83-1025_CC_Minutes_Adjourned Regular Meeting3 6
OCTOBER 25, 1983
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA
The adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of
San Juan Capistrano, California, was called to order by Mayor
Bland at 7:05 p.m., in the City Council Chamber.
ROLL CALL PRESENT: Anthony L. Bland, Mayor
Gary L. Hausdorfer, Mayor pro tem
Lawrence F. Buchheim, Councilman
Kenneth E. Friess, Councilman
Phillip R. Schwartze, Councilman
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Stephen B. Julian, City Manager; James S.
Okazaki, City Attorney; Mary Ann Hanover, City Clerk; Cheryl
Johnson, Recording Secretary.
COUNCIL ACTIONS
1. MOBILEHOME PARK REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
(SAN JUAN MOBILE ESTATES)
(23) This item was continued from the meeting of October 18,
1983.
Additional Written Communications:
Chart showing computation of permitted rents and charges,
submitted by Howard A. Parelskin, Attorney at Law, Barash &
Hill, One Century Plaza, 2029 Century Park East, Suite 2050,
Los Angeles, 90067, representative for the Park Owner.
Mayor Bland advised that consideration would be given to the
recommendations of the Mobilehome Park Review Committee
regarding the petition submitted by the residents of the San
Juan Mobile Estates, noting that this was not a public
hearing although testimony would be received from a
representative for the residents and a representative for
the Park Owner. He stated that the Council found that the
petition met the requirements of the Ordinance and will
stand as submitted. He cited Section 2-2.905(g) of the
Municipal Code regarding relevant factors to consider in
evaluating rent increases proposed or effected by the Park
Owner.
Receipt of Testimony:
(1) Frank Bailey, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the
San Juan Mobile Estates Residents Association, 32302
Alipaz Street, Space 286, advised that Stewart Parker,
Attorney at Law, would present testimony on behalf of
the residents.
-1- 10/25/83
36 rv, �
(2) Stewart Parker, Attorney at Law, 15751 Brookhurst,
Suite 201, Westminster, 92683, advised that meaningful
negotiation now appeared possible and the matter may be
resolved without litigation. Mr. Parker requested the
Council take a limited action to affirm the validity of the
petition; to indicate that the Ordinance was in effect from
the City's position during both of the contested increases;
and, to find that the increases in both cases exceeded the _
guidelines of the Ordinance. He further requested that
Council defer action on the following matters so that
negotiations may continue in good faith: (1) whether
the Owner had shown justification to exceed the
guidelines and (2) establishment of rent amounts to a
time certain, not to exceed two weeks. He invited
members of the Council and staff to participate in the
negotiations.
(3) Howard Parelskin, Attorney and co -counsel for the Park
Owner, stated that negotiations were proceeding toward
resolution of the matter in a manner satisfactory to
all parties; that would not jeopardize the validity of
the Ordinance nor severely impact the Park Owner. He
stated he did not wish to challenge the validity of the
Ordinance; that the Owner had abided by the rent
control guidelines with the exception of this petition;
and, that the position of the Owner was justified due
to the circumstances. He stated that he is not
prepared to concede that the May 1, 1982, increase
violated the Ordinance because the Ordinance was not in
effect at the time that the trial court had declared it
unconstitutional and the Mobilehome Park Review
Committee had been disbanded. He stated that the fair
market value and rate of return had been ignored and
discussed the subjective application of the CPI. He advised
that he concurred with the request for a continuance and
with the affirmation of validity of the petition, but took
exception to the statement that the Ordinance was valid and
in effect at the time of the increases and that the
increases exceed those permitted under the guidelines
provided by the Ordinance.
(4) Stewart Parker, Attorney, stated that it can be
established that the Ordinance was in effect.
Limited Action/Continuance:
Following discussion, it was moved by Councilman Friess and
seconded by Councilman Schwartze to affirm the validity of
the petition from the San Juan Mobile Estates homeowners; to
affirm that in fact the Ordinance was valid and in effect
throughout the time of these increases; and, that the
increases imposed exceed that permitted under the guidelines
of the Ordinance. With the concurrence of the second, the
motion was amended to continue the item for two weeks to
November 8, and to appoint a subcommittee of Councilmen
Friess and Schwartze to act as observers rather than
participants in the negotiation process. The motion carried
unanimously.
-2- 10/25/83
Mr. Parelskin stated that the attorneys intend to resolve
the matter within the next seven days. Councilman
Hausdorfer stated that the material received by Council is
subjective and Council does not accept it at face value.
Councilman Buchheim noted that the Oyharzabal family owns
the property, but is not involved in the rent increase
situation at the San Juan Mobile Estates. Councilman Friess
stated that guidelines need to be set regarding requirements
for facts and certifying information.
Establishment of Guidelines:
Pursuant to the suggestion of the City Manager, it was moved
by Councilman Schwartze, seconded by Councilman Hausdorfer
and unanimously carried to authorize the City Manager to
work with the City Attorney to develop a specific format and
guidelines for submittal of information to the Mobilehome
Park Review Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned at 7:45 p.m., to the next regular meeting date of
Tuesday, November 1, 1983, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council
chamber.
Respectfully submitted,
MAN 2-i
lZMA
ATTEST:
-3- 10/25/83