1993/10/07 City Council MinutesSPECIAL JOINT SESSION
OF' 77-M
ROH4Ei2T PARK CITY COL7NC I L
AND RENT' APPEPALS SG?ARD
MINUTES
Triursclay 7 1993
The City Council and the Rent Appeals Board of the
City of Rohnert Park met this date in a special joint
session commencing at 5:30 p.m. at City Hall, 6750
Commerce Boulevard, Rohnert Park, California.
Call to Order: Vice Mayor Reilly called the special joint session of
the City Council and the Rent Appeals Board to order
at approximately 5:35 p.m. and led the Pledge of
Allegiance.
City Council PRESENT: (4) City Councilmembers Eck, Spiro,
Roll Call: Vice Mayor Reilly, and Councilmember
Gallagher (Gallagher arrived 5:47 p.m.)
ABSENT: (1) Mayor Hollingsworth
Rent Appeals Board PRESENT: (5)
Roll Call:
ABSENT: (0)
Board Members Aldeza, Coe, Collins,
Sobel, and Chairperson Brody
None
Staff present for all or part of the meeting: City
Manager Joseph Netter, Assistant to the City Manager
Carl Leivo, City Attorney John Flitner, and Rent
Appeals Board Secretary Diane Tomkins.
Acknowledging Vice Mayor Reilly confirmed that the agenda was posted
Posting of Agenda: as required by law.
Unscheduled Public
Appearances: There were two unscheduled public appearances.
Timothy O'Hara, Law Mr. O'Hara stated his firm represented the five mobile
Offices of David home parks in Rohnert Park. He spoke in support of
Spangenberg a forum to explore the issues of Ordinance 494. One
Palo Alto, CA role of city government was to explore mutually
beneficial solutions for the housing shortage. If the
park owners were not provided a fair return on their
investment, then they take measures necessary to
protect their investment. He could submit written
comments on the proposed amendments for the City
Council's review.
Councilmember Eck stated the purpose of the forum was
to allow the City Council and the Board to openly
deliberate future actions concerning amendments to
Ordinance 494. There would be plenty of time later to
ponder the amendments. Councilmember Spiro confirmed
that Mr. O'Hara was referring to a shortage of low -
cost housing.
Joint City Council /Rent Appeals Board Minutes October 7, 1993
Page 2
James Clark Mr. Clark stated that Mr. O'Hara could not represent
Valley Village all five parks. He maintained that a Mr. Leberman was
the legal representative at Valley Village.
Vice Mayor Reilly stated that the purpose of the forum
was to meet with the Board to discuss Ordinance 494
and the feasibility of proposed amendments by
residents.
Councilmember Councilmember Gallagher arrived at approximately
Gallagher arrived 5:47 p.m.
Issues discussed by the City Council and the Board
included: 1) the Board was a judicial body to
administer Ordinance 494; 2) concern that the Board
would lose its neutrality and be accused of bias if it
provided amendment recommendations to City Council; 3)
forwarding any proposed amendments to legal counsel
for review; 4) if changes in state law nullified a
portion of Ordinance 494, that section was dropped; it
could not be corrected or amended except by special
election; 5) possibly include clause which allowed
City Council to amend the Ordinance; 6) residents have
proposed amendments for the City Council to put on
ballot, not to debate and amend; 7) to make good law,
City Council did not pass through amendment requests
without thorough review; 8) review other rent
stabilization ordinances which give better protection
and are more stable than Ordinance 494, such as City
of Santa Rose Ordinance 3072; 9) the proposed
amendments take care of previous, not future,
problems; could be a "band -aid" approach; 10) if
residents want security, Ordinance 494 did not provide
that; 11) Ordinance 494 is imperfect and inadequate as
written; 12) conduct process whereby park owners and
park residents could agree on rent stabilization
factors; 13) difficult to sell mobile homes in such a
situation; abandoned mobile homes not good for park
owner either; and 14) put in a clause in which
mediation /arbitration would be sought before
litigation.
MOTION It was moved by Vice Mayor Reilly and seconded by
Councilmember Eck that the Rent Appeals Board should
preserve its judicial and neutral capacity and forward
all relevant information concerning Ordinance 494 to
the City Council for review. An information sheet
similar to the 1989 Sonoma County mobile home survey
would be prepared by the Rent Appeals Board and
submitted to the City Council for review. Then the
information fact sheet would be mailed with results
reported to the City Council upon completion. The
motion was passed unanimously by the City Council.
Other Unscheduled
Public Appearances There were nine unscheduled public appearances.
Joint City Council /Rent Appeals Board Minutes October 7, 1993
Page 3
Dayadevi Hearts Ms. Hearts spoke in support of residents purchasing
P. 0. Box 2333 the mobilehome park only if Public Safety eliminated
Rohnert Park, CA the drug dealers doing business in the park.
Councilmember Eck stated that City Manager Netter was
preparing a report concerning that issue.
Evelyn Alexander Ms. Alexander stated that her mobile home had been on
Rancho Grande the market for 22 months. Being forced to sign a
lease was driving away prospective buyers.
Vice Mayor Reilly stated that City Council had no
authority over normal business practices. City
Council was working to solve complex mobile home park
issues along several lines. Ordinance 494 could not be
amended by direct Council action. Councilmember Eck
suggested that park residents establish a legal fund
for all five mobile home parks. City Council could
not advise individuals regarding their legal rights.
Roswell Pinckard Mr. Pinckard stated that City Council had sold mobile
Rancho Verde home residents down the river. He protested over the
petition awards and increased service fees received by
Carlsberg Management from Rancho Verde MHP residents.
Vice Mayor Reilly stated that City Council had devoted
long hours to mobile home park issues. The problem
was in how poorly Ordinance 494 was drafted, not with
the City Council. Councilmember Eck reconfirmed that
City Council was willing to address the problems and
invited the residents to work with them.
Coleman Persily
Mr. Persily stated that residents were only
asking
GSMOL Regional
City Council to
place amendments on the
ballot.
Representative
Vacancy control was legal and constitutional.
There
was no need for a
subcommittee.
Councilmember Eck
asked if GSMOL was willing to
commit
legal funds to the
effort.
Mr. Persily stated that he had requested a letter from
City Council asking for GSMOL's support. As soon as
he received it, GSMOL would write a letter in support
of the City's position in the Sime litigation.
Board Chairperson Brody confirmed with Mr. Persily
that GSMOL had an attorney access network. Residents
could contact their local chapter or call Mr. Persily
to ask legal questions.
Jonnie Perrot Ms. Perrot read the statement of purpose from Ordi-
Valley Village nance 494. She reviewed a document concerning vacancy
decontrol which is attached to these minutes. She
stated that the submitted figures demonstrated that
rents have de- stabilized during the six years
Ordinance 494 has been in effect.
Joint City Council /Rent Appeals Board Minutes
October ?, 1993
Page 4
David Ross Mr. Ross asked that residents work with City Council
Valley Village to resolve the problems rather than fighting.
Residents were not allowed to sublease their mobile
homes if they were unable to sell. Some landlords
were requesting financial statements from residents.
Some park rules prohibited grandchildren from
visiting.
John Phalen
Mr. Phalen stated that
Carlsberg Management
had just
Rancho Verde
issued new park rules.
There were only 21
residents
left on rent control in
Rancho Verde. When
would the
NOI petitions stop?
He asked City Council to
institute Ordinance 495
and throw out Ordinance 494.
Mary "Hadoway"
This Cotati resident
spoke in support of
action on
Cotati, CA
destabilization of rents.
Park Purchase Councilmember Eck stated that a subcommittee of City
Program Council had met with Rancho Feliz park residents to
discuss the feasibility of residents purchasing the
park property. The discussion was in the early phases
and depended upon the City obtaining a bond to finance
such a purchase and good faith bargaining with park
owners.
Walt Wells Mr. Wells requested the public be kept informed when
Rancho Grande City Council discussed amendments to ordinance 494.
Dayadevi Hearts Ms. Hearts questioned why a mobile home park had to be
purchased by residents. Why couldn't the City acquire
the property and provide services? Public Safety
currently did not regularly patrol mobile home parks.
Councilmember Eck stated that was an option. A
subdivision would need to be created and ownership of
roads and clubhouse decided. Public Safety patrols
could be instituted by agreement.
Adjournment There being no further business and no one further
desiring to be heard, Vice Mayor Reilly adjourned the
special joint session of the City Council and the Rent
Appeals Board at approximately 6:56 p.m.
9)z 7 XW, -) (0- 21 9, 11 V-1t -, I - - -
V ce Mayor eilly
kv*I) *-I IM
L�ie
Rent Appeals Board Secretary