|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
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.
The agreement modifies a more stringent rent control provision that had been in place for years, but has since been questioned in court cases affecting other similar mobile home parks in California.
Pleasanton has three mobile home parks. Vineyard Estates at 3263 Vineyard Ave. is the largest with 208 spaces; Hacienda at 3231 Vineyard Ave. has 149 spaces, and Fairview Trailer Park at 785 Rose Ave. has 22 spaces.
Hacienda and Vineyard Estates are operated as age restricted communities where residency is generally limited to households in which one of the residents is at least 55 years old. Fairview has no age restrictions.
Because most of the residents at all three sites are generally lower-income households, the city government has maintained rent stabilization agreements with their owners. In 2010, the council approved a new agreement to stabilize rents and control rent increases with Vineyard Estates, and it reached a similar agreement early this year with Fairview Trailer Park owners.
The agreement with Hacienda, which took effect Tuesday, even before the council’s action, allowed a modest rent increase. Under the new agreement, Hacienda can again raise rentals in January based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) figure last August.
The formula, which will be in effect through 2016, is expected to allow rent increases in a range from 1.5% to a ceiling of 5% each year. The CPI figure for this year is 2%, which will be applied to Hacienda Park residents Jan. 1.
The new agreement does not set forth maintenance standards, which were part of a previous agreement, but the park owner has agreed to make improvements now to kitchen equipment and on an ongoing basis during the period of the new agreement.
Mobile home owners in both Hacienda and Vineyard Estates own their mobile homes but rent the land they’re sitting on. Actually, the homes aren’t “mobile.” They’re placed on foundations when they are brought into the parks and must be trucked out if they are ever moved.
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. $1,000+ a month! Times how many units? We are driving our seniors out of town! Good job Pleasanton Council!
Totally agree with shameful…rents are extremely high in these mobile park homes for seniors…it’s a joke…is anyone on the council a senior trying to live on a small pension and social security?. Not only is the land rent high, but so are the utilities that you must pay in order to live there…Truthfully, I thought Pleasanton would be a great place to live in my old age..but I have been unhappily aware of snobbish prices since moving here 3 years ago,..with higher everything…except income.
What is shameful is that the city council even considers rent control good policy. We are supposed to be living in a free enterprise system with property rights. Rent control squashes these rights and smacks of socialism. Nobody is forced to live at these parks. If you don’t like the rent you can sell your home in place and move or move your home off the land. Time to grow up and take responsibility for yourselves.
Contact: http://lashicap.org/about-us
Perhaps there is a legal approach re: how best to approach the problem.
Generally, American children and seniors are viewed as expendable.
This may be helpful: http://www.cityofpleasantonca.gov/community/housing/sr-citizen-housing.html
Really Mike? You think it’s ok to ‘sock it to’ some of the most vulnerable in our community who for the most part live on fixed incomes? Perhaps you don’t have to worry because you are receiving a big fat pension that all of us have paid for. Yikes, now I’m stooping to your level. Free enterprise is fine and good until it smacks you in the face and you have to leave the community you raised your kids in because you can’t afford it. Frankly, can’t wait until my kids are out of these ‘award winning’ schools so I can sell my over-priced house and get the H$ll out of here!
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?
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.
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
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.
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…
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!