15 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

LAW OFFICES GILCHRIST ~ FtUTTICR PROFESSIONAL CORF'ORATI OCT WILSHIgE PALISADES 6UILOING 1299 OCEAN AVENUE. SUITE 900 SANTA MONICA. CALIFORNIA 90401-1000 January 22, 2009 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS Jennifer Pearce, Chairperson Arne Olson, Vice Chairman Commissioner Philip Blank Commissioner Anne Fox Commissioner Kathy Narum Commissioner Gregory M. O'Connor, Alternate Pleasanton Planning Commission City of Pleasanton, City Hall 200 Old Bernal Avenue Pleasanton, California 94566 TELEPHONE (310) 393-a000 FACSIMILE (3 t O) 39a-a700 E-MAIL: rclosaQgilch ristruttar.com Re: PMCC-2 /Mobile Home Park Conversion to Resident Ownershin for 3263 Vineyard Avenue: Dear Chairperson Pearce and Commissioners: On January 28, 2009 you will be considering the approval of the conversion subdivision of Vineyard Mobile Villas to resident ownership. In representing mobilehome parks throughout the state seeking to convert to resident ownership, we have noticed misunderstanding on the part of some cities regarding the import of the results of the survey of resident support, which is required pursuant to applicable law. In an effort to avoid any confusion at the Hearing on this application, we wanted to address it in writing. Government Code section 66427.5 and case law explicitly prohibit cities from denying an application for Conversion due to lack of resident support. Section 66427.5 merely provides in Subdivision (d) that an applicant fox Conversion conduct and submit a survey of support ("Survey"). Pursuant to Subdivision (e) of Section 66127.5, local government authority is restricted to determining whether the Survey is conducted and submitted in accordance with the requirements of Section 66427.5. The plain language of Section 66427.5 makes clear that cities have no authority to reject an application for Conversion for lack of resident support. In addition, the Court of Appeal specifically rejected the contention that a Conversion application requires any level of resident support for its legitimacy or its approval in El Dorado Palm Springs, Ltd v. City of Palm Springs (2002) 96 Cal. App. 4~' 1153, 1181-82 ("El Dorado").