Stabilization Measures Study

Mobilehome Space Rent Stabilization Measures Study

Prepared by Arcata Mobilehome Ordinance Study Group

September 2016

I. Introduction

In the spring of 2015 we joined with a small group of friends to study methods for space rent stabilization (SRS).[1] We had become alarmed at the quickly increasing rents for the spaces where our mobilehomes were located in mobilehome parks. As homeowners we knew that it would be impossible to move our homes to other mobilehome parks. Thus we began looking for solutions to keep space rents affordable.

We studied how other mobilehome parks had met the same challenge. We looked at how other California cities and counties had stepped in at critical moments to keep their mobilehome parks affordable for middle income and low income residents. We considered many approaches including ordinances, long-term leases, MOUs (memorandum of understanding), and creative combinations of these approaches.

The conclusion we reached: an ordinance seems to be the best instrument for mobilehome space rent stabilization.

II. Study Highlights

Our analysis depended heavily on the writings and research of three prominent California experts in mobilehome space rent:

Attorney and Urban Planner Kenneth Baar, Ph.D.
Attorney Bruce Stanton
Economist Michael St. John, Ph.D.

Baar’s and Stanton’s recommendations generally support the view of low-income residents whereas St. John’s recommendations generally support the view of park owners/landlords.

A brief overview highlights the basic problems[2] that space-rent stabilization seeks to address:

Historically mobilehome parks have provided affordable housing for low-income households in California and the USA
Mobilehome park owners sometimes raise space rents to high levels that low-income residents can’t afford
When space rents are too high for low-income residents to pay, cities and counties usually seek to stabilize the space rents to keep mobilehomes affordable to low-income residents
There are currently about 90 ordinances/MOUs in California[3] that localities have established to stabilize space rents and keep mobilehomes affordable

The following is a highlighted summary of our analysis of the various documents (Baar, Stanton, St. John, and the relevant mobilehome park contracts):

Most contracts in California mobilehome parks are month-to-month leases
Long-term leases (more than 12 months) are usually advantageous to the park owner, not to the low-income residents
There are few MOUs (Memorandum of Understanding) in California relative to the number of ordinances.
One important reason that cities and counties are sometimes interested in an MOU instead of an ordinance is fear of expensive administration and litigation to the jurisdiction; however modern ordinances such as those in Marina have not had these problems.
MOUs are usually not as resident-friendly as ordinances.
There is a close dynamic between MOUs and ordinances in California

Mobilehome residents sometimes reluctantly agree to MOUs that are resident-unfriendly when the city/county is unwilling to adopt an ordinance.
Park owners/landlords sometimes reluctantly agree to resident-friendly MOUs when there is an ordinance in place or when the city/county is about to adopt an ordinance.
Some California cities such as Marina, Modesto, and Thousand Oaks, have tried an MOU/Agreement and later replaced it with an Ordinance.
Other cities, such as Ontario, California, have tried an ordinance and later replaced it with an MOU.

III. Five Key Issues

For the purposes of this study, we look at five key issues that we have determined are most critical to mobilehome affordability. The five key issues are:

Contract Terms (Ordinance, MOU, Long-term Lease)
CPI (Consumer Price Index; inflation)
Pass-throughs
Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy (Vacancy De-Control)
Rent subsidy for low income residents

1. Contract Terms (Ordinance, MOU, Long-term Lease)

Background.

In most cases a California mobilehome park resident owns his/her mobilehome and rents the space, usually a cement pad, where the mobilehome is located. The California Mobilehome Residency Laws (MRL) allows the park owner/landlord to increase the space rent to any level. The only condition is that the landlord has to give 90 days notice to the resident, thus in effect limiting the landlord to 4 rent increases a year.

However, when the space rent increases too quickly or too much, there are four current methods for stabilizing the increases to an affordable level:

ordinances enacted by public jurisdictions such as cities and counties
MOUs (Memorandum of Understanding),
long-term leases, and
combinations of leases, MOUs and/or ordinances

Ordinance (Space Rent Stabilization Ordinance, SRSO)

Kenneth Baar describes how ordinances are used in California to stabilize space rent increases:

“Principal Characteristics of Local Rent Stabilization Ordinances in California: About 90 jurisdictions in California (including cities and counties) have adopted mobilehome park space rent stabilization ordinances. Most of the ordinances were adopted in the 1980’s and 1990’s. With a few exceptions these ordinances are only applicable to mobilehome parks and do not cover apartment rents.

Most of these ordinances limit annual rent increases to either a portion or the full amount of the annual increase in the CPI (consumer price index). Most do not permit any additional rent increases when mobilehomes are sold in place (new tenancies) (“vacancy decontrol”) or allow only limited rent increases when a mobilehome is sold in place.

When limited increases are permitted upon in-place sales of mobilehomes, typically the allowed increases are in the range of 5% to 10% and a limit is placed on their frequency (e.g., not more than one increase in one, three, or five years).”[4]

New ordinances are still being adopted in California. Since 2000 the following California cities have adopted space rent ordinances: Goleta (2002), Santa Rosa (2004), Modesto (2007), Ukiah (2011), and Marina (2011). Since 2000, the following cities have revised their ordinances: Morro Bay (2007) and Thousand Oaks (2011). City of Sonoma is in the process of revising its ordinance in 2016.

MOU (Memorandum of Understanding)

Economist Michael St. John describes the role of MOUs in stabilizing mobilehome space rent increases:

“A memorandum of understanding (MOU) is an agreement negotiated between park owners and residents, often with the assistance and oversight of the local municipality that sets boundaries on space rent increases. Under a typical MOU it would be impossible for a park owner to impose large, sudden space rent increases. A typical MOU, on the other hand, would provide for annual space rent increases to compensate for inflation and for the pass-through of exceptional expense increases. Memoranda of understanding are usually accompanied by a model lease that is signed by park owners and residents participating in the MOU program.”[5]

California attorney Kenneth Baar discussed the role of MOUs in his 2008 report:

“In a few [California] jurisdictions, park owners and residents have entered into an MOU [Memorandum of Understanding] approved by the locality (city or county), and the locality has refrained from adopting rent regulations as a result.

In a few other cases, park owners have had the alternative of entering into an MOU or being subject to the rent control ordinance.

The MOUs are rental agreements which generally provide for more liberal rent increase terms than an ordinance but still contain ceilings on rent increases. (e.g., the MOUs provide for greater annual rent increases or permit limited rent increases upon vacancies which are not usually permitted under rent controls.)

This [MOU] alternative has been attractive to park owners when it is clear that a rent stabilization ordinance will be adopted if they do not enter an MOU or alternatively they will be subject to the ordinance which has been adopted, if they do not enter into the MOU.

The advantage of the MOU for a locality is that it cannot be challenged [in court] because it is “voluntarily” entered into. Also, if the MOU is well drafted, the administrative participation of the City [of Marina California] can be minimized. (e.g., if the MOU does not provide for capital improvement pass-throughs which have to be reviewed by the City.)

If a rent stabilization ordinance includes an MOU alternative, then the rent stabilization protections are in place in the event that some owners choose not to enter into the MOU or do not comply with the MOU.”[6]

Long-Term Lease.

When the California legislature passed the MRL, the legislature hoped that residents and landlords could create and agree upon long-term leases that would stabilize space rent increases to an affordable level for the residents and provide a fair return to the landlords. In addition, the hope was that voluntary long-term leases would eliminate the need for adversarial rent control by public jurisdictions such as cities and counties.

Long-term leases must abide by provisions of the MRL. The key sections are 798.17 and 798.18. A long-term lease must be more than 1 year in length. Different sections of the MRL govern month-to-month leases and any short-term leases that are less than 12 months duration.

Despite what the legislature intended, the result is that today most long-term leases greatly favor the landlords, whose attorneys write the leases. Residents often feel compelled to sign long-term leases without fully understanding them. Because the long-term leases are written in dense legal language, a resident would have to pay for legal help to understand the pros and cons of signing the lease. This kind of expense is often out of reach for middle-income and low income residents.

Residents who sign long-term leases are exempt from any benefits of rent control ordinances in their jurisdiction.

After many years of representing mobilehome residents, California attorney Bruce Stanton is fond of saying that “I never met a long-term lease I liked.”[7]

Long-Term Lease and MOU Combination

Michael St. John stated his preferred approach to space rent stabilization as follows:

“In most jurisdictions, there is no need for programs of any kind. The market works perfectly well in most communities. When there is a perceived need for rent stabilization measures, a model lease and memorandum of understanding works far better than rent control. Unlike rent control, a model lease/MOU program doesn’t set up an expensive bureaucracy, encourage extensive litigation, or cause unrealistic and unsustainable inflation in the values of mobilehomes.”[8]

Long-Term Lease, MOU and Ordinance Combination

Attorney Bruce Stanton’s describes the interaction between ordinance, lease, and MOU in Modesto, California:

“An option to the conventional RSO [rent stabilization ordinance] was chosen by the City of Modesto in 2006, which is essentially a hybrid between a model Long-Term Lease Agreement and RSO. Unwilling to commit itself to full rent control, the city instead passed an ordinance that would only apply to those parks which did not offer a City-approved lease that was negotiated by a team of park owner and homeowner representatives and supervised by the City Attorney. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was enacted to reflect these terms, and an ongoing rent commission established to field questions and investigate any ongoing enforcement issues.

“The reader is encouraged to go to the City of Modesto website to obtain copies of these provisions, which should be at least considered when dealing with a conservative jurisdiction which is hostile to the concept of rent regulation. Essentially three documents are required:

An Ordinance
An approved Long-Term Lease
A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which is signed by each Park Owner who agrees to be bound”[9]

2. CPI (Consumer Price Index; Inflation)

In California the majority of rent stabilization measures (ordinances, long-term leases, and MOUs) provide for one annual rent increase.

“…these increases are usually tied to the percentage increase in the consumer Price Index (CPI) for the same period. The CPI is the United States Government Index that tracks inflation and the prices charged consumers for various items such as housing, food, or transportation. Most major metropolitan areas, including the San Francisco/Oakland and Los Angeles Metropolitan and San Diego Areas, have their CPI index which reflects the price changes in that particular geographic region.

“Most ordinances permit base rents to be increased by an amount equal to a portion of the percentage increase in the CPI ranging from 50% to 100%, with the average being 75%.”[10]

Ordinances, long-term leases and MOUs in northern California are usually tied to the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for the San Francisco Bay Area, California, as published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Usually a ceiling and a floor is given in conjunction with the CPI in an ordinance, lease, or MOU. For example, if the ordinance, lease, or MOU provides for an annual space rent increase equal to 100% CPI with a 3% floor and a 6% ceiling, the increase has to stay within the 3%–6% range even though the CPI might be outside the 3%–6% range.

3. Pass-Throughs

“A typical MOU…would provide for annual space rent increases to compensate for inflation and for the pass-through of exceptional expense increases.”[11]

Any true pass-through item must be billed as a separate line item and must include the date upon which the pass-through charge will drop off the bill once full reimbursement is obtained.

Pass-throughs typically apply to large expenses such as capital expenses. According to attorney Bruce Stanton, if a charge is described as an adjustment instead of a pass-through, it is likely that this capital expense will become part of base rent that is increased every year even after the capital expense is paid off.[12]

4. Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy (Vacancy De-Control)

When a mobilehome is sold, the mobilehome and its space are called “vacant.” The question then arises, will the space rent for the new resident-homeowner remain at the same stabilized rate as that paid by the previous resident-homeowner? If the answer is yes, then this situation is called “vacancy control” because an ordinance (or a lease or MOU) controls the level of the space rent that the next resident-homeowner will inherit as a base level rent. In other words, with vacancy control, the park owner cannot increase the space rent at the time of a change in mobilehome ownership or occupancy.

California law allows jurisdictions (cities and counties) to enact ordinances that will stabilize space rents with vacancy controls.

However, many ordinances/leases/MOUs do not provide vacancy control, and when a mobilehome is sold, the park owner-landlord can increase the space rent for the new buyer to any amount, usually to market level. This is known as “vacancy de-control.” If the park owner is diligent, he/she will increase the space rent one mobilehome at a time every time that a vacancy arises. In this way, the park owner can bring most of the park spaces up to market level in a gradual way. Of course with vacancy de-control, long-time residents will have much lower space rents than the newcomers.

There are other situations besides sale of a mobilehome that can result in a vacancy, such as abandonment of a mobilehome or termination of a resident-homeowner’s right to stay in the park.

We decided to use more intuitive language in our charts. Instead of “vacancy control,” we use the following phrase: “Are rent increases allowed upon vacancy?”

5. Rent Subsidy for Low Income Residents

There are several kinds of rent subsidies available to low-income mobilehome residents. Unfortunately government-funded subsidies are extremely rare and are dependent on government programs that come and go.

Sometimes the park owner-landlord will offer a space rent credit to diminish the blow of a large sudden rent increase. The credit can be changed or terminated at any time by the park owner-landlord. The credit might be offered to long-time residents or it might be offered to low-income residents who submit tax returns and other private financial information to get the credit.

Sometimes the park owner-landlord will offer a space rent deferment to low-income resident-homeowners. The actual rent is not reduced; instead the park owner-landlord keeps track of the deferred portion of the rent. When the mobilehome is sold, the park owner-landlord recoups all of the deferment accumulated over the years from that homeowner-resident. The deferment process requires that the homeowner-resident submit tax returns and private financial information and sign an agreement for the park owner’s lien on the mobilehome.

Another type of subsidy occurs when a park owner-landlord will offer a space rent deferment to low income resident-homeowners provided that the city or county match the amount of the deferment with a subsidy from the taxpayers.

Taxpayers are often reluctant to fund a subsidy to low-income mobilehome residents because the eventual recipient of the taxpayer-funded subsidy is the park owner-landlord. Hence this type of situation is sometimes derided as “welfare for the rich.”

IV. Charts with Examples of Stabilization Measures

We evaluated 11 specific space rent stabilization cases[13] in effect at various locations throughout California. We focused on mobilehome parks in Humboldt County and in other locations similar to Humboldt County where low-income and middle-income homeowners reside in their mobilehomes as their primary residences.

We arranged the eleven examples in order beginning with the arrangements that are most friendly to low-income and middle-income residents and progressing to those that are least friendly to those residents. We made these evaluations after studying the data and the relevant reports.

Most Friendly Arrangements for the Low-Income Resident:

Lazy J Ranch (Arcata) Month to month Lease 1970s to 2013
Humboldt Mobilehome Rent Control Ordinance (Initiative Measure V)
Marina California Ordinance
Napa California MOU
Modesto California Hybrid Ordinance/MOU/Lease

Slightly Friendly Arrangements for the Low-Income Resident (both of these measures allow unlimited space rent increases upon vacancy)

Thousand Oaks California Ordinance
Ocean West Senior Village (McKinleyville) Long-term Lease

Least Friendly Arrangements for the Low-Income Resident:

Rancho Cucamonga MOU
Ontario MOU (Accord)
Lazy J Ranch (Arcata) Month to Month Lease 2013 to present
Lazy J Ranch (Arcata) Long-term Lease 2015 to present

Below are charts that show the 11 space rent stabilization examples that we included in this report. They are listed in order from most resident-friendly to least resident-friendly.

1. Lazy J Ranch (Arcata) 1970s—2013 Month to month lease
Contract Terms	Month to month lease
CPI (inflation)	100% CPI. (rent increases according to inflation/CPI)
Pass-throughs	None; capital improvements etc. were paid for by space rents that increased with inflation/CPI
Are Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy?	Yes. However Johnson Ranch, the park owner, did not increase space rents upon vacancy.
Rent Subsidy for Low Income Residents	None.
Other
Comments	The above terms describe the Johnson Ranch ownership that lasted for more than 30 years at the Lazy J Ranch mobilehome park in Arcata from the 1970s to 2013.

2. Humboldt County Mobilehome Rent Control Ordinance Initiative Measure V[14]
Contract Terms	SRSO (Space Rent Stabilization Ordinance)
CPI (inflation)	100% CPI. (rent increases according to inflation/CPI)
Pass-throughs	Yes with majority vote approval from mobilehome residents
Are Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy?	Yes with conditions. 5% increase in space rent allowed on vacancy (for example, sale of mobilehome).
Rent Subsidy for Low Income Residents	None.
Other	Fair return adjustment procedure provided for park owners. Residents can request a rent reduction if park services are reduced. Residents can be charged up to $5/month administrative fee to pay for costs of rent control program.
Comments	Measure V will be on the November ballot. NOTE: Measure V passed November 8, 2016.

3. City of Marina California SRSO[15]
Contract Terms	SRSO (Space Rent Stabilization Ordinance)
CPI (inflation)	100% CPI. (rent increases according to inflation/CPI) No decrease in rent if CPI decreases.
Pass-throughs	“It shall be presumed that this standard (100% of the percentage increase in the CPI) provides a fair return to the park owner.”[16] Exceptional circumstances can result in rent adjustments. New capital improvements are subject to approval by majority of residents. Any capital improvement pass-through must be identified separately on the statement along with the date of expiration of the capital expense.
Are Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy?	Yes with conditions. 5% increase in space rent allowed on vacancy (for example, sale of mobilehome).
Rent Subsidy for Low Income Residents	None.
Other	Administrative service fee is to be paid to the city from every occupied mobile home space except exempt spaces. The fee is set by City Council resolution. Fee in 2011 was $3.50/month/mobilehome. Fee pays for administration of the ordinance. Net Operating Income is standard for calculations. Park owners pay petition fees for fair return applications.
Comments

4. Napa, California MOU[17]
Contract Terms	1995 MOU between City of Napa and Owners of mobilehome parks within Napa and Residents in the parks. Not all Napa mobilehome parks are included in the MOU.
CPI (inflation)	100% CPI plus 1% and with 3% floor and 7% cap
Pass-throughs	Yes but totally new capital improvements require approval by majority of park residents; amortization over life of the capital expenditure with termination date stated on resident’s rent statement. Extraordinary cost increases could result in additional rent adjustments without resident approval.
Are Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy?	No.
Rent Subsidy for Low Income Residents	Yes. Rent subsidy program is administered by the City of Napa.
Other	Park owners pay their fair share of the budget related to mobilehome park mediation services. Residents in hardship circumstances can sublet their homes for a short time through a carefully controlled process.
Comments	The Napa MOU was mentioned by a Councilmember in an Arcata City Council meeting in December 2015. The 2009 City of Napa Housing Element does not refer to the MOU.

5. Modesto Hybrid Ordinance/MOU[18]
Contract Terms	Hybrid of Ordinance and MOU and Long-term Lease. Eight of nine parks offer the Long-term Lease and agree to the MOU. One park owner refused to sign the lease and is thus subject to the ordinance.
CPI (inflation)	With long-term lease: 100% CPI with 7% cap per year With ordinance: 100% CPI with 6% cap per year
Pass-throughs	unknown
Are Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy?	Yes with conditions. With signed long-term lease, space rent can increase up to 15% on vacancy. With ordinance space rent can increase up to 10% on vacancy.
Rent Subsidy for Low Income Residents	Yes. Rent subsidy program funded by mobilehome parks and matching contributions from the city’s Redevelopment Agency.
Other	Choice of 5-, 7-, or 10-year leases
Comments	Park owners who offer the city-approved long term leases to mobilehome residents are not subject to the ordinance. One park owner, Equity LifeStyle, considered $775/month to be the market rate for space rent in 2007.

6. Thousand Oaks Ordinance 2011 Revision[19] [20] [21]
Contract Terms	SRSO (Space Rent Stabilization Ordinance)
CPI (inflation)	75% of CPI with 7% cap through 2016. Beginning in 2017, a 100% CPI with no ceiling or floor on annual rent increases. Special supplemental monthly rent increase of $100 over six years. For example, an increase of $16.67/month/space is allowed beginning in 2011.
Pass-throughs	Park owners may apply to the City Manager for a rent adjustment to cover capital improvements and rehabilitations. A city-approved resolution (2011) defines terms for capital improvements and rehabilitation projects. Park owners are required to hold a meeting with mobilehome owners at least once a year to discuss plans for capital expenditures in the park. Majority vote by mobilehome residents is required to increase rent for new improvements. Rent adjustments for capital improvements are temporary, and they expire when the improvements are paid off; the adjustments do not become part of the “base” rent.
Are Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy?	Yes. (Unlimited increase is possible.)
Rent Subsidy for Low Income Residents	Yes, a rent deferral program in which the qualified “very low income” mobilehome owner repays to the park owner the deferred rent upon sale of the mobilehome (implemented by an interest-free lien on the mobilehome).
Other	Park owners agree not to convert their parks for ten years from 2011. Park owners agree not to bring suit against the City re changes made to the ordinance for ten years and not to apply for “just and reasonable return” rent increases for ten years.
Comments

7.Ocean West Village (McKinleyville) Long Term Lease 2016
Contract Terms	Long Term Lease Agreement (longer than 12 months)
CPI (inflation)	100% CPI. (rent increases according to inflation/CPI) 2.5% floor, 5.5% cap. No decrease in rent if CPI decreases.
Pass-throughs	An increase of $14.50/month for property taxes allowed in 2016. An increase of up to $16/month for property taxes allowed in 2017. Afterwards property taxes in excess of 2% shall increase the rent.
Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy	Yes. (Unlimited increase is possible.)
Rent Subsidy for Low Income Residents	None.
Other	The first 12 months of the lease have the same rental charges as those offered in the shorter term (less than 1 year) rental agreements. Free rent for the 59^th month of the lease. Landscaping on the homesite shall be watered and maintained by homeowner at homeowner’s expense. The long-term lease allows an increase to market rates at the end of the lease.
Comments	Ocean West space rent of $440 to $600/month (not including utilities or landscaping services) is more than the current market rate of $250-$400/month at most other Humboldt County mobilehome parks.

8. Rancho Cucamonga, California, MOU[22]
Contract Terms	MOU between City and park owners
CPI (inflation)	100% CPI, floor 3% and cap 9%
Pass-throughs	Yes for taxes and utilities and 50% of the costs of a capital project, amortized for life of project as defined by IRS. Resident Committee can take rent increase to arbitration. Cost of arbitration shared equally by Park Owner and Residents.
Are Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy?	Yes. (Unlimited increase is possible.)
Rent Subsidy for Low Income Residents	None.
Other	Not all mobile home park owners in Rancho Cucamonga are party to the MOU.
Comments	The owners of the Lazy J Ranch recommended the Rancho Cucamonga MOU to Lazy J residents during discussions about rent control in 2015.

9. Ontario, California, Accord (MOU) 2007
Contract Terms	Accord (MOU) between City of Ontario and mobilehome park owners
CPI (inflation)	120% CPI, 4% floor, 10% cap
Pass-throughs	Yes. Property tax, utility and capital improvement costs can be passed through to residents but are subject to review by the City of Ontario
Are Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy?	Yes. (Unlimited increase is possible.)
Rent Subsidy for Low Income Residents	None.
Other	City of Ontario enacted rent control in 1990 and repealed it in 1999 when the City approved an MOU/Agreement (the Jack Galvin Accord) with the owners of the mobile home parks within the city. It was amended in 2007 and reapproved in 2014.[23] [24]
Comments	Space rents in mobilehome parks in Ontario in June 2016 are $900+/month.[25]

10. Lazy J Ranch (Arcata) 2013—present Month to month lease
Contract Terms	Month to month lease
CPI (inflation)	Space rents have had an annual increase of 13% for incoming residents for the past three years. Space rents have had an annual increase of 5.5% for continuing residents for the past three years. Note: the 5-year annual inflation rate is 2.6% (CPI-U San Francisco)
Pass-throughs	None; capital improvements etc. are paid for by space rents
Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy	Yes. (Unlimited increase is possible.)
Rent Subsidy for Low Income Residents	None.
Other
Comments	The above describes FollettUSA’s ownership of the Lazy J from 2013-2016.

11. Lazy J Ranch (Arcata) Long Term Lease 2015 and 2016
Contract Terms	Long Term Lease Agreement (longer than 12 months)
CPI (inflation)	100% CPI with 3% floor, 7% cap
Pass-throughs	Yes. property taxes and capital improvements (over $50,000 annually, 5 year amortization; 6% interest rate for unamortized capital expenditures; no ending date for rent increases for capitalization costs in pass-throughs)
Rent Increases Allowable Upon Vacancy	Yes. (Unlimited increase is possible.)
Rent Subsidy for Low Income Residents	None.
Other	Residents have no vote on what capital expenditures can be incurred. Once the rent has increased to cover a capital expenditure, the increase remains in place after the capital expenditure has been paid off.[26] Free rent for the 59^th month of the lease.
Comments

Conclusion: About 90 California cities and counties have ordinances that regulate mobilehome space rents to keep mobilehome housing affordable to low-income residents. In the last three years space rents in Arcata have risen to levels that are unaffordable to low income residents. The City of Arcata is currently investigating measures that might protect the affordable housing in mobilehome parks. As a result of our study, we are convinced that an ordinance is the best alternative.

Study Report prepared by Linda Derksen and Uriela Mitchell. Revised Sept 9, 2016.

[1] We prefer to use the term “Space Rent Stabilization” instead of “rent control”, which can refer to apartments.

[2] The introduction to the Humboldt Mobilehome Space Rent Control Ordinance Initiative Measure V gives a full account of the reasons for space rent stabilization in Humboldt County in 2016. http://www.humboldtmobilehome.org/measure_v_text

[3] GSMOL, California Jurisdictions with Mobile Home Park Rent Stabilization Ordinances 2015.

[4] Kenneth Baar, “Mobilehome Park Housing in El Monte [California]: Issues and Policy Options, Feb. 17, 2015. http://www.ci.el-monte.ca.us/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=ORqP347cWmo%3D&tabid=100

[5] Michael St. John, “Balanced Space Rent Guidelines“, Feb. 26, 2013, p. 4.

[6] Kenneth Baar and Dorina Pojani, “Mobilehome Parks and Mobilehome Space Tenancies in Marina”, December 31, 2008.

[7] Bruce Stanton, letter December 8 2015, p. 2.

[8] St. John, op. cit., p. 24.

[9] Bruce Stanton, The GSMOL Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Ordinance Handbook, Second Edition, 2012, p. 27. http://mobilehomerentcontrol.blogspot.com/2016/02/the-hybrid-modesto-model.html

[10] Ibid., p. 16.

[11] St. John, op. cit., p. 4.

[12] Bruce Stanton, letter December 8 2015, p. 3.

[13] Nine measures are currently in effect, one has expired, and one is proposed.

[14] Text of Initiative can be found at: Measure V Initiative

[15] City of Marina California, Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Ordinance. http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Marina/html/Marina05/Marina0572.html

[16] Ibid.

[17] City of Napa, “Memorandum of Understanding between City of Napa Mobilehome Owner’s Association and City of Napa Mobilehome Park Owner’s Association,” 3^rd draft. Revised 1.30.95.

[18] City of Modesto, “Ordinance No. 3451-C.S., An Ordinance Adding Chapter 19 entitled ‘Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Program’ to Title 4 of the Modesto Municipal Code.” http://www.modestogov.com/documentcenter/view/1052

[19] City of Thousand Oaks, Staff Memo July 12, 2011 “Municipal Code Amendment MCA 2011-70254 Comprehensive Amendment to Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Ordinance”

[20] City of Thousand Oaks Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Ordinance Chapter 25 of Municipal Code. Jan. 23, 1996, Amended Sept. 9, 2011.

[21] City of Thousand Oaks, Capital Improvement Resolution 2011-046.
http://ci.thousand-oaks.ca.us/home/showdocument?id=1632

[22] City of Rancho Cucamonga, “The Mobilehome Park Accord,” Dec. 16, 2015.

[23] Michael St. John, “Balanced Space Rent Guidelines,” 2013, p 23.

[24] City of Ontario, “Approval of a Five-year Extension to the 2007 Jack Galvin Mobile Home Park Accord Agreement,” Meeting Minutes, December 2, 2014.
http://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/meeting-minutes/city-council/20141202_minutes.pdf
http://www.ontarioplan.org/jack-galvin-accord/

[25] In June 2016 Zillow.com showed space rents exceeding $900 for mobilehomes in Ontario CA.

[26] L. Derksen and J. Derksen, Letter to Arcata City Council and Staff, “FollettUSA’s Long Term Lease offered to Lazy J Ranch Mobile Home Park Residents,” April 4, 2016.