PC 022509 - Laserfiche WebLink

condominiums, rent stabilization agreements are voided; State law would take over, and after four years, renters would be under a market-rate rental situation. Commissioner Fox noted that many survey respondents were undecided, and comments on the survey indicated that some respondents were concerned about letters they had received. She stated that some were concerned because they had no idea about what the purchase price would be. She questioned whether, as a bona fide survey, there should have been an “undecided” option. Mr. Roush replied that in fairness to the applicant, the applicant’s representative did share the survey with City staff as well as a resident committee who worked on the rent stabilization agreement and there was give-and-take with respect to what was contained in the survey as well as its phrasing. He stated that the group concluded that it was fine to include the “undecided” question and that the owner did not mandate that it be included. Commissioner Fox stated that only approximately 40 out of 208 units, or 20 percent, were in favor of the conversion. She inquired if more than 50 percent, or 105 “yes” votes for 208 units, would be required for a majority. Mr. Roush replied that much like in an election, there may be 200 registered voters, but if only 100 vote, it would not require 101 votes for the measure to pass. He noted that the difficulty is that under case law, the applicants contend that they met the requirements of State law by simply conducting the survey. Commissioner Fox inquired what a “bona fide” survey meant. Mr. Roush replied that the legislative history of the language is not particularly illuminating and that it would have to fall back on an appellate court’s decision before the amendment of State law, which decision talks about whether the intent of the application is to sell the units off as a residential conversion as opposed to selling off one or two lots, and then raising the prices on the lots so no one else can buy it, thereby removing the rent control provisions. He noted that in this case, the courts have said that if that happens, it would not be a bona fide conversion but a “sham” conversion, and the courts could step in and set it aside. Commissioner Fox inquired what the definition of a “sham” conversion was. Mr. Roush replied that it would be where the conversion is allowed to go through, the owner sells one or two lots to get rid of the rent stabilization ordinance, and then prices the lots so high that no one can reasonably purchase them, thereby eliminating rent control. Commissioner Fox inquired if rent stabilization would be removed if one of the mobile home spaces is sold under the current proposal. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 25, 2009 Page 10 of 29