Oceanside voters on Tuesday were soundly rebuking in early returns
propositions that would phase out rent control in mobile-home parks and
change how city elections are held.
Proposition E on rent control was losing by a landslide, and Proposition F, though closer, was far from passing.
Proposition E aimed to enact vacancy decontrol, which would have phased
out rent control in the city’s mobile-home parks. The protection would
have been eliminated when homes were sold or passed on, but would have
kept low rents for current park residents.
Proposition F would have revamped the city’s election procedures with a
charter amendment. Under the proposition, City Council candidates would
have picked a specific seat to run for and would have needed to win a
majority. The system would have lengthened elections by requiring a
runoff. The city currently uses a single at-large election in which
candidates simply have to garner one of the largest pieces of the
Oceanside’s rent control goes back to 1984 and says rent for spaces can
increase no more than 75 percent of the consumer price index, generally
at a rate less than inflation.
Mobile-home park tenants typically own the home but rent the land beneath it.
The council placed Proposition E on the ballot more than a year ago. It
has been a point of controversy since. Mobile-home park residents
attended City Council meetings frequently, held public demonstrations
and campaigned door-to-door to protest the measure, saying it would
diminish their home values and might not actually preserve low rents.
Park owners spent hundreds of thousands to fight what they say is an
FAIR USE NOTICE. Tenants Together is not the author of this article and
the posting of this document does not imply any endorsement of the
content by Tenants Together. This document may contain copyrighted
material the use of which may not have been specifically authorized by
the copyright owner. Tenants Together is making this article available
on our website in an effort to advance the understanding of tenant
rights issues in California. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair
use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of
the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for
purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain
permission from the copyright owner.