The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09-25-1986 MHRRB Minutescity of sAn luis93403-8100 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 e San Luis Obispo, M-I_N_U_T_E_S MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW BOARD SEPTEMBER 25, 1986 TAPE #1 I. WELCOME/INTRODUCTIONS -- ---- ------------- Acting Chairperson John Grden declared that the regular meeting of the Mobilehome Rent Review Board come to order at 1:45 p.m. with the following in attendance: BOARDMEMBERS: Barlow, Grden, Wheeler, Wright, (Label arrived at 2:15 p.m.) STAFF: Henderson, Kemper II. APPROVAL_ OF MINUTES_ OF SEPTEMBER 4,_1286 ---- -- -- --- --------- - The minutes of the meeting of September 4, 1986 were approved as mailed. III. REVIEW_ OF PACKET ------ -- ------ Mr. Henderson reviewed the packet presented to the Board, which included: 1. letter from Mr. & Mrs. Nicas, re: request of Board's help in clarifying the status of R.V.'s in mobilehome parks; 2. minutes of last meeting; 3. memo from the City Attorney to the City Council, re: court decision concerning (mobilehome) rent control ordinances; 4. copy of page 1 of minutes, MHRRB mtng., 5-15-86; 5. copy of three separate definitions of what consti- tutes a "mobilehome" - one from the Calif. Civil Code Mobilehome Residency Law, and two from the Mobilehome Health & Safety Code; 6. data on Silver City which exists as a result of a survey/study on mobilehome parks in 1981. IV. CONTINUATION_ OF SILVER_ CITY_ APPLICATION The Board recollected that there remained three (3) unanswered questions from the last meeting. These concerned: 1. the Marshall & Swift journal, used as a resource in preparation of Mr. Waters' appraisal report; 2. the retyping of Exhibit "G", to correct the error(s); and 3. information on an insurance refund check pursuant to some stolen chairs, to be provided by Mrs. Constance. MHRRB Minutes - September 25, 1986 page 2 IV. CONTINUATION OF SILVER CITY APPLICATION --------------------------------------- (continued) TAPE #2 Dennis Law, attorney representing the owners of Silver City, explained how the amendments to Kent Waters' appraisal report should be incorporated. Mr. Law emphasized that the corrected/ new data presented today in no way changed the results and con- clusions of the original appraisal report. Mr. Law further explained that the discrepancy in the figures in Exhibits G and I were the result of his error. Apparently, he had failed to include two additional pages in the subject's application which were directly pertinent to the above Exhibits. The Board questioned Mr. Law and Mr. Waters in order to clarify two items contained in the appraisal; "Time Adjustment," and "Cost Per Space." Mr. Olpin, attorney for the tenants' association, began his questioning of Mr. Waters with reference to amendments and/or adjustments to the initial appraisal report. Specifically, Mr. Olpin referred to pages 1, 36, and 44. Covering each page individually, he asked Mr. Waters which changes, if any, existed on the "new" page when contrasted to the "old" (original) appraisal. For the Board and Mr. Olpin, Mr. Waters examined each set of pages, item by item, and illuminated for them every instance in which a difference existed. Mr. Waters emphasized that the "new" figures were correct. The Board questioned Mr. Law and Mr. Waters in order to clarify some findings of the appraisal report. Mr. Law responded explaining that the fundamental concept to be understood concerns the fact that all of the expense and income data in the application was compiled from a completely distinct source than that data which Mr. Waters utilized to complete his appraisal report. Apparently, this should explain differences between findings presented in the application, and those residing in the appraisal report. Mr. Olpin continued his questioning of Mr. Waters, returning to comparisons between pages in the old/original appraisal, and those which make-up the new/amended report. He wanted to know how these changes correspond to one another. Mr. Olpin referred to pages 44, 50, and 51. MHRRB Minutes - September 25. 1986 Page 3 IV. CONTINUATION OF SILVER CITY APPLICATION (continued) TAPE *3 Mr. Waters Waters explained that in his initial effort to correct some errors pointed out to him during the last hearing. he uncovered still more errors. These errors were of both the typographical and substantive nature. Because of this, Mr. Waters proceeded to comb through the entire report, and perfect his calculations. In many instances, the corrected figures changed, in effect, the calculations. Most of these calculations acted as factors in a following calculation, and that is why the repercussion of a single "error" turned out to be so comprehensive. Mr. Law interjected at this point, explaining that much of the misunderstanding results from the way the subject's (owners') case was handled by himself and Mr. Waters. That is, as stated earlier, preparation of the application and appraisal developed as two separate projects. A difference of opinion concerning the correct Consumer Price Index figure arose between Mr. Law and Mr. Waters. Although a sole figure was agreed upon, this similarity failed to be passed -on in the final preparation of the documents- -thus, two contradictory statements. It was this discrepancy that found its way into the appraisal report, and invariably misstated calculation totals. The Board took a break from 3:00 - 3:10 p.m.. Mr. Olpin continued questioning Mr. Waters with reference to pages 53 and 54. He requested Mr. Waters to point out differences between the original and amended versions. Mr. Olpin also asked about the rationale behind the changes. Mr. Waters responded that, similar to other instances of changes in the amended versions (pages), the "original" errors he sought to clear-up had sowed inaccuracies throughout the appraisal. That is, all aspects and thus conclusions in the report are inter- related -- each conclusion becomes a factor in yet the next calculation. Mr. Olpin further questioned Mr. Waters concerning the following terms/topics: 1. cap rate; 2. expense ratio; 3. Exhibit E; and rent vs. non -rent control models. Also of considerable discussion concerned the matter of the land sales grids which are included in the appraisal. It seems the relationship between these Exhibits, and the value applied to the subject's property, based on these grids, was unclear. w d gV: V 4s pauano f pu .Hur40aw aqy •sNjud awogaTTgow UT s•A•H 3o 4g2Tld aq4 svrusaavoa axods glog • 8 uor2aa sOJ 'IONiS9 Jo • jTa • aossd ' IlsH aualjugO • syr SUM pssog aq4 Burssaspps osly g3Eag owsrd wo13 'uTnaZ sr.zJoW zW sum xsads of 4siTa 'AuowrIs84 arlgnd 3arsq awos paMolls papog aqy 'Bur4a8w q48 sago430 aq4 4u 'ssarN •ss14 V '.rye woaJ uor4sluasasd s ZEaq o4 peeizu pjuog aqy ••w'd OC:T 4s 986T '91 sago430 'AEpssngy uo plaq aq 01 HuT408w Isuor;rpps us Jo3 aJsp anr4sua4 s has oslE papog aqy ••w•d 0£:T 42 986T '8 jago430 Aepsoupam ao3 palnpagas SUM gargM '2uT40aw 4xau aq; JoJ a}sp s 4as 04 panow p.zsog aqy -------------- SSHNISIIg 2i8Hy0 A •TOs4uoa 4uas-uov •sn 4uas 3o slapow aq4 pus '4uaj aasds pa4sa22ns 'JO43UJ uoT4Ei3ur 43aiJO3 aq4 3O saaroga srq SUTusaaUOa spuTw arag4 JPalao4 4JO33a us ur •saa4um -jW Jo suoT4sanb uMo sol g4rM papaaao,zd uaq4 papog aqy %# Sdvi '4uas aasds a4srsdojddu us 2uTUJa3UO3 suois -nlauoa srq g4TM aasgssrp so aasHE 04 XSU4 s,pssog age Mou SUM 4r 41a3 saa4uM 'JW •suOT4uln3ls3 pus sassaaojd srq spus4ssapun pssog aq4 Mou 4Egl p04UIs aH •EaJU srg4 uT aauaTjadxa pus auaw -aHpnf srq uo pasuq ass suorsnlauOa asag4 '.zag4jng •sarpn}s 94s -xsdas oM4 ss pa4srxa suorsnTauoa asog4 4sg4 pasaMsus s,za}sM •.rye 6paTjT4snf aq sTg4 usa MOH ''00-000100019$ 4u A4jadoid s, laafgns aq4 .Hurnlsn a4sw14sa us pagasaj s.z94sM ,Tye '4sodaj Issrslddu aq4 ur 42g4 Ono pa4urod urdiO •ayV 'srq} o4 uor4 -arpssluoa uI ''00-000-000'9$ so anlsn A4.zadosd s parldds sja4sM •JJJ 4uoT4unba srg4 jog •A4jadosd aq4 3o anlsn(pa4uwr4sa) aq4 Zuraq sao43sj aq4 jo auo :ss043s3 V 2urn10AUT slnwsoj da4s-S s UTA uorsnlauoa srgl pagasas sia4uM jlq s4uaprsas zrag4 a,3zsga 04 A4TO JanlrS Jo sJGumO aq4 Jo3 4uas 94PTidoadds us ss aasds sad 00'ZZZ$ papuawwoaaJ pBq ssa4um 'JW 4sg4 pa4ou urdl0 jW "u4up uosr,Iudwo3 woij A143ri4s anJUA pull E asBq o} a4Pjn33uUT aq P1noM 4T ajojasagy ••349 'uOT4s301 'azTs 04 BUTpJOaas A,zsn sales puul lunprnrpur 'Al4uassddy 'suosrasdwoa 3o Abolopoq}aw aq4 ur s043s3 auo 4uasasdai Alasaw pus 'pazAluuu a.IaM pa4uls aq 'spr,z2 asagy •uorsnlauoa ar3r3ads s 4E Burnrsss 3o uor4ua4ur aq4 g4TM sprsB sales pull asag4 BurzrlT4n panlOnur suTnwjOJ lea -r4Bwag4uM ou a.IaM asag4 4ug4 43a33a aq4 04 papuodsaa sja4uM -jN (panui4uoo) NOIy�'OI'Iddd 1�yIO 2ISA'IIS aO NOIydIINIINOO 'AI V a2sd 9861 'gZ jagwa4daS - sa4nurW ONSHN