Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - March 22, 2001 - CCCITY OF AZUSA MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL RENT STABILIZATION REVIEW BOARD THURSDAY, MARCH 22, 2001 - 6:30 P.M. The City Council substituting for the Rent Review Hearing Board of the City of Azusa met in Adjourned session, at the above date and time in the Azusa Auditorium, located at 213 East Foothill Boulevard, Azusa, California. Chairperson Chagnon called the meeting to order. Call to Order ROLL CALL Roll Call PRESENT: BOARD MEMBERS: . STANFORD, ROCHA, CHAGNON ALSO PRESENT: Also Present Jamie Raymond of Best, Best, and Krieger, Community Improvement Manager Rudisel, Robert Coldren, of Hart, King and Coldren, Attorneys for Mar Investments introduced himself as well as Andrew Kenly, Ed Gogin, CPA, Ken Marr, Principal of the Owner, John Neet, MAI Appraiser, and Dale Pedroche, Deputy City Clerk Toscano, City Clerk Mendoza. row Pines Mobile Home Estates APRlication for a Rent Increase. Application for Rent Inc. Chairperson Chagnon opened the Hearing stating that the purpose is to receive testimony from Arrow Pines the applicant. Deputy City Clerk administered an Oath to all who may give testimony at the Mobile Home Hearing. I Estates Mr. Robert Coldren, of Hart, King and Coldren, Attorneys for Mar Investments introduced himself R. Coldren as well as Andrew Kenly, Ed Gogin, CPA, Ken Marr, Principal of the Owner, John Neet, MAI comments Appraiser, and Dale Pedroche. Mr. Ed Gogin, CPA, addressed the Hearing on behalf of the applicant, detailing the spreadsheet E. Gogin he submitted with regard to Space rental income. He then answered questions posed by comments Boardmembers and Mr. Coldren on a variety of aspects of the worksheet. He also responded to questions regarding capital expenses, PUC lawsuit, electric charges, prior pass through, etc. Community Improvement Manager Rudisel addressed the issue questioning Mr. Gogin regarding Com Imp base rent averages, charges/pass though, the city ordinance, expenses, Net Operating Income Mgr (NOI), etc. comments Mr. John Neet, Real Estate Appraiser, addressed the issue stating that a study of market rents, J. Neet which he stated came from a larger neighborhood in San Dimas. He spoke against the use of comments MC7 I index, stating that it does not reflect the type of income of a property owner who is esting. He passed out sheets of paper presenting percentage decline in real income and cline In real income resulting from discounts applied to Inflation adjustments. He ten answered question posed Mr. Coldren, Mr. Rudisel and the Boardmembers. City Attorney Jamie Raymond provided comments regarding the procedures to be taken to J. Raymond conclude the hearing; if a decision is made, there is a need to make finding of facts In City Attorney accordance with the Azusa Municipal Code and certain notices that need to be made to the comments applicant. Recess: 8:51 p.m. Reconvened 9:03 p.m. Recess Reconvened Mr. Coldren offered closing remarks objecting to the procedures that have taken place at the hearings as well as comments made by reviewing boardmembers and staff. He offered to spread $100 increase in rents to mobile home tenants over a three year period, advised that no resident would be evicted for inability to pay, noted that there may be a deferral any particular home owner and that they would agree not to collect retroactive rent increases, If the application for rent Increase was approved. R. Coldren comments Chairperson Chagnon responded to comments made by Mr. Colden asking him what they would D. Chagnon do if they did not get the rent increase. comments Mr. Coldren responded stating that they may pursue an action against the city for damages, R. Coldren action against the city based on illegal application of its ordinance, and pursue the rent increase. comments �oved by Boardmember Stanford, seconded by Boardmember Rocha and unanimously carried Hrg Closed close the Hearing. Chairperson Chagnon recommended the following, based on factors listed in the Azusa Municipal D. Chagnon Code, which are numbered; findings (1) Changes in the Consumer Price Index for Wage Earners (CPI -W) in the Los Angeles -Long based on Beach -Anaheim area published by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. Based on the factors listed information received during the Hearing, the abovd has been utilized by the applicant, therefore, in the Azusa there is no increase warranted. All Boardmembers agreed. Municipal ' Code (2) The rent lawfully charged for comparable mobilehome spaces in the city. Although the applicant did research for comparable rents, they were not within the City limits, therefore, there was no increase warranted. All Boardmembers agreed. (3)The length of time since either the last hearing and final determination by the board on a rent increase application or the last rent increase if no previous rent increase application has been made. There has not been a significant lapse of time where no increase has been applied, there was no increase warranted. All Boardmembers agreed. (4) The completion of any capital improvements or rehabilitation work related to the mobilehome spaces specified in the rent increase application and the cost thereof, including such items of cost, including materials, labor, construction, interest, permit fees and other Items, as the board Ieems appropriate. Based on testimony from tenants, improvements made do not support an crease. All Boardmembers agreed. (5) Changes in property taxes in excess of the two -percent annual increase or other taxes related to the mobilehome park. Based on NOI, there are no large increases that warrant an increase at this time. All Boardmembers agreed. (G) Changes in reasonable operating and maintenance expenses. Based on testimony, expenses are normal operating item. No increase warranted. All Boardmembers agreed. (7) The need for repairs caused by circumstances other than ordinary wear and tear. Based on testimony, there were no extraordinary needs for repairs. No increase warranted. All Boardmembers agreed. (8) The amount or quality of services provided by the applicant to the affected home. Based on testimony, there were no such repairs. No increase warranted. All Boardmembers agreed. (9) Any and all other factors that the board may deem relevant. There was significant concern regarding deferrer) maintenance. There were no significant findings to support an increase. Chairperson Chagnon thanked all for their input at the meeting. comments ease note: Throughout the process of the hearing certain documents were submitted to docs submt. pilcants as well as the Reviewing Board. It was consensus of Councilmembers to adjourn. Adjourn TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 9:25 P.M. EO DEPUTY CITY CLERK