 when the meeting reconvened, David Evans of the
Western Mobilehome Association, introduced himself to
the Board. In response to question- from, the Board, he
said that he felt the use of binding arbitration in
Lancaster and Simi Valley had worked to the benefit of
park owners, tenants and the cities. He gave a brief
description of the programs. Boardmembers Grden and
Barlow asked to meet with staff to pursue further
information about such programs.
There being no further comment from attendees at the
meeting, Chairpersons Barlow closed the public hearing
portion, of the meeting. She re -capped her understanding
of what items the individuals testifying had
highlighted as being necessary for Board consideration:
home -owner owned parkas should be included/facilitated
under the ordinance, and that percentage of CFI should
be considered as well as CPI tiring. Boardmerber Grden
repeated his desire to look- at other systems for
implementing rent stabilization, and suggested
contacting city managers in Lancaster, Simi Valley and
Rocklin. Boardmember Wright asked that a written
synopsis of the information gathered through those
calls be presented to the Board.
The Board initiated discussion on the issue of tenant
protection during condominium conversions. Mr. Henderson
suggested observing how the Planning Commission's
conditions on the Chuvash conversion were implemented.
MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW BOARD
JANUARY -223, 1987/PAGE 4
TAPE #4
Given the absence of two Boardmembers, the Board chose
to proceed with issues which were perhaps less
complicated than those on the list given higher
priority. The issue of CRI timing was discussed both as
it pertained to increases granted during an application
process and to establishing an anniversary date for
regular rent increases to be given within each pare-=.
Mr. Henderson suggested that the matter of increases
granted pursuant to an a application be handled at an
administrative level, most likely 60 days following a
Council decisions, or as Stipulated by the Board during
the application process. ft was the consensus of the
Boardmembers present that the policy on annual CRI
increases be that if a park owner should fail to apply
the allowable rent increase on an established
anniversary date, he/she could not recapture that
year's increase in a subsequent year.)
Ed Evans suggested to the Board that park owners be
notified in writing of the Board's decision on CPI
timing.
Mr. Henderson introduced the definition of a "mobile
home" according to state law that would allow inclusion
of recreational vehicles meeting certain conditions to
be protected by the reit stabilisation ordinance.
Boardmembers Grden and Wright had no obJection to the
staff recommendation, but Chairperson Barlow expressed
concern about the terminology. Ghe understood Council
to be interested in spaces in mobilehome parks rather
than in what is resting on the spaces. It was decided
to continue discussion on RVs until the full Board was
present.
There was a brief discussion on the concept of
Tenant/Owner Rent Stabilization. Boardmember Wright
expressed interest in more information on this. Mr.
Henderson related this concept to the Purpose and
Intent of the Ordinance to protect low income tenants.
Criteria for eligibility could be established by the
Board, staff or the Housing Authority, for example. It
was decided to postpone further discussion of this item
until there was a full complement of the Board. Mr.
Henderson highlighted the staff recommendation on
Utilities Consumption and Allowance.
The Board, after reading correspondence pertaining to
the Ni cas' case and the action of the City Attorney,
MOB I LEHOME RENT REVIEW BOARD
JANUARY 22, 1987/PAGE 5
tabled further discussion of this in order to see how
it would proceed.
V. AbJOUBN
The meeting of the Mobi1ehome gent Review board was
adjourned at 4:30 p.m. The next regular meeting will be
February 5, 1907, at 1:30 p.m.