Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-04-1986 MHRRB MinutesA 93403 ����i�� City.... 990 -8100 Palm son tuisPost Office Box 8100 9 San Luis Obispo, ..... ......... MINUTES Mobile Home Rent Review Board March 26, 1981, I. WELCOME/INTRODUCTIONS The meeting of the Mobile Home Rent Review Board held at Creekside Mobile Home Park was called to order at 1:'10 p.m. by Chairperson Barlow with the following in attendance: MEMBERS: Barlow, Grden, Wheeler, Label, Wright STAFF: Henderson, Barton, Wohlford Chairperson Barlow introduced the members of the Board and the Staff to the audience. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes from the meeting of March 19 were not available to the board at this time, so they could not be approved. III. REVIEW OF RECOMMENDATIONS/PUBLIC TESTIMONY Chairperson Barlow reviewed the history and current problems of the present ordinance. She stated that tensions between owners and tenants are still high and conflicts are increasing. The current ordinance fasters animosity, because it creates an adversarial situation between the two groups. The Board and the City Council held a joint meeting in December to discuss the current problems, and as a result of that meeting, the Board was charged with the task of making recommendations to the Council. The Board has developed some final recommendations to submit to the City Council which are major changes to the current ordinance. The Council can either adopt, amend, or reject the Board's recommendations. Chairperson Barlow stated that the purpose of this meeting was to share the Board's recommendations with the public and to answer any questions concerning them. Chairperson Barlow proceeded to review the current ordinance clause by clause with visual aids to assist the audience. Mobile Home Rent Review Board Minutes- March 26, 1987 Page 2 Chairperson Barlow then outlined the Board's recommendations to the City Council For the new arbitration ordinance. She explained the relevant Factors involved in arbitration. She emphasized the importance of change #8 in the arbitration criteria: "reasonable rate of return." In response t❑ a question From Paul Beavais, Chairperson Barlow explained the costs ❑f arbitration to the audience. The American Arbitration Association quoted the Board SS00.00 a day for a two day period. Chairperson Barlow explained the reasons the Board favors the Lancaster ordinance. The length and expense ❑f the hearing process For both sides would be reduced. The arbitrator has more expertise than the Board in rent matters. It gives a reason for dialogue between the two parties. Each side receives equal opportunity, and has equal dignity. There is no doubt about representation of the majority, and no doubt about who speaks with authority for the coach owners. No city employees or volunteers are involved in the process, and the decisions are made by qualified and experienced professionals. The Board answered many questions and heard concerns from the audience about the ordinance and the proposed recommendations. In response to a question From Paul Beavais, Chairperson Barlow and the Board agreed that the adoption of a Lancaster type of ordinance would end the operation of the Board. Again, t❑ answer Mr. Beavais, Chairperson Barlow told the audience that copies of the recommendations would be available to them, and she asked them t❑ keep checking with Steve Henderson, since they were not yet ready in their final form. IU. OTHER BUSINESS Tape #2 Boardmember Wright expressed her concern that not much information was gathered by the Board on the Lancaster ordinance, and Few members of the audience were given information. Reading from a report on the Lancaster trip written by Boardmember Grden, Boardmember Wright expressed her opinion that the phrase, "The Council is anti -rent control," indicates that they do not care about their people. She Further expressed her minority opinion concerning the Lancaster Ordinance in opposition to the remainder of the Board. Boardmember Grden responded to Boardmember Wright's comments. He stated that adequate information was obtained. He also stated that an anti -rent control stance For the City Council is irrelevant to their concern For the people. He attempted to Further refute her contentions. Mobile Home Rent Review Board Minutes- March 26, 1987 Page 3 Chairperson Barlow pointed out that the cost of arbitration versus the costs of the current ordinance is an important issue For the people to consider. She is concerned that the people get the best value for their money, and to their own satisfaction. Boardmember Wright expressed her concern for the cost of arbitration. Boardmember Label restated his idea of barring attorneys from being present at arbitration hearings. Boardmember Wheeler stated that the existing ordinance sets up an adversarial situation between the park owners and the coach owners. He identified two advantages of arbitration. First of all, it would force the two parties to sit down and settle their differences together, because they would both fear what might result from binding arbitration. Secondly, it would take the politics out of it. No political bodies would be involved. The Board fielded more questions and concerns from the audience. Communication was a common topic. The Board's recommendations are final, but an opportunity exists for further public comment at the City Council meeting April 1'l. Boardmember Wheeler discussed his experience as a witness in an arbitration hearing. He recalled that the issues were quickly resolved. U. RECESS After several more public questions and comments, Chairperson Barlow recessed the meeting to Colonial Manor Mobile Home Park. The meeting was recessed at 3:05 p.m. Tape #3 I. WELCOME/INTRODUCTIONS The meeting of the Mobile Home Rent Review Board was reconvened at 3:30 p.m. at the Colonial Manor Mobile Home Park with the following in attendance: MEMBERS: Barlow, Grden, Label, Wheeler STAFF: Henderson, Wohlford Chairparson Barlow introduced the members ❑f the Board and the Staff to the audience. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Thora w o -a no minutoE. to apppove . Mobile Home Rent Review Board Minutes- March 26, 1987 Page Lf III. REVIEW OF RECOMMENDATI❑NS/PUBLIC TESTIMONY Chairperson Barlow again reviewed the history of the current ordinance and the proposed recommendations. Steve Henderson explained the "Utilities" clause of the recommendation to the audience. Some discussion occurred between the Board and the audience concerning the San Luis Obispo Housing Authority and the Section 6 program for rent assistance to mobile home owners. - There are some "slots" open for mobile home owners only. - Park owners have offered to contribute to a fund, which would be administered by the S.L.O. Housing Authority, to assist some coach owners to pay their rent. Chairperson Barlow concluded that the Lancaster Ordinance is doing what the city desired. It is bringing people together, it is lessening tensions, it provides a reason and timing for dialogue, each side has equal opportunity and dignity, and the arbitrator determines fair solutions. IU. OTHER BUSINESS Boardmember Wheeler stated that the key to a Lancaster type of ordinance is that the park owners and the coach owners are forced to communicate with each other, and this is an important element in resolving differences. Each side will be forced to meet because of the uncertainty of what they might lose. Boardmember Label stated that the Board is unanimous in their desire to reduce some of the tensions between park owners and their tenants. The Lancaster Ordinance provides a new approach to deal with problems. He favors adopting a Lancaster type of ordinance. Boardmember 6rden stated that the Board has done a great deal of research on the issue. In his view, regardless of how enjoyable the experience of being a Board member has been, he feels that the arbitration concept is better than the current process. He feels it is much cheaper and faster. A member of the audience posed a question wondering what to do if a homeowner association does not exist. Chairperson Barlow replied for them to farm one. It was acknowledged that the residents at Colonial Manor Park have an agreeable situation compared to other parks. Chairperson Barlow assured the audience that the proposed ordinance would not alter the situation for the residents or the park owners. The Board answered several other questions and heard comments from the audience. Mobile Home Rent Review Board Minutes- March 26, 1987 Page 5 Tape #q One member of the audience was concerned about restrictions on the sale and purchase of m❑bile homes created by park owners. Chairperson Barlow told her that it is governed by State Code, and would not be affected by rent stabilization measures. Steve Henderson and Boardmember Label pointed out that the Board has not addressed this issue. Boardmember Label commented that the proposed Lancaster ordinance is a concept. He admitted that it may need to be fine tuned by the City Council and tailored t❑ the needs of San Luis Obispo. Steve Henderson pointed out one adjustment that can be recommended to the City Council. As an example he suggested a limit to the amount of times a park owner can petition the residents for a rent increase. Chairperson Barlow announced that the City Council will hear tL96tif'Oflg regarding these recommendations on Tuesday, April 1'1, at 12:10 p.m. Steve Henderson stated that he would make staff reports t❑ the City Council for that meeting available for viewing by the public on Friday, April 10. It will contain no changes other than what the Board has recommended. He will also make a copy available in the City Library. ADJOURN Chairperson Barlow adjourned the meeting at '1:30 p.m. MHRRB Minutes - September 4, 1986 Page 3 IV. CONTINUATION OF SILVER CITY APPLICATION (continued) The Board assigned numbers (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) to exhibits from the previous hearings. The Board questioned Mr. Waters with reference to his preference concerning professional cost estimate journals and whether or not the choice of publications would greatly effect the outcome of an appraisal report. He responded saying that one particular journal (Marshall & Swift), he felt, was organized in such a way as to facilitate the task of an appraiser to a greater extent than other journals. Mr. Waters felt that this preference was of a personal nature and that this choice would not become an influential factor in the results of an appraisal report. The Board briefly questioned Mr Moody, co-owner of Silver City, in order to clarify earlier testimony. V. ADJOURN The meeting adjouned at 3:45 p.m., and the next meeting was scheduled for September 25, 1986, 1:30 - 4:00 p.m.