Saturday, July 4, 2009     Volume: 23, Issue: 48
Signup

Website Features

Featured Slideshow

Slideshow

6/3 Election Night

Weekly Poll
Do the new cameras in SLO creep you out?

No, because I never do anything wrong.
Yes.
I think they're cool. I feel very Euro.
No worries; I trust the city completely.

Vote! | Poll Results

RSS Feeds

Latest News RSS
Current Issue RSS

Special Features
Delicious
Search or post SLO County food and wine establishments

New Times / News

The following article was posted on November 6th, 2008, in the New Times - Volume 23, Issue 14 [ Submit a Story ]
The following articles were printed from New Times [newtimesslo.com] - Volume 23, Issue 14

Supes restrict mobile home closures

Colin Rigley

People who live in mobile home parks will be able to rest a little easier with the knowledge that they can’t be tossed out of their homes if the park owner decides to sell or subdivide.

On Nov. 4, the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved new rules on mobile home park closures. In effect, the new language makes it more difficult to simply close a park and force residents to fend for themselves and find a new home.

Since mobile home park residents generally don’t own the land they live on they are often at the mercy of the park owner. Under the new rules, if a park is closed or converted the park owner is required to help residents find new housing and even cover the extra costs in some situations. Owners can get around the extra steps by applying for an exemption, but in doing so they have to show that the park is unsafe or that keeping it open would be financially infeasible.

Mobile home residents throughout the county threw their support behind the new rules. There was some resistance from park owners, however, who worried about extra costs they could be forced to pay. Regardless of a few protests, the vote went through 5-0.

Supervisors also considered an ordinance on converting parks from rental to resident-owned. Under the ordinance, an owner would need support from 50 percent of the residents in order to change the park to a resident-owned property like a condominium. The item was continued to Jan. 6 but seemed to have full support from supervisors.