§ 4-19.01. Findings.

(a)

Approximately a year and a half prior to the adoption of the ordinance codified in this chapter, many citizen-residents of mobile home parks began submitting concerns and complaints about rapidly increasing mobile home park space rents which threatened to cause the displacement of residents, to the attention of the Modesto City Council, as well as the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors and the City Councils of Ceres, Riverbank, and Oakdale.

(b)

In response to these complaints and developing crisis, requests for a rent control ordinance, in the spring of 2006 the Modesto City Council, along with the Board of Supervisors, and the City Councils of Ceres, Riverbank and Oakdale, formed an Ad Hoc Committee (the "Ad Hoc Committee") to look at options available to address this growing concern. The Ad Hoc Committee was made of up elected officials from each jurisdiction.

(c)

The Ad Hoc Committee met approximately nine (9) to ten (10) times between May 2006 and February 2007. Over the course of their meetings the Ad Hoc Committee took in documentary evidence and testimony from residents and owners, as well as receiving information from subject matter experts in the area of mobile home rent control.

(d)

During the time the Ad Hoc Committee was studying this issue, mobile home space rents continued to increase, some very drastically. The citizen-residents submitted testimonial and documentary evidence demonstrating that some mobile home parks specifically cited the threat of potential rent control as a reason for the rent increases during this time.

(e)

Collectively, the decision of the Ad Hoc Committee was for the representatives of the various agencies to recommend rent stabilization ordinances in all the involved jurisdictions. On April 30, 2007, this recommendation was brought to the Modesto City Council, who then acted to move forward with the adoption of a rent stabilization ordinance.

(f)

The City of Modesto currently has nine (9) mobile home parks with a total of approximately one thousand four hundred (1,400) mobile home spaces. These mobile home spaces also represent a significant portion of the low cost affordable housing supply within the City.

(g)

The State of California has recognized, by the adoption of special legislation regulating the terms and conditions of tenancies of mobile home owners in mobile home parks, that there is a significant distinction between the situation of residents (mobile home owners) of mobile home parks and tenants of rental apartments or other rental property. This legislative recognition is codified in the State Mobile Home Residency Law, which is found at California Civil Code Section 798.55a, and includes the following findings:

The Legislature finds and declares that, because of the high cost of moving mobile homes, the potential for damage resulting therefrom, the requirements relating to the installation of mobile homes, and the cost of landscaping or lot preparation, it is necessary that the owners of mobile homes occupied within mobile home parks be provided with the unique protection from actual or constructive eviction afforded by the provisions of this chapter.

(h)

In 2001, the United States Supreme Court also explained the "unique" nature of mobile home space rentals in its pivotal holding in Yee v. The City of Escondido 503 U.S. 519, 523, 112 S.Ct. 1522, 118 L.Ed.2nd 153 (1992) while holding as follows:

This case concerns the application of a mobile home rent control ordinance, and some background on the unique situation of the mobile home owner in his or her relationship to the mobile home park owner may be useful. The term "mobile home" is somewhat misleading. Mobile homes are largely immobile as a practical matter, because the cost of moving one (1) is often a significant fraction of the value of the mobile home itself. They are generally placed permanently in parks; once in place, only about one (1) in every one hundred (100) mobile homes is ever moved. (Citation.) A mobile home owner typically rents a plot of land, called a "pad," from the owner of a mobile home park. The park owner provides private roads within the park, common facilities such as washing machines or a swimming pool, and often utilities. The mobile home owner often invests in site-specific improvements such as a driveway, steps, walkways, porches, or landscaping. When the mobile home owner wishes to move, the mobile home is usually sold in place, and the purchaser continues to rent the pad on which the mobile home is located. (Yee v. Escondido, 503 U.S. 519, 523, 112 S.Ct. 1522, 118 L.Ed.2d 153 (1992).) Thus, unlike the usual tenant, the mobile home owner generally makes a substantial investment in the home and its appurtenances—typically a greater investment in his or her space than the mobile home park owner. (cite omitted) The immobility of the mobile home, the investment of the mobile home owner, and restriction on mobile home spaces, has sometimes led to what has been perceived as an economic imbalance of power in favor of mobile home park owners. Galland v. Clovis, 24 Cal.4th 1003, 1009-10 (2001).

(i)

As a practical matter, mobile homes in mobile home parks are "immobile." The cost of moving a mobile home from one (1) park to another is substantial. Generally, mobile home parks will not accept mobile homes that are more than a few years old. As a result, owners of mobile homes in mobile home parks are virtually captive tenants. The result is that often the only space where they can place their mobile home is the space where it is currently located.

(j)

The City of Modesto commissioned a Mobile Home Market Study in July of 2007 (hereinafter the "Market Study"). The results of the Market Study provided that between the years 2000 through 2007, most mobile home residents have experienced average rent increases of twenty-five (25) to forty (40) percent. However, within the last two (2) years, some mobile home residents have experienced a dramatic increase in rent, in some cases more than ninety (90) percent. This has led to tremendous financial hardship, particularly for residents on fixed incomes, including senior citizens. Under the Mobile Home Residency Law, residents are not entitled to receive more than a ninety (90) day notice of an increase in rents, which may not provide sufficient time to plan and budget for these significant rent increases. The Market Study also indicated that some residents received more than one (1) such significant increase within a year's time.

(k)

One (1) effect of the rapidly increasing mobile home rent spaces has been that mobile home owners who could no longer afford to pay the rent spaces, have been forced to sell their mobile homes. In some cases, as revealed by the Market Study, mobile home owners who were neither able to sell their home nor afford the increased rent, simply walked away from their mobile homes.

(l)

Mobile home parks are a valuable resource of affordable housing for low and moderate income individuals and families. In the City of Modesto, approximately forty (40) percent of mobile home park residents qualify as low income, with annual incomes of less than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000.00).

(m)

Most of the mobile home park residents in the City own their own mobile homes. A significant portion of those mobile home owners have made a substantial financial investment in their mobile homes.

(n)

The Market Study further revealed that a significant proportion of mobile home park residents are senior citizens, many of whom live on limited or fixed incomes.

(o)

The Market Study also confirmed that due to the unaffordability of significantly increasing rents, some mobile home owners have had to sell their homes for drastically reduced prices, and in some cases, the owners have had to abandon their homes entirely when they found themselves unable to sell and unable to afford the increased rent.

(p)

The average income level of mobile home owners is substantially below the area median income level and the level necessary to afford a median priced rental unit.

(q)

Due to their limited or fixed incomes, their large investment in their mobile homes, and the immobility of mobile homes which creates a captive market, mobile home park residents generally have very limited economic bargaining power concerning the rents charged for mobile home park spaces.

(r)

If there are no limits on rent increases for mobile home spaces, park owners could impose excessive rent increases that would further result in mobile home owners suffering severe financial hardship, including, but not limited to, a drastic reduction or loss of equity in their mobile homes.

(s)

Provide a minimal rollback of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter, to April 30, 2007 because that is the last day of the month in which the City Council determined a rent stabilization ordinance was needed to address the crisis of potential displacement of residents unable to afford to remain in their homes.

(t)

The City Council finds that the adoption of the ordinance codified in this chapter will not have a significant, substantial or adverse effect on the physical environment of the community because enactment of this chapter involves no deviation from the General Plan and no change in the present use of any property within the unincorporated areas.

(Added by Ord. 3451-C.S., § 1, effective 10-4-07)