Town Square

Post a New Topic

Pleasanton Council OKs rent increases in Hacienda mobile home park

Original post made on Oct 3, 2013

The Pleasanton City Council ratified a new rent stabilization agreement with the owners of Hacienda Mobilehome Park on Vineyard Avenue Tuesday, keeping the lid to some extent on rent increases on spaces in the park at least through the end of 2016, when the agreement will expire.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, October 3, 2013, 7:52 AM

Comments (12)

Posted by shameful, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Oct 3, 2013 at 8:36 am

I think any increase at all is shameful. Do you know what the rents are for leasing the space? I've looked into it for someone who is over 55 and wants to move closer to me. $1,000+ a month! Times how many units? We are driving our seniors out of town! Good job Pleasanton Council!


Posted by member, a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Oct 3, 2013 at 9:44 am

Totally agree with shameful...rents are extremely high in these mobile park homes for seniors...it's a joke...is anyone on the council a senior trying to live on a small pension and social security?. Not only is the land rent high, but so are the utilities that you must pay in order to live there...Truthfully, I thought Pleasanton would be a great place to live in my old age..but I have been unhappily aware of snobbish prices since moving here 3 years ago,..with higher everything...except income.


Posted by mike, a resident of another community
on Oct 3, 2013 at 9:54 am

What is shameful is that the city council even considers rent control good policy. We are supposed to be living in a free enterprise system with property rights. Rent control squashes these rights and smacks of socialism. Nobody is forced to live at these parks. If you don't like the rent you can sell your home in place and move or move your home off the land. Time to grow up and take responsibility for yourselves.


Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore
on Oct 3, 2013 at 10:05 am

Contact: Web Link

Perhaps there is a legal approach re: how best to approach the problem.

Generally, American children and seniors are viewed as expendable.


Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore
on Oct 3, 2013 at 10:10 am

This may be helpful: Web Link


Posted by shameful, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Oct 3, 2013 at 1:42 pm

Really Mike? You think it's ok to 'sock it to' some of the most vulnerable in our community who for the most part live on fixed incomes? Perhaps you don't have to worry because you are receiving a big fat pension that all of us have paid for. Yikes, now I'm stooping to your level. Free enterprise is fine and good until it smacks you in the face and you have to leave the community you raised your kids in because you can't afford it. Frankly, can't wait until my kids are out of these 'award winning' schools so I can sell my over-priced house and get the H$ll out of here!


Posted by Hugh Jassoh, a resident of Laguna Oaks
on Oct 3, 2013 at 5:33 pm

mike is right. nowhere does it say in our constitution that you have the right to live in pleasanton. there are people of all ages that cannot afford to live here. why should the gummers be any different?


Posted by Lee, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 4, 2013 at 9:30 am

Our seniors live mostly on fixed incomes, and rent increases and utility increases for them are a pox on our society. What does it say about us as Americans if we don't take care of our grandparents?

This makes me sad and angry. We can do better.


Posted by Julia, a resident of another community
on Oct 4, 2013 at 9:42 am

The wisdom of the Cholo rides again. The wisdom contained in the Cholo's mind can not even fit into a tea-cup.

But you have us listening Cholo...keep up the safe and sane comments...yea right!!!

Julia Pardini from Alamo


Posted by Me Too, a resident of Downtown
on Oct 4, 2013 at 3:56 pm

I'm not a senior but I live on a fixed income also. I get paid the same amount every two weeks. If the rent and utilities are so outrageous the place would be vacant but it's not. If it's so shameful put YOUR money where your mouth is and pony up, help a brother out.


Posted by Jack, a resident of Downtown
on Oct 5, 2013 at 12:50 am

Who pays for increased property taxes? Who pays for the park's increase in PG&E and water and sewer? Who pays for the increase in garbage pick-up? Who pays for Obamacare for the park's staff? Who pays for the park's increases in insurance coverage?
The park's ownership is supposed to eat all these increases every year? That doesn't seem realistic...


Posted by Peace Maker, a resident of another community
on Oct 5, 2013 at 3:36 pm

It seems easy for Mike and Hugh to lump important issues conveniently into categories such as "free enterprise" and "rent control." Neither have offered a solution to appease both sides, mainly because of their obvious repressed anger towards their own parents who most likely shelved them in childhood in pursuit of professional careers, and limited real life experience and appreciation outside of a text book. Morality decisions are reached in consensus by city counsels across our nation--some good and some bad. We will soon see how much value is attached to the elderly in Pleasanton. As for Mike and Hugh, in about 40-50 years (estimate based on probable ages derived from dimwitted responses) they too will be "gummers" asking, no begging...for someone to care about them. Merry Christmas boys!


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

To post your comment, please click here to login

Remember me?
Forgot Password?
or register. This topic is only for those who have signed up to participate by providing their email address and establishing a screen name.

Preserving Disorder
By Tom Cushing | 68 comments | 1,939 views

Bi-Polar Disorder
By Roz Rogoff | 25 comments | 1,663 views

The drought drives lawmakers to action
By Tim Hunt | 12 comments | 1,372 views