15 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Roush replied that was correct. He added that the restriction, as written now, is that the owner will not sell the units for a minimum of ten years. Commissioner Fox inquired how the ten-year and four-year period work with respect to rent stabilization. Mr. Roush explained that assuming the final map records in 2009, none of the conversion provisions will apply between 2009 and 2019 and that the conversion will not occur until after the first lot is sold. He continued that assuming the first lot is sold on July 1, 2019, this would trigger the averaging of the rents in 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 that would apply for 2019 for those lower income residents. He stated that because the rent stabilization agreement runs from 2007 to 2017, the agreement will continue to be in place, and, during that time, rents may increase between two percent to five percent each year, depending on the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Commissioner Fox inquired what will happen if the agreement was extended beyond 2017 and whether there will be further negotiations with the park owner during 2017. Mr. Roush replied that if an agreement is not re<~ched, the rent stabilization ordinance would take effect in the absence of an agreement. He clarified that if a tenant moves out in 2010 and a new tenant comes in, the new tenant would pay the rent that the rent stabilization agreement would provide for any nf;w resident. In response to Commissioner Olson's inquiry if the rent stabilization agreement would cease to take effect at conversion, Mr. Roush replied that the terms of the rent stabilization agreement would be superseded by State law at the time of conversion unless the owner were to agree otherwise. He noted that, notwithstanding State law, the owner could indicate that he will continue to abide by the agreement for so many years, or he could say otherwise and trigger the provisions of Section 66427.5 at the time of the conversion date, which would be the date of the first sale of the unit. He added that at that point, the City's ordinance ceases to be effective. Commissioner Olson asked if staff tried to determine why so many residents did not respond to the survey. Mr. Roush replied that staff did not follow up with those who did not respond to the survey. He added that staff felt 120 responses out of 208 residents was not a bad return. Commissioner Narum inquired if the documents provide language that, somewhere along the line, the park could not be converted from senior housing to a regular mobile home. Mr. Roush replied that the rent stabilization agreement includes a provision that identifies it as a senior park; therefore, contractually, it could not be converted to a EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 25, 2009 Page 4 of 19