HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10181994 - 1.79 i
177 through 1.80
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on October 18, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Smith, DeSaulnier, Bishop, Torlakson, and Powers
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
SUBJECT: CORRESPONDENCE
Item No.
1.77 LETTER dated September 30. 1994, from B. Davis. Executive Director, West Contra Costa
Integrated Waste Management Authority , transmitting the results of the first meeting of the
Contra Costa Countywide Solid Waste Co-ordinating Council.
***ACKNOWLEDGED RECEIPT
1.78 LETTER dated September 29, 1994, from S. Williamson, 75 Ryegate Place, San Ramon
94583, requesting a reduction of the speed limit on San Ramon Valley Boulevard between
Montevideo Drive and Alcosta Boulevard.
***REFERRED TO PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
1.79 LETTER dated September 23, 1994, from P. Stewart, Executive Director, Rental Housing
Association, 3333 Vincent Road. Pleasant Hill 94523. providing information on the
Association's opposition to a rent control ordinance.
***REFERRED 'CO MOBILE HOME TASK FORCE
1.80 LETTER dated September 21, 1994, from A. Mangels, Communications Director,
Californians Against the $700 Million Tax Increase/No on Proposition 185, 11 Anza
Boulevard, Suite 406, Burlingame 94010, urging Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
to oppose Proposition 185.
***REFERRED TO TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE, PUBLIC WORKS
DIRECTOR, AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Super� l
rwis�.orp op the date shown.n. Q
ATTESTED: lJ
PHIL BATCHELOR Clerk oft Board
cc: Correspondents
of Supervisors and&u-nty Administrator
�� `
Transportation Committee By I - .pwa
Public Works Director
Mobile Home Task Force
Community Development Director
i 7 9 Pry
R 1A
R=N .A!HOUSING ASSOCIATION A memoe:of me Calimmia Apartment Associatior!
September 23 , 1994 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
RECEIVED
R
p
Supervisor Tom Powers, Chair SpP ? I
Contra Costa Board of Supervisors R
County Administration Building ""-
651 Pine Street OFFICE OF
Martinez, CA 94553-1229 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
RE: Mobile Home Rent Control
Dear Supervisor Powers:
On Tuesday, September 27, you will considering an emergency
ordinance to freeze rents in mobile home parks. This proposal
is part of an apparent overall direction to adopt a mobile
home rent control ordinance "or procedure" for Contra Costa
County.
The Rental Housing Association is adamantly opposed to rent
control. It does not protect housing opportunities for
seniors or low income persons. A 1994 study by the Real
Estate and Land Use Institute at U.C.-Berkeley concluced that
rent control has, in fact, casued a loss of housing available
to those two census groups. The study compared these census
groups for Berkeley/Alameda County and Santa Monica/Los
Angeles County.
Further, has the Board considered the cost of creating a rent
control bureaucracy? The Task Force considered three
virtually identical ordinances. CoCoMOA's (which was drafted
by GSMOL, the state mobile home tenant's group) and which
is the basis for the Fremont and Milpitas (AKA Concord)
ordinances. The Concord City Council was told by GSMOL
representatives that the administrative costs for the
Milpitas (Concord/Fremont/GSMOL) ordinance were very low.
So how much will a mobile home rent control ordinance cost
the County? Let' s use a mobile home rent control ordinance
which is actually more lienient (thereby creating fewer
hearings, disputes, etc. ) and has been in effect since
1980 (thereby creating a economic/legislative history) . That
ordinance is from the City of Hayward.
3333 Vincent Road, Suite 220 • Pleasant Hill, California 94523 • (510) 932-3234 • Fax (510) 932-4678
-2-
According to a staff report from the City of Hayward, the
cost to administer the rent control program in Hayward for FY
1993-94 was $159,589: But let's be more specific. The cost to
administer the mobile home rent control (yes, Hayward has
both forms of rent control) is $68, 816. . .and that does not
include $86, 197 in what is termed "common costs. "
The largest single component is the cost for employee
services. Assuming an even split of common costs, is the
County prepared to spend $111,914 to administer a mobile
home rent control program? A program which by the very
wording of the ordinance is more restrictive than the City
of Hayward's. By the way, the per space fee to administer
the program in Hayward is $37.91-- which by law is passed
on to the tenants.
Why enact a mobile home rent control ordinance which covers
everyone to solve the problems of a few? For example, park
closures are a direct side effect which the Board may have to
face given the proposed ordinances. It would appear that
voluntary agreements and/or mediation between parks owners
and tenants would be the prudent approach.
Yes, the RHA recognizes there are distinct differences
between mobile home parks and fixed structure rental housing,
but also remember all it takes is two weeks' notice and three
votes on the Board and the whole scenario changes. Rent
control does not work. We strongly urge the Board to reject
the proposed ordinances and work on more equitable process to
resolve the issue.
Resp ctfully
,
7�
Paul A. Stewart II
Executive Director
cc: Board of Supervisors
PAS/pas