ELECTIONS / MOORPARK MEASURE T : Mobile Home Park Rent Control Backed

Moorpark voters Tuesday overwhelmingly approved a city ordinance that limits the size of rent increases mobile home park owners can charge when tenants sell their coaches to new residents.

In unofficial final results, 85% of the ballots cast in the special election supported the ordinance, upheld by a margin of 930 to 164, county elections officials said.

The City Council adopted the ordinance unanimously in October, but the local law never went into effect because the owner of Moorpark’s 240-unit Villa del Arroyo Mobile Home Estates mounted a petition drive that forced Tuesday’s vote.

“Super,” said Villa del Arroyo tenant Frank Hilton when told of the results. “I just think it’s wonderful. It just really shows that the little guy can do something.”

Mobile home park tenants had strongly backed the ordinance, sending personal letters to nearly 1,000 likely voters, posting signs throughout the city and handing out more than 2,000 pamphlets in the days preceding the election.

The tenants argued that allowing park owner Dale Williams to impose unrestricted rent increases on new park residents interfered with their ability to sell their homes. New buyers were scared off, tenants said, by the sizable rent increases park owners could impose upon them.

Williams, who was unavailable for comment Tuesday, has not responded to repeated attempts to reach him.

Park manager Lisa Davis refuted residents’ claims and said the vacancy control ordinance would unfairly interfere with Williams’ ability to do business.

“We don’t think it’s fair,” Davis said. “They’re all crying that they can’t sell their homes. I can tell you that the homes are selling, but the market has slowed down. Mobile homes are just part of the housing market, and the housing market has slowed down.”

Georgia Dennehey, a county elections administrator, said a total of 12,987 residents were eligible to cast ballots in the special election.

Moorpark repealed its vacancy rent-control ordinance three years ago in response to a $1-million lawsuit against the city, and a U. S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeal ruling that such control amounted to a physical taking of a park owner’s property for which the owner was due compensation.

Ruling on a different case last year, the U. S. Supreme Court held that vacancy control does not result in a physical taking of property. That decision led to Moorpark’s move to reinstitute the ordinance. The council has stood firmly behind its action, deciding to spend $23,000 to hold the election instead of voluntarily rescinding the ordinance.

The local law would cap any rent increase at 5% or the Consumer Price Index--whichever is less--over any 12-month period, and would allow just two such rent increases every five years. The city already regulates annual rent increases on units that are not sold.

“It looks like a landslide,” Councilman Scott Montgomery said after hearing initial returns. “It tells me that the council was right all along and that the people of the city recognize that the tenants need the protection that this ordinance provided.”

As expected, the one-issue election generated light voter turnout. Only 30 voters had cast ballots at Moorpark High School by 2:30 p.m., said inspector Kathryn Snyder, who described the turnout as “a little trickle, all day long.”

Turnout was a bit more active at the Moorpark Community Center, where 66 residents had voted by 2:30 p.m.

“We’ve been kind of slow, but it’s not so bad for this kind of election,” worker Jessie Silos said.

Winnie Echterling, a Moorpark resident since 1981 who lives in a smaller mobile home park on High Street, also voted to uphold the city ordinance.

“I voted for my side,” she said. “If I was the landlord, I’d vote the other way.”

Times staff writer Maia Davis contributed to this story.