Proposition 199
Mobile Homes
- Phases out local rent control laws on mobilehomes. Prohibits new state and local rent control laws.
- Limits existing local rent control laws to current spaces. Prohibits controls on rent increases smaller than annual cost-of-living increase; eliminates controls on rent for space when tenancy or unit ownership changes.
- Requires park owners to provide subsidy of 10% of monthly rent for very low-income tenants if fewer than 10% of existing spaces are subject to rent control and if subsidy will not subject more than 10% of spaces to rent control or subsidy.
The information below was provided by the California Journal.
Background: About 500,000 Californians live in mobile
homes. which typically are owned by the occupant who must then rent space from
a mobile-home park. About 100 cities and counties around the state have some
form of rent control for these parks, generally limiting rent increases to the
level of inflation or less. These controls apply to about 150,000 mobile homes
statewide. Owners of mobile-home parks have tried periodically over the years
to repeal the rent-control laws, arguing that the value of the low rents is
capitalized into higher mobile-home prices, making it more difficult for
low-income buyers to purchase the homes. By phasing out rent controls, the
purchase price of homes in these areas might become cheaper, as the equity
value of the homes is transferred to park owners in the form of higher
rents.
Proposal: Proposition 199 would gradually phase out all
existing rent controls on mobile-home parks. The controls would stay in effect
for each individual unit until the current occupant sells, sublets or otherwise
leaves the residence. The park owner then would be able to raise the rent
freely.The measure also would allow park owners to raise rents at least as fast
as the rate of inflation. Finally, the initiative would require park owners to
provide 10 percent rent discounts for 10 percent of the spots in their parks to
people with "very low" income, a level that varies by county. The state
legislative analyst estimates that the measure could save local governments
several million dollars annually in the long run, as the cost of administering
rent control laws eventually disappears.
Arguments for: Proponents -- including the state Chamber
of Commerce, the Republican Party and the Mobilehome Park Owners Alliance --
argue that rent controls have led to an increase in the cost of the homes and a
decrease in the amount of park space available. Because of disincentives to
creating new park space, the state has faced a shortage in just the kind of
housing most needed by seniors and young families, they say. By removing the
rent controls, the purchase prices for the homes will fall and more space will
open up -- and the 10 percent rent discounts will help the poorest sector of
the population afford housing. Rent-control laws cost local taxpayers millions
of dollars to administer, proponents add, which would be avoided with passage
of the initiative.
Arguments against: Opponents -- including the American
Association of Retired Persons, the Golden State Mobilehome Owners League and
the California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO -- say the initiative is nothing more
than a thinly veiled attempt by park owners to raise rents. The 10 percent
rental assistance provision is not enough to outweigh the effects of expected
rent increases, they say. Rent increases would price senior citizens and others
on fixed incomes out of the market, not make it easier for them to buy the
homes.
For additional information please see:
- Mobilehome rent control up to voters -- The Vacaville Reporter (February 18, 1996)
- Yes on 199
None submitted.
- No on 199
Golden State Mobilehome Owners' League
