HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-05-23; City Council; Minutes'
0 0
MINUTES
MEETING OF: CITY COUNCIL (Special Meeting)
DATE OF MEETING: May 23,1994
TIME OF MEETING: 7:OO p.m. PLACE OF MEETING: City Council Chambers
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Lewis called the Meeting to order at 7:OO p.m.
ROLL CALL was taken by the City Clerk, as follows:
Present: Council Members Finnila, Nygaard, Mayor Pro Tem Stanton and Mayor Lewis.
Absent: Council Member Kulchin.
36 1. AB #12,717 - INTRODUCTION OF MOBILE HOME PARK RENT CONTROL ORDINANCE.
City Attorney Ron Ball stated the purpose of this Special Meeting is to consider the introduction
of a mobile home rent control ordinance discussed most recently at the City Council Meeting of
May 17, 1994.
Mr. Ball stated the three major issues discussed at the May 17, 1994 meeting concerned the
discretion of hearing officer to award costs; duty to maintain physical improvements in
thecommon facilities by the park owner, and who should be eligible to vote for inclusion or
exclusion from the operation of the ordinance.He then explained the two alternatives presented
in Exhibit A and Exhibit B, and how they differ in terms of who votes for inclusion or exclusion.
Exhibit A
'5.26.050 Petition for Exclusion.
(a) A mobile home park may be excluded from the provisions of this chapter if a
Petition for Exclusion is filed with the City Clerk within 60 days after the effective
date of this ordinance.
(b) The Petition for Exclusion shall contain signatures of a majority of the
homeowners in the park, with each space entitled to one signature counting
toward the majority. Spaces exempted under the Civil Code Section 798.17 shall
be counted for purposes of determining a majority, and homeowners residing in
those spaces shall be entitled to sign the petition, notwithstanding the exemption
from the other requirements of this chapter stated in Section 5.26.040. The
petition shall also contain statements for exclusion from the provisions of this
chapter, such as a wriien agreement between the homeowners and the park
owners which satisfies the purpose and intent of this chapter.
(c) The Clerk shall verii the signatures and the mobile home park will be excluded
from the provisions of this chapter, with the exception of the initial registration
requirements contained in Sections 5.36.060 (a) and (b).
,j ;,? ...?
-/
0 0
May 23, 1994 Page 2
(d) If there are changed circumstances after a park has been included or excluded,
the homeowners may petition for exclusion or inclusion between January 1 and
March 1 of each year, provided a petition meeting the requirements of subdivision
(b) is filed with the City Clerk, and provided further that the petition shall contain
statements for exclusion or inclusion within the provisions of this chapter. The
City Council may approve, deny or condition the petition so that inclusion of the
park is consistent with the purpose and intent of this chapter."
Exhibit B
'5.26.050 Petition for Exclusion.
(a) A mobile home park may be excluded from the provisions of this chapter if a
Petition for Exclusion is filed with the City Clerk within 60 days after the effective
date of this ordinance.
(b) Where all or substantially all of the homeowners within a mobile home park are
on rental agreements exempted from the operation of this chapter under Civil
Code Section 798.17, a petition for exclusion shall contain signatures of a
majority of the homeowners in the park, with each space entitled to one signature
counting toward the majority. Spaces exempted under Civil Code Section 798.1 7
shall be counted for purposes of determining a majority, and homeowners
residing in those spaces shall be entitled to sign the petition, notwithstanding the
exemption from the other requirements of this chapter stated in Section 5.26.040.
The petition shall also contain statements for exclusion from the provisions of this
chapter, such as a written exclusion from the provisions of this chapter, such as
a written agreement between the homeowners and the park owner which satisfies
the purpose and intent of this chapter.
(c) For mobile home parks where all or substantially all of the homeowners are not
currently on exempt rental agreements pursuant to Civil Code Section 798.17,
then the petition for exclusion shall contain a majority of the homeowners in the
park who are not on rental agreements exempted from the operation of this
chapter pursuant to Civil Code Section 798.17 with each space entitled to one
signature counting toward the majority. The petition shall also contain statements
for exclusion from the provisions of this chapter, such as a written agreement
between the homeowners and the park owner which satisfies the purpose and
intent of this chapter.
(d) The Clerk shall verify the signatures and the mobile home park will be excluded
from the provisions of this chapter, with the exception of the initial registration
requirements contained in Sections 5.26.060 (a) and (b).
(e) If there are changed circumstances after a park has been included or excluded,
the homeowners may petition for exclusion or inclusion between January 1 and
March 1 of each year provided a petition meeting the requirements of subdivision
(b) is filed with the City Clerk, and provided further that the petition shall contain
statements for exclusion or inclusion within the provisions of this chapter. The
City Council may approve, deny or condition the petition so that inclusion of the
park is consistent with the purpose and intent of this chapter."
/3r, , .-$a
0 0
May 23, 1994 Page 3
City Attorney Ron Ball stated he had received one comment on the Negative Declaration and he
asked Mike Holzmiller, Planning Director, to respond.
Mike Holzmiller stated that staff has reviewed the comment received with regard to the Negative
Declaration and researched the matter, and still recommend that the City Council adopt the
Negative Declaration. The comment received stated the Negative Declaration did not adequately
address the possibility of a park closing, which could result in a resident not being able to
relocate within the City of Carlsbad. Mr. Holzmiller stated that staff has not been made aware of
any closure of any mobile home park in the State of California exclusively as a result of mobile
home rent control. Upon the closure of a park, the owner would be required to file a relocation
plan, and that plan would have to address where the residents could be relocated. Staff did
address the worst case scenario causing residents to be displaced on page seven of the initial
study, and then on pages eight and nine, and there wouldn’t be a significant environmental
impact, even in the worse case situation of the ordinance causing a park to close.
Albert Thel, Attorney, Voss, Cook & Thel, 840 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, representing
Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Home Park owners, stated the owners of Lakeshore Gardens do not
oppose rent control or this ordinance; however, this ordinance unfairly and unconstitutionally
affects Lakeshore Gardens. The ordinance would establish rents at this park below fair market
value, which would affect the value of the property, the income and the ability to resell the
property.
Mr. The1 requested a 30-day continuance to allow time to make the rent control ordinance apply
to Lakeshore the same as all parks, so the owner can receive fair market rental value.
Pete Garcia, 5236 Shore Drive, Bankruptcy Trustee for Rancho Carlsbad, stated the voluntary rent
accord reduced the value of the park by $3 million. The ordinance reduces the value of the
estate by $7 million, which is below what is owed to the creditors. Therefore, he must oppose
and fight the ordinance with every resource at his disposal.
Jonathan Dabbieri, 550 West C Street, San Diego, representing Pete Garcia, Trustee for the
Bankruptcy, stated Mr. Garcia has a duty to try to sell this park at a price that would provide for
payment to all of the creditors, and to be able to do this, the park and surrounding properties
would have to be sold for 36.5 million dollars. Mr. Dabbieri stated that the negative declaration
is not supported by the evidence, and referenced his objections, as contained in a document
which is on file in the City Clerk’s office.
Michael Spata, Andersen, Keleher & Spata, Attorneys, 1334 Park View Avenue, Suite 100,
Manhattan Beach, spoke on behalf of David Dawes, the Dawes Marital Trust and South Shores
Development Corporation, owner of Lanikai Lane Park, objecting to the proposed rent control
ordinance, negative declaration and resolution setting base rents. He presented a letter dated
May 23, 1994, detailing his objections, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerk’s office.
Bill McLean, 7400 Santa Barbara, Manager, Lakeshore Gardens, spoke on behalf of the owner
and in opposition to the proposed rent control ordinance. He requested a delay in passing this
ordinance to provide time for staff and interested parties to study the effects of the interplay
between the Civil Code and the rent control ordinance as written. He summarized the contents
of a letter dated May 21, 1994, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerk’s office.
/.? i
e 0
May 23, 2994 Page 4
Jed Robinson, 8041 Florence Avenue, #203, Downey, South Shores Development, spoke in
opposition to the proposed rent control ordinance. He stated that 50 percent of their residents
exceed the median income level. He used overhead transparencies and gave a history of rents
in the park for the past 11 years. He explained the impact of the ordinance and said the
ordinance transfers the rights of the land to the tenants. Their resale prices would increase, but
park owners’ revenue would decrease. A copy of Mr. Robinson’s transparencies are on file in the
City Clerk’s Office.
Leigh Rayner, Attorney, 355 West Grand, Escondido, representing Lanikai Lane Homeowners
Association, spoke in favor of adopting the rent control ordinance with Exhibit B. Mr. Rayner
stated the legality of mobile home park rent control ordinances is well-established, and the
ordinance provides for a fair and reasonable return to the park owners.
Don Olmsted, 809-27 Olive Avenue, Vista, representing COMPAC, spoke in favor of the ordinance,
stating all of the different organizations from the whole north county applaud the efforts to solve
the problem about property rights and endorse the Council’s position. Mr. Olmsted stated
Council should allow those who are affected by this ordinance to decide their fate without
interference by those with no vested interest.
Don Lincoln, Attorney, 600 B Street, San Diego, representing Rancho Carlsbad Homeowners
Association, requested Council introduce the ordinance tonight, stating there are 92 other
jurisdictions with ordinances, and the one Council is considering tonight is in line with those. He
stated the negative declaration is also in line with the other jurisdictions. He stated the
Homeowners Association favored adopting Exhibit B to the ordinance. Mr. Lincoln stated the
ordinance covers the situation at Lakeshore Gardens adequately by allowing the City to hold
another appraisal to enter Lakeshore Gardens in the ordinance.
Ewell “ex” O’Bryan, 5109 Don Miguel Drive, spoke in opposition to the ordinance as a resident
homeowner in a park. He had questions regarding his lease, which will expire December 31,
1994, and whether the ordinance would apply to him and what would his base rent be at that
time. He said his rent would continue to be higher than others in the park and he resented being
disenfranchised.
Allan Summit, 3455 Don Alberto, spoke in favor of rent control as a Rancho Carlsbad homeowner,
stating the homeowners need to be represented as well as the land owner, as they are a captive
group.
John Larocque, 3030 Oceanside Blvd., #37, Oceanside, representing COMPAC #5, stated he
owns a double wide coach in a park under rent control in Oceanside and as a spokesperson for
COMPAC, supports the ordinance. Similar ordinances have been challenged many times and
those making the challenge have never won. The ordinance is an effective tool for the
homeowners.
Chuck Gender, 5106 Don Mata, President of the Rancho Carlsbad Homeowners Association,
spoke in favor of the ordinance and urged Council not to delay taking action on the ordinance.
He expressed support for Exhibit B.
Charlotte Yale, 7107 Santa Cruz, Lakeshore Gardens, spoke in favor of the ordinance, stating the
homeowners in that park have long-term leases that expire in six or seven months, and the
homeowners will soon start negotiating with the owner on rent increases.
/\J 5
e e
May 23, 1994 Page 5
Leslie Tanner, 655030 Ponto Drive, President of the Homeowners Association, Lanikai Lane Park,
spoke in favor of the rent control ordinance and thanked everyone for all the work done.
City Attorney Ron Ball responded to questions, stating that long-term leases are those with a term
over twelve months, even if it expires in one month. Mr. Ball stated that if a park votes to be
included in the rent control and a homeowner has a lease expire and does not enter into another
exempt lease, the homeowner would be covered under the ordinance, and the last rental rate
charged would be the base rent.
ACTION: On motion by Council Member Finnila, Council agreed that the wording in Exhibit
A would be the voting mechanism included in the rent control ordinance as
Section 5.26.050.
AYES: Stanton, Nygaard and Finnila
NOES: Lewis
Council Member Finnila stated her concern with the possible costs of litigation in connection with
this ordinance and how this will hurt the General Fund. If a mandatory rent control ordinance is
passed rather than having a voluntary rent control, this will need to be monitored at further cost
to the City. If the issue goes to a vote of the people, that will cost more money. The City budget
can be balanced only by reducing expenditures, and this ordinance will increase costs. She said
the mobile home park homeowners want fair rent, but she feels this vehicle will not accomplish
that for the homeowners and is not in the best interest of the City.
ACTION: On motion by Mayor Pro Tem Stanton, Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 94-
142, approving the negative declaration regarding the mobile home park rent
control ordinance; and
adopted RESOLUTION NO. 94-143, setting the base rent regarding the mobile
home park rent control ordinance.
AYES: Lewis, Stanton and Nygaard
NOES: Finnila
ACTION: On motion by Mayor Pro Tem Stanton, Council introduced ORDINANCE NO.NS-
282, amending Title 5 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, by adding Chapter 5.26
Kegulate mobile home park space rent; with the inclusion of Exhibit A as the
voting mechanism.
AYES: Lewis, Stanton and Nygaard
NOES: Finnila
/A9
e rn
May 23, 1994 Page 6
PUBLIC COMMENT:
In accordance with the Brown Act, Mayor Lewis opened the meeting for further public comment. Since
there was no one wishing to speak at this time, the public comment period was closed.
ADJOURNMENT:
By proper motion, the Special Meeting of May 23, 1994, was adjourned at 852 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
di!hA%d* ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ
City Clerk
I
Harriett Babbitt
Minutes Clerk
/26?