Some housing crises come and go. Some stick around for a very long time. The one currently occupying the public stage involves many people losing their homes for an assortment of reasons. Homes were bought with loans whose payments took unexpected leaps. Equity disappeared as owners cashed out and the market crashed.
Many people and institutions took foolish risks. Innocent victims, including taxpayers, will pay the price of the greed and irresponsibility of others and our failure to control it. This housing crisis has a lot in common with the current plight of Lake County mobile home park residents.
A common myth about mobile homes is that they are mobile. They are not. Relocation of older mobiles is nearly impossible. Moving a newer mobile in search of a lower rent is an expensive gamble. Residents have a significant investment in their homes but have no control over the amount of rent they are charged.
Park owners can legally raise the rent as high as they want. If rents are excessive, the value of the mobile drops or disappears completely Large increases can quickly make homes unaffordable.
Given the disparity in bargaining powers between park owners and residents it is a good thing that most park owners are reasonable people who consider the needs and interests of park residents. However, some park owners don”t.
In May of 2006 a large group of mobile home park residents asked the Lake County Board of Supervisors for some protection from unreasonable rent increases. Responding to the packed house, the Board established a task force to explore the issue of rent stabilization.
Supervisors Anthony Farrington and Rob Brown were appointed to the task force, as were an equal number (three) of park owners and residents. Former Supervisor Bill Merriman was named as an at-large member.
For the next two-plus years, the task force met, negotiated, argued, reasoned and, finally, coalesced around a recommendation that rent stabilization be achieved through the use of a long-term lease which linked annual rent increases to changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI).
The task force reviewed every page, paragraph, line and word of the lease and unanimously approved it. The task force then referred the lease to the Board of Supervisors for implementation.
The Board of Supervisors considered implementation of the lease at its September 12, 2008 meeting. Supervisor Farrington stated his preference that the lease be implemented on a voluntary basis. However, he made it clear that successful implementation of the task force”s recommendation meant that 100 percent of park residents would be offered the lease. The Board passed a resolution urging park owners to offer the lease and approved a plan to survey park owners on their willingness to do so.
The survey of the (estimated 80-plus) park owners of record proved to be very problematic. Most owners simply failed to respond. As reported in the December 3 Record Bee, park owner and task force member Maryanne McQueen attempted her own survey.
Only 28 of the 57 who responded to Ms. McQueen indicated that they would offer the lease. Throughout this long process, park owners and their representatives repeatedly pledged to do what was necessary to get their fellow park owners on board. Obviously, more than a few park owners are not interested in getting on board.
The question now is whether the lease will actually be implemented. Supervisor Brown has begun to answer that question by redefining the meaning of successful implementation, a very handy debating tactic. According to Supervisor Brown”s new definition, success means that park owners who wish to offer the lease will do so and the rest will not.
The problem with this approach is that (with some exceptions) the park owners from whom residents need protection are the very park owners who have refused to get on board. The park owners who worked collaboratively with residents and county government on this difficult issue should not be the only ones participating in the solution.
Completion of the long, arduous process that led to approval of the lease gave hope to park residents that they would be protected from unreasonable rent increases. The Board of Supervisors can realize that hope by requiring that all park owners offer the lease.
Andrew M. Rossoff is the Directing Attorney of Senior Law Project, a not-for-profit organization providing free legal assistance to Lake and Mendocino County seniors.
He also works as a contract attorney for Legal Services of Northern California, specializing in housing issues, and as a mediator. The opinions stated above are of the author as an individual and not as a representative of any organization.
The Board of Supervisors will consider options for implementation of the lease at 11 A.M on December 16, 2008.
Opinions expressed in all Guest Commentaries are solely those of the individual writers and do not necessarily reflect the views or endorsement of the Lake County Record-Bee or its staff.
