The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutResolutions 84-106 N.C.S. 05/21/1984't. l~esol.ution .NO._ ~ a ,, ~~ ti:N. 'C. S. _ of the City of Petaluma, California _ RESOLUTION OUTLINING CITY GOU`N:CIL POSITION REGARDING MOBILE, HOME PARK. SPACE' RENT; REVIEW WHEREAS, a Committee of the City, Council has reviewed rent increases in Petaluma Mobile Home Parks for the period January 1978 to January 1984; and, WHEREAS, this "review indicates that some park owners have increased rents at a rate greater than the CPI for the .same period and that some parks have not; and, WHEREAS, this review clearly shows that one mobile home park, specifically Petaluma Estates, has increased rents 39o greater than the CPI for the corresponding period; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Committee report dated May 4, .1984, attached hereto and marked Exhibit "A", and concurs with the recommendations contained therein; and, 49HEREAS, negotiations between the parties apparently have not been taking place; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of .Petaluma hereby urges all parties to communicate and enter into negotiations to resolve ren-t disputes within the parks and offers its assistance to further such negotiations, and will adopt a formal binding procedure to review rent increases if , any park owner increases rents greater than the Bay Area CPI for the period from January 1, 1982 to the last reported date of the Bay Area CPI, and. at least 5,l o of the tenants' of the affected park subsequently. petition the City Council to proceed with an enforceable rent review mechanism; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED .that. City staff is dr..ected to continue meeting in conjunction with the Courici'1 Committee.; par"k owners and tenant association representatives to .develop a formal binding procedure for rent control of mobile home park spaces . Under the po~yer and authority conferred upon this~.Council hy: the Charter of said City. I fiereby certify the foregoing Resolution was, introduced and adopted by the Council of the City of Petaluma at a (Regular) {~~~X~ meeting on the ............Z1S-t.• day of ...:._..:...Mail ......................_.._.._...:_..._, Y$.~_4., by the following vote : - . AYES: Bond/Cavanagh/Bal~shaw/V.NI. -I3ar;berson/P~layor ~attei ATOES: -0- ABSENT: Perm/}3attagl ' a ATTEST : .... ........ ....... ...... ........~-~/....-.............. ..........-- - ........ ...-----.... ........... - •-_---•-_-••--•----••------..... ,. DEPUTY City Clerk ~ ~ ~ Mayor ' Council File .:..:.......................:....... - c `Form CA 2 7/87 ~ Re§: No:.:S~..~ ~..Q~.~ .'~ ..5.. MAY 7 1~~4 ~~ ~-` CITY OF PETALUMA Memorandum ~ May 4, 1984 T0: Mayor and City Council FROM:: Rent Review Committee Vice Mayor James L. Harberson., Chairman SUBJ: Report of the Rent Review Committee to the Petaluma City Gounc'il. Thee. Rent Review Committee, consisting of Vice Mayor H'arberson, Councilman Balshaw and Councilman Bond, has completed its inve gation into the request from the Petaluma Association. of Mobilehome..Owners (PAMO) to consider establishing a rent. control mechanism to prevent. future large increases in mobile~home.park space rents in Petaluma. The Committee reviewed numerous examples of current and past ordinances in effect in various ]:ovations in California. Although there is no uniformity in the ordinances, several key elements were discovered: 1. Most rent ordinances are confined to mobilehome parks and. not total rental units. 2.. Most ordinances are binding on: both~the tenants and the park owners and violations of the ordinance may allow tenants to refuse to pay "illegal" rent. increases or obtain a refund of rents found to be in violation of the ordinance. 3'. Most ordinance s.exc;lude rent .increases based on a minimum percentage increase. per year, or those increases not opposed, in writing, by a majority of the tenants. ,~ ~~ ~ Rent Review - 2 - May 3, 1-9.84 4. All ordinances..require a processing fee of from $300 - $2, 000, paid by the petit°oner to the review board to cover some of the expenses of administering the review process. 5. Mont Review Committees/Commiss'ons consist of 5 people representing both tenants and owners. The Commi tee was also provided extensive material from Golden State Mobi~lehome Owners League: (GSMOL) and Western MobTehome Association (WMA) to review which provided information from both. the moblehome owner's and park owner's points of view.. The Committee met with several of`the park owners/ representatives on March 3`0, T984. They met with the owners of Youngstown, Capri, Candlewood`, Royal Oaks and Leisure Lake Parks.. The property manager s: of Petaluma Estate sent°a written response for°consideration. The park owners were. concerned about getting fair rates of return on their investments. One indicated that he might raise his rents to the maximum allowable to insure a "reasonable" income if rent controls ar_e passed. Most owners felt they .had been very reasonable in their park fees and felt. this issue was being caused by the actions of Petaluma Estates.. All tenant representatives were invited to meet with the Committee on Apri'1 6, 1984, tenant representatives of Youngstown, Leisure Lake-and Petaluma~Estates appeared before the Committee. It appeared that residents of Candlewood and' Leisure Lake }` Rent Review - 3 - ~ May 3, 1984 were satisfied with their parks' rental rate increases and were not extremely interested in rent control under their eurrent:.land owners. Home owners in Petaluma Estates expressed concern over the difficulty in moving the units- (too expensive) and the negative impact high space rental had on the selling price of the mobilehomes.. The Committee has concluded that some of the park tenants are being financially squeezed by increases in space rental,. especially in the Petaluma. Estates Park. .However;, most of the tenants seem to be. able to meet their housing expenses and no ground swell,of opposition. from the general park population throughout Petaluma_is apparent at this time... Some park residents, in fact, ~; don't support the adoption of rent control by the City of Petaluma. The Committee also concluded that,. with one exception, the rate of rent increases in the park's were reasonable and that the majority of park owners were shown to be fair and equitable.. Of concern to the Council was the. costs .associated with :the establishment of rent control. Costs which were borne by the City, the park owners and the resi- dents of, the parks. There costs include hearing fees, compensation to appraisers, economists, arbitrators Rent Review - 4- - May 3, 1984 and, in many cases,, hearing trapscrpts and legal costs associated with legal counsel and. litigation arising out of the application. of the rent control. provisions.. Summary The members of the' Committee felf it is presently unreasonable to set up a rent contromechanism which.' might have a negative effect on alI_park owners and tenants when only one park seemed to be the focus of the concern.. The Committee agreed that the. City should do what it canto reduce the pressures which contribute to the increased: space rentals. In this effort, the Committee.,recommends that the Council. study the possi- bility of providing incentives to increase the number of spaces available in Petaluma, including the conversion to condominiums of°current or future parks through change`s in the Zoning Ordinance and°General Plan if needed.. Staff~wll research other ideas to assist those park residents most aecuteTy-affected by high space rents through rent subsidies or other means. I't is the consensus also that, if unreasonably high increases continue, a comprehensive rent control law should be passed which would base the allowable percen`tage' in-crease~to be based on the rents in effect in .1982. The City will monitor the rent situation in • Rent Review - 5 - May 3, 1984 the parks and will reconsider the desirability of enacting rent control,if the increases continuer as some of them have been. The. Committee also recommends that the Council, through resoT:uton or otherwise, let the park owners realize .the dissatisfaction with. some of the increases and that rent control.wll become a reality in Petaluma .f the park owners are unable to provide: relief to those most detrimentally affected by rent increase within their parks. February 27, 1.984 Leisure Lake Candlewood Petaluma Estates Youngstown MOBILE HOME PARK RENT INCREASES./CPI COMPARISONS Jan., 1978 Jan., 1984 Increase $130/mo $177/mo +36.2 87/mo ~ 140/mo +3702$ 137/mo ~ 265/mo +92$ 120/mo 198/mo +65$ CPI Variance +53$ -16.8 +53$ -15.8% +53$ ±39$ +5 3~ ~+12!x: