ORD 1843 - Laserfiche WebLink

G. Under the then existing ordinance, the park owner of the property at 4202 Stanley Boulevard (the Pleasanton Mobilehome Park) believed that the base year (i.e., 1992) rents were not reasonable or did not reflect general market conditions and petitioned for an adjustment to the base year rents. In 1995 a hearing officer determined that effective February 1, 1993, the monthly rent for the spaces in that park was three hundred thirty five dollars ($335.00). The hearing officer did not determine the monthly rents for 1992, but because those rents were between two hundred twenty two dollars thirty one cents ($222.31) and three hundred two dollars eleven cents ($302.11) (depending on the space), presumably those rents should have been higher in 1992 (than the $222.31 to $302.11) in order to yield the three hundred thirty five dollars ($335.00) per month rent effective February 1, 1993. Accordingly, should there ever be a fair return adjustment petition for that park, the gross income for the base year (1992) shall be deemed three hundred twenty eight dollars fifty five cents ($328.55) per space. H. The March 17, 1992 agreement was due to expire on December 31, 1996, and the parties to that agreement met during 1996 to discuss the terms and conditions of a revised Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Agreement. I. The parties to the March 17, 1992 agreement reached agreement on a revised Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Agreement ("the November 1996 agreement"). J. The one park owner who had not entered into the March 17, 1992 agreement was offered the opportunity to participate in the November 1996 agreement but again refused to do SO. K. The November 1996 agreement is due to expire on December 31, 2001; the parties to that agreement met during 2001 to discuss terms and conditions of a revised Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Agreement. L. With the exception of one park owner (for the property at 785 Rose Avenue), the City and the park owners have been unable to agree upon terms and conditions for a new agreement. M. Due to the lack of a significant vacancy factor and the high cost of moving mobilehomes owned by the residents in the parks, the residents do not have an alternative of relocating to other parks in which rents may be more reasonable. Mobilehome residents, unlike apartment tenants or residents of other rental stock, are in the unique position of having made a substantial investment in a residence for which space is rented or leased. Removal and/or relocation of a mobilehome from a park space is not a practical alternative to accepting an excessive rent increase in that it can only be accomplished at substantial cost, and in many instances may cause extensive damage to the mobilehome and loss of appurtenances such as integrated landscaping and supporting structures inconsistent with the new location. N. Two of the parks are senior parks and most of the residents are senior citizens, many of whom are living on fixed incomes. Because mobilehomes are often owned by senior citizens, persons on fixed incomes, and persons of low and moderate income, exorbitant rent increases fall upon these individuals with particular harshness. 4