Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-28-1986 MHRRB Minutescity of sAn lois oBi SPO 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 Mobilehome Rent Review Board APRIL 28TH, 1986 I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTION The Mobilehome Rent Review Board public hearing was called to order at 1:35 p.m. by Chairperson Barlow. Boardmembers in attendence were Pat Barlow, John Grden, Naomi Wright and Dennis Wheeler at 1:45 p.m. Gary Label was unable to attend. Staff in attendence were Steve Henderson and William Sloan. Chairperson Barlow announced at this time, as a point of information, that future Mobilehome Rent Review Board meetings would be held every third Thursday, at 1:30 p.m.,(Not the 3rd Thursday of each month.) II. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF APRIL 17TH. 1986 Boardmembers reviewed the corrected minutes of April 17th and approved them as submitted. III. OTHER BUSINESS Steve Henderson presented a letter to the Board, from Mr. and Mrs. Nicas who live at the Oceanaire Mobile Home Park. The letter requested Board help with what the Nicas's felt was a rent increase in conflict with the Ordinance. Mr. Henderson explained to the Board that he had contacted the Nicas's and at the time of the meeting had no resolution of the problem. Mr. Henderson will provide a report on the Nicas's complaint at the next Board meeting. IV. CREEKSIDE APPLICATION Mr. Henderson distributed to the Boardmembers a Staff report on the application brought by the Creekside Tenants' Association. Mr. Henderson notified the Board that Paul Beauvais, Chairman of the Creekside Tenants'Association's Grievance Committee, had requested a postponement of the Creekside hearing. Mr. Beauvais had made this request because the attorney representing the Tenants' Association, Mr. Perry, would be unable to attend. It was agreed that some of the material involved with the Creekside application could be covered at this meeting and that MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW BOARD MINUTES, APRIL 28TH, 1986 Page 2 CREEKSIDE APPLICATION (CONTINUED) Mr. Henderson reviewed the Staff Report, and noted the history of the application. Mr. Henderson emphasized that the Tenants' want the application taken as a whole, and not as 13 individual complaints. MR. BEAUVAIS: Addressed the Board on behalf of the Tenants' Association. Mr. Beauvais stated that for two years there had been no street sweeping in the park, except by hand. A machine for street sweeping had been purchased only recently. The Shuffleboard area renovation had generated a lot of interest on the part of tenants, however, Mr. Beauvais noted that this was giving the tenant's back something they had had previously. With regards to the pool temperature, Mr. Beauvais stated that this morining, at 8 a.m., the pool was only 76 degrees. Mr. Beauvais had made inquiries at Cuesta College about a pool's temperature comfort zone and was told by the manager of the adult lap swim program that 85 degrees is appropriate. Mr. Beauvais noted that the Creekside pool, at 76 degrees, was well below the comfort zone. Mr. Beauvais was not certain that agreement had been reached on the issue of the leaking roof over the jacuzzi. Mr. Beauvais stated that it was his hope that the roof would be painted as well as repaired. The problems involved with the cable service, provided by Sonic Cable, had been addressed by Mr. Beauvais and Mr. Evans. A proposed solution to the service problem was to contract with another cable service. Mr. Beauvais stated that he was not sure if the tenants would want the new cable service if it didn't work better than the pool. Mr. Beauvais noted that the maintenance of the common grounds had improved in the last couple of months. Mr. Beauvias wished to defer in comment on the issue of trash collection until the attorney for the Tenants' Association could be present. Mr. Beauvais stated that he feels the CPI used for determining allowable rent increases is the wrong one. The CPI designated by the Board on March 27th, 1986, was the L.A./Long Beach, Anaheim index. Mr. Beauvais had contacted the local Social Security Administration and was told that they generally use the national CPI. Mr. Beauvais noted that Ed Evans had used the national CPI for years and had recently changed to the L.A.-Long Beach CPI. Mr. Beauvais felt this was unfair. MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW BOARD MINUTES, APRIL 28TH, 1986 PAGE 3 With regards to the requirement to upgrade or take out fences around individual mobilehome at the time of their sale, Mr. Beauvais felt that this represented mandatory upgrading by rule change and that it should be abolished. Mr. Beauvais cited a recent court case involving this issue. Mr. Beauvais noted the deteriorating condition of the streets and waterpipes. He recounted an incident in which problems with the main valve to the park along with a break in the pipes had created a circumstance where the water was shut off for a period in excess of 24 hours. Mr. Beauvais noted that the general disrepair of the park has created a loss for mobilehome owners in Creekside. He presented photographs of the conditions of streets, drainage, and trash in the park. MR. ED EVANS PRESENTATION: Mr. Evans, owner of the Creekside Mobilehome Park, apologized to the Board for the unwarranted complaints. Mr. Evans noted that Creekside is 15 years old, and stated that he felt his practices were comparable with any professional management practices. Mr. Evans agreed that there were problems at the park, but that rent control prevents his taking any action. He equated what the Board was seeing now, because of rent control, with what has been occurring in New York City. Mr. Evans stated that he had come into Creekside with the idea that the Ordinance would allow for property improvements. Mr. Evans stated the the erosion of mobilehome value in the park was untrue, and that single and doublewide mobilehomes had actually increased in value. Mr. Evans stated that Creekside was better now than it was three years ago. Mr. Evans noted that he had initiated a policy of better management and utility conservation. With regards to the complaints about the laundry facilities Mr. Evans said that when he took over Creekside all but three of washers were set at 50 cents. Two of the three washers were raised to 50 cents and the other was removed, because it wasn't working. Mr. Evans stated that he had not changed the price on the dryers. Mr. Evans stated that he had the laundry machinery set to operate like a regular commercial laundromat. He had the water set at 120 degrees, which he described as adequate. Mr Evans noted that the facilities were open 14 hours a day, 7 days a week and that the nine machines that are in the facility currently were used less than at full capacity. Mr. Evans stated the laundry area is kept clean. MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW BOARD MINUTES, APRIL 28TH, 1986 PAGE 4 CREEkSIDE APPLICATION (CONTINUED) Mr. Evans stated the the prior owners for sometime had no sweeping of the streets, and that when the previous owner had a sweeping service it had come into the park on a once a month basis; a frequency of service he termed inadequate. Mr. Evans stated that he had implemented a staff sweeping program for two years and that he had recently purchased a streetsweeping machine, because of the efficiency it provides. Mr. Evans said, with regards to the shuffleboard area, that it hadn't been used for years, but that he is willing to provide equipment if there is interest in the game. With reference to the condition of the pool cues, Mr. Evans noted that it is very difficult to keep the equipment with children around. He stated that they had lost 26 cue sticks in the past year. Mr. Evans assured homeowners that the manager would repair cues that were damaged. Mr. Evans said that he had made an effort to obtain a pool temperature of 82 degrees by noon. He said that this was difficult and expensive to do, stating that even with a solar heating system gas heating bills for the pool and sauna totaled $7800.00 for the year. Mr. Evans said that if people wanted to swim at 8am it would not be as warm as would be at noon. Mr. Evans said that he had asked for help from the tenants about the pool temperature. He asked them whether in the winter months he could cover the pool at 6pm instead of the normal lOpm time. The tenants said no. Mr. Evans wishes to cover the pool early in the winter in order to save heat. With reference to the jacuzzi, Mr. Evans acknowledged that there had been equipment problems and that problems will occur again. The Jacuzzi roof was over the Jacuzzi when he purchased Creekside and that its purpose was to keep heat in, not necessarily to keep the rain out. He stated that some of the leak that tenants had complained about was actually condensation formed by the hot water of the jacuzzi. He noted that the roof does need painting and that he has painted it twice already. Mr. Evans denied that the jacuzzi is unsanitary and said that it is daily maintained and regularly checked by the health dept.. With regards to trash pickup, Mr. Evans noted that trash -trucks because of their size, damage streets. He said that he had talked to the residents about the trash problem. MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW BOARD MINUTES APRIL 28TH, 1986 PAGE 5 CREEKSIDE APPLICATION (CONTINUED) Mr. Evans said that he feels that most residents would agree that weekly door-to-door service is better than what they had before. Also, he noted, that there is a bin in the back of the park that is avialable to tenants. Mr. Evans said that the current trash pickup system saves him no money, rather the only thing it saves is wear and tear on the streets. Mr. Evans stated that he didn't change the CPI until looking into it. He checked with legal counsel and with city staff. Mr. Evans stated that the Ordinance language was vague. He said that he doesn't purposely disregard the Ordinance. With regards to the cable T.V. service, Mr. Evans said that Sonic cable doesn't own the system in Creekside. He said that Sonic has made it appear that any reception problems were caused by the park's system. Sonic had doubled its price to commercial users and that this had been passed on to residents like any other utility. Mr. Evans felt that the problem with cable service would be solved with a disc receiver and some other service provider. With regards to the fences, Mr. Evans said that the fences in the park are in disorder, and that he would rather their were no fences, but if tenants want fences then the fences would need to be solid and six feet high. Mr. Evans stated that he was not asking the tenants to upgrade, rather he was asking them to take down those fences that were not in compliance with community rules. Mr. Evans stated that the California Civil Code allowed him to change rules without tenants' approval, but had not done so in hopes of achieving community unity With regards to street repair, Mr. Evans stated he had been told by a street repairer that his streets were in sound shape, except for some minor spots. Mr. Evans stated that the roads do not need to be resealed. Mr. Evans said that his longterm goal was to repave the streets, but the cost was between 80,000 and 100,000 dollars. He said that rent control prevented him from doing anymore than patching. Mr. Evans categorized fences, streets and driveways as longterm needs in a 15 year old park. MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW BOARD MINUTES APRIL 28TH, 1986 PAGE 6 CREEKSIDE APPLICATION (CONTINUED) With regards to the park's water system Mr. Evans said that one main shutoff valve was not uncommon, and that a program was underway to access the operational condition of the valves in the park. Mr. Evans said that he takes pride in the maintenance of the park and that winter conditions are difficult to contend with. He stated that manhour allocation had been increased for park maintenance. With reference to a water conservation factor, Mr. Evans stated that he had spent some effort in gaining the information which was used to establish waterusage at 600 cubic feet per unit per month. Mr. Evans summed up by saying that Creekside is willing to provide better service, and that he doesn't deny that there are problems, but that he doesn't feel that the allegation by the Creekside Tenants' Association are accurate. TEN MINUTE RECESS After the recess the Board discussed what action should be taken at this time. It was agreed that the Creekside application would be taken up again at the next meeting. Steve Henderson notified the Board that a hardship application by Silver City Mobilehome Park, for an increase in rent was just received. Board agreed to add this to the agenda of the next Mobilehome Rent Review Board meeting. V. ADJOURNMENT The hearing was adjourned at 4 p.m. The next Mobilehome Rent Review Board meeting will be Thursday, May 15th, 1986 at 1:30 pm. At that time the Board will continue the Creekside Application and take up the Silver City Application, as well as review the Ordinance. Respectfully submitted, W A Sloan, Cler Bard MOBILEHOME RENT REVIEW BOARD MINUTES MAY 15TH, 1986 MEMBERS PRESENT: Barlow, Grden, Label, Wright STAFF PRESENT: Henderson, Sloan Meeting was called to order at 1:30p.m. by Chairperson Barlow. I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, APRIL 28TH, 1986. The minutes of April 28th, were approved with the following corrections; page 2, "Mr. Beauvais wished to defer in comment..", corrected to "Mr. Beauvais wished to defer any comment..", page 5, .."he would rather their...", corrected to, "...he would rather there...". II. REVIEW OF PACKET. Mr. Henderson reviewed the packet of information given to the Boardmembers. The packet consisted of Minutes of April 28th, public notice of the May 15th meeting, Agenda for the May 15th meeting, and the application by Silver City Mobilehome Park. III. REPORT OF ACTION. NICAS' LETTER. Mr. Henderson gave a report of his action with regards to a letter received by the Board from a Mr. and Mrs. Nicas of Oceanaire Park. Mr. Henderson stated that he had contacted both the Nicas' and the park owner. It was determined by Staff that the Nicas' trailer type, in particular its 8 foot width, did not come under the protection of the Ordinance, and that the park owner was within his rights to increase the Nicas' rent to the extent that he did. IV. CONTINUATION OF TENANTS APPLICATION, CREEKSIDE MOBILEHOME PARK. Mr. Henderson stated that he had received a request from Paul Beauvias for a continuation of the Creekside matter because of the tenants' attorneys' inability to attend the hearing. Mr. Henderson told Mr. Beauvais that he could not grant such a continuance, rather that such a decision was up to the Board. V. MHRRB 5/15/86 PAGE 2 Mr. Henderson noted that the Creekside tenants' attorney had intended to speak on the issues of CPI and water usage. The Board discussed, among its members, the continuation of the Creekside application, and the consensus was that a continuation to the June 5th, 1986, should be granted. CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION. SILVER CITY MOBILEHOME PARK. Mr. Henderson noted that this was an application by the owners asking for an increase in rent beyond the parameters of the rent stabilization ordinance, and that there was a need at this at this time to set a date to hear the application. Boardperson Wright asked whether what was before the Board was a capital improvement and if so did the Board have jurisdiction? Mr. Henderson said that the Board did have authority to review this application. Discussion continued on the Boards authority to review this application. Mr. Henderson noted that capital improvement is a hard cost that must be approved by 50% of the park residents. If approval is not gained then the park owner must come to the board with an application. Mr. Henderson noted that water meters are a capital improvement, but it must come before the board. Mr. Henderson went on to say that in theory an owner can come to the Board and announce that services are going down and that capital improvements are going in and then request a rent increase. Date set for review of application was June 5th, 1986. VI. PROCEDURAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT. Discussion revolved around whether 75% or 100% of the CPI should be used. Chairperson Barlow noted that there was concern expressed that 75% of CPI was not adequate. Public testimony was heard on the Leigh Willard stated that there 2-86. He noted that the average Security and pension increases. Mr. Willard went on to say that because of what is covered in the those items that actually affect park. 75% 100% CPI dilemma. was a new CPI listing for 2-85 to CPI was used for most Social the•75% figure was agreed on CPI, and the need to reflect the operation of a mobilehome Dick Clark also spoke in favor of retaining the current 75% CPI as the appropriate figure to use. Mr. Clark also requested that Subsection C of Section 5.44.060 of the Ordinance be deleted. James Buttery spoke in favor of the 100% CPI. He stated that he felt there was a need to focus on what the ordinance intended to (PROCEDURAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSMENT CONTINUED) MHRRB PAGE 3 5-15-86 address with regards to the CPI; he felt it was an issue of "fair return". Mr. Buttery stated that the purpose of the Ordinance was to insure that the park owner received the same amount, adjusted for inflation, year end and year out. Using 75% of CPI works as an automatic decrease in return. Mr. Buttery said that the owners will suffer substantial losses before they are willing to come to the Board, because of the structure of the Ordinance. He stated that park owners never agreed to 75% of CPI. Mr. Buttery stated that the deletion of Subsection C of Section 5.44.060 would be unfortunate and that a limitation of CPI increases would bring about an increase in the number of applications to the Board. Mr. Buttery spoke to Barr's article comentary on 75% of CPI plus allowing owners to pass thru cost increases. Morris Levins spoke in favor of 75% of CPI. He stated that as a resident of a Pismo mobilehome park he had come to observe the review board process. He noted that he had worked with Mayor Billig, the park owners and the residents on the current San Luis Obispo ordinance. Mr. Levins said that the CPI is an emperical measure that has little to do with the operation of a mobilehome park. He felt that 75% of CPI helped maintain the park's costs of operation. Ed Evans spoke in favor of 100% of CPI. He stated that there is a good understanding of the CPI when it affects us. However, some think that park owners operate outside the economy, park owners do however operate with the constraints of the economy. He stated that he spends more today than three years ago. Mr. Evans stated that the Ordinance should use the rental housing or housing index when looking for a percentage to apply. Mr. Evans summed up by saying that the City could not continue discounting of the CPI because the park owners will be before the Board all the time. He stated that his cost have gone up and his purchasing power had gone down. Chairperson Barlow asked if ammending the Ordinance to use 100% of CPI would allieviate Mr. Evans cost problem, thus it would not be necessary to request hardship increases. Mr. Evans stated that it would take care of much of the problem, except for unexpected costs such as capital improvements and exceptional insurance costs, ect. Francis Kirschner stated that with regard to the rental real estate CPI that it is based on a probable vancancy, which he said is not the case in mobilehome parks. Chairperson Barlow closed the hearing of public testimony. The Board then addressed itself to prioritizing the procedural and administrative adjustments to the Ordinance and its language that the Board needed to decide upon. The final order of the items to (PROCEDURAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENTS CONTINUED) MHRRB 5-15-86 PAGE 4 be taken up by the Board was as follows; Tenant Application Fees, Safe Harbor, Subleasing, and Vacancy Decontrol Those items to be presented to the City Council were application fees, definition of surcharge, and length of lease. With regards to the issue of subletting, Mr. Buttery noted that traditionally state law restricts the use of the mobilehome in a park to the owner and his or her relatives. A new law being considered by the state legislature may allow subletting. If the law passes it would create a situation not foreseen by the Ordinance. Mr. Buttery stated that he felt it would be inappropriate for the Board to react to what the state may do. He stated that he saw no danger in addressing the issue of subletting now. Boardmember Grden stated that he would prefer to wait and see what the state does Boardmember Label stated that he tended to agree with Mr. Buttery. Mr. Henderson stated that he was not convinced that subletting was a burning issue. Boardmember Wright stated that she could understand the park owners' concern. Mr. Buttery and Mr. Clark both offered to provide the Board with information on the bill before the state legislature dealing with subletting in mobilehome parks. Mr. Buttery inquired if it was the Board's intent to make this a priority item when the state did act. The Board's consensus was that it would be a priority item.VI. OTHER BUSINESS Adele Raymond noted that on 11-20-85 Mr. Brymer had attempted to get before the Board with regards to having section *D of the Ordinance put back into the Ordinance. Mr. Henderson noted that the elimination of that section of the Ordinance was a clerical error and is to be corrected. Chairperson Barlow announced that there will be a quarterly meeting for advisory body chairpersons and that all Boardmembers are welcome to attend. Chairperson Barlow asked Mr. Henderson if the issue with Mr. Soto was complete. Mr. Henderson acknowledge that it was. MHRRB 5-15-86 PAGE 5 VII. ADJOURNMENT The Meeting was adjourned by Chairperson Barlow at 3:44 p.m. The next meeting of the Mobilehome Rent Review Board is scheduled for Thursday, June 5th, 1986, at 1:30 p.m. / '2 Respectfully submitted _ W A Slo Clerk to the Board