Item 3: PH on Ordinance Concerning Manufactured Dwelling Park Closures

Home Browse Search

owner elects to use a 180-day closure notice, they must also locate a space for the tenant to move their unit to and pay moving costs. The ordinance also requires the park owner to hire a housing counselor to help special category tenants apply for moving costs. When the City originally adopted protections, it recognized the needs of special category tenants. The thinking at the time was that other tenants had more options. The ordinance was also limited to parks anticipated to eventually close because of their location. Today, land prices are higher, and flat, easily buildable parcels all over the City are increasingly attractive for redevelopment. Manufactured home parks occupy some of these flat, easy-to-build-on parcels. Risk to park residents has become a national issue. Park owners may wish to retire or take financial advantage of their investment when offered an opportunity. In some cases, tenants may wish to collectively purchase the park they live in. However, legal remedies at the state level are needed to facilitate the financing options. Furthermore, there are examples in Oregon and elsewhere of situations in which the sale price far exceeded the ability of tenants to purchase the park themselves. If a park closes, homeowners can be faced with a bleak situation. They may not have any place to move their home, as new parks are rarely created. Or, tenants may discover that their home cannot be moved due to its age or condition. Sometimes these homeowners have been required by their park to invest in expensive “park packages” that include paying for a driveway, a patio, or a car port. If the park closes, they may be left with a debt in addition to a devalued home. Two parks have closed under the City’s current ordinance. No existing Eugene parks have indicated any plans to close. However, many tenants are concerned about their future and have followed this issue closely. The Housing Policy Board (HPB) examined this issue and appointed a committee to study the problem and make recommendations. City Councilor Jennifer Solomon chaired the committee. The committee included a park owner, a park manager, tenants, and the HPB chair, John Van Landingham. The committee members met eight times during a seven-month period. They listened to public testimony and debated emotionally charged issues. The HPB’s recommendations attempted to acknowledge and balance the rights of property owners and the concerns of tenants. The proposed amendments, which would apply Eugene’s ordinance to all tenants who own their home, are summarized in Attachment B. Attachment B also shows a comparison of these amendments and HB 2735 and SB 17A, which are currently being considered by the State Legislature. The ability of the City to act is impacted by the Oregon legislature. They are considering bills that were drafted by a coalition including park owners and tenant advocates. The same bill was introduced in both the Senate (SB 17) and the House (HB 2735). The coalition’s bill provides statewide protections but would also preempt local jurisdictions from passing their own ordinances. One amended version of the bill would grandfather in jurisdictions that adopt legislation that takes effect prior to October 1, 2007. The Oregon Legislature is likely to complete its session prior to the scheduled City Council action. Response to Questions Raised at the City Council Work Session 1.Councilor Bettman raised the issue of tenant notification. The ordinance requires that park owners provide tenants with written notice not less than 365 days before the closure date. A park owner first gives notice to tenants and the City of their intent to close the park. Following notice of intent to close, the park the owner must apply to the City for a closure permit. The owner must submit the L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070625\S0706253.DOC