Legislature(2001 - 2002)
03/01/2001 01:35 PM Senate L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 6-MOBILE HOME PARK EVICTION NOTICE
CHAIRMAN PHILLIPS announced SB 6 to be up for consideration.
MR. TYSON FICK, Staff to Senator Johnny Ellis, testified that this
bill is the result of a task force report done by the United Way
and the Archdiocese of Anchorage following the inevitable
relocation of residents of the Alaska Village Mobile Home Court.
There are currently 41 manufactured home communities in the
Anchorage Bowl and SB 6 deals only with manufactured home dwellers
and what happens in the event of rezoning and subsequent
development of land which is currently used in mobile home courts.
The task force recommended lengthening the amount of time allocated
for relocation from 180 days to 360 days, and no earlier than April
1 and no later than September 30. One-hundred-eighty days notice
can be required if the developer pays for the cost of relocating
the mobile home, not to exceed $5,000.
MR. FICK explained that the committee substitute changes language
in section 2, line 30 from "only 180 days notice is required or the
mobile home park owner or operator finds a suitable place to
relocate the mobile home" to "only 180 days notice is required if a
suitable place is found". The idea is that it takes the
responsibility of finding a new location away from the owner,
specifically, which addresses some concerns of the development
community.
MR. FICK said this bill is supported by a wide range of people from
mobile home residents, Catholic Social Services, United Way and
Alaska Manufactured Home Residents Advisory Council.
SENATOR DAVIS moved to adopt the committee substitute, version J,
to SB 6. There were no objections and it was so ordered.
MS. MACKENNA JOHNS, Alaska Manufactured Homes, supported SB 6. The
only the concern they is that the $5,000 cannot be applied to
things inside the mobile home. Since the bill was written, they
have discovered that the actual costs are averaging around $8,000.
SENATOR LEMAN wanted to clarify that the costs to disconnect,
relocate, reskirt and prepare a new site is averaging $8,000.
MS. JOHNS said that was right. She explained when you move a mobile
home, you have to bring it up to code. The way the bill is written,
moving the home and bringing it up to code are defined together.
The disconnection and relocation is one part and the
reestablishment depends on your operator. All they usually do is
put it on the lot and level it. When you add skirting and
insulation, that's an additional cost that's not covered by the
mover.
SENATOR LEMAN asked if a new code applied when you moved, like
bring the furnace and plumbing up to new standards.
MS. JOHNS replied yes and said those issues are unique to each
home. Specific to each home would be blocking, leveling, skirting
and insulation and connections, all code issues. A mobile home
owner is grand fathered in where he is, but as soon as he moves to
a new location, he must bring yourself up to whatever the municipal
code is currently. It usually means gas and electrical fittings and
can mean some pad work. Lines and other items inside the home are
unique to each home.
SENATOR LEMAN said he didn't realize that equipment inside the home
might have to be upgraded, as well as outside the home. He wanted
to confirm this.
MR. FICK explained that the $5,000 figure came from the Anchorage
Response to Manufactured Housing Community Relocations Task Force
Report. It was admittedly an arbitrary number at the time.
SENATOR DAVIS asked if this bill was designed to cover the full
costs of moving.
MR. FICK answered yes.
CHAIRMAN PHILLIPS asked Ms. Johns to fax whatever information she
had to justify the $8,000.
MS. FICK said she would do that, but she has only one set of
receipts from the tenant who moved to Rangeview. She also said that
she had a small problem with the April 1 date, because there could
be some items that are still frozen in the ground at that time. She
thought May 1 would provide adequate time.
Number 2400
MS. STEPHANIE WHEELER, Catholic Social Services Anchorage, said SB
6 addressed some major concerns of residents needing to relocate -
adequate notice and financial compensation for relocation costs. A
365-day notice will help residents explore options and finalize a
plan for relocation.
MS. ANGELA LISTON, Archdiocese of Anchorage, said she was on the
Task Force last year and actually drafted the portion of the report
that dealt with this specific provision and she is pleased that the
legislature decided to consider it. Her primary concern is that
otherwise self-sufficient people may be forced into poverty as a
result of these massive displacements. She said the $5,000 was not
a result of any study, but it now appears to be to little.
CHAIRMAN PHILLIPS asked if there was any real life experience with
this yet. He knew she was handling Alaska Village.
MS. LISTON replied that two people testified at an Assembly meeting
two weeks ago that it was nearly $8,000. She has heard no one say
they could do it for $5,000. She noted the Ms. Johns just told her
that they have six people who have relocated.
CHAIRMAN PHILLIPS asked her to supply the committee with the
information.
MR. RANDY SIMMONS, property manager, said they are currently
redeveloping Plaza 36 in Anchorage to construct a 10-story, 200,000
sq. ft. office building for one single tenant. They acquired the
mobile home park for the site and have very little experience in
developing a mobile home park. With the help of United Way, they
came up with a process to mitigate tenants moving. They have put
the sum of $5,000 for each mobile home into an pool that would be
administered by the Catholic Social Services. They did it that way
because some homes would cost more than $5,000 and some would cost
less. At least one person wanted just six months free rent and they
would move themselves. He said there are 43 trailers that have to
be moved.
MR. SIMMONS said his company has no objection to this bill. He
cautioned that people would wait the 365 days and tenants will get
nothing to move. They have committed $5,000 during two different
phases, but not for phases three and four. He said it would take a
long time working with grants and with HUD. The current bill is a,
"fair balance between mobile home park owners and the actual owners
of the mobile home."
SENATOR DAVIS asked if the bill could be amended to say the money
is placed in a pool so that people could receive their actual
costs.
MR. SIMMONS said that would work for them and that's how they set
it up in the first place.
SENATOR LEMAN said he thought it was a good idea, but he didn't
think they needed to write into the bill that a third party could
administer the program, but they need to allow that they could. He
also thought there needed to be a minimum number of units in a
mobile home park, like 10, that can be pooled.
SENATOR LEMAN moved this as a conceptual amendment. There were no
objections and it was so ordered.
CHAIRMAN PHILLIPS asked if anyone objected to changing the dates to
May 1 - October 15.
MS. JOHNS said that Catholic Social Services happened to be the
lucky party that got chosen the first time out and suggested they
use language like "independent agency".
CHAIRMAN PHILLIPS responded that they were only concerned with
pooling the money and the dates at this point. They did not want to
specify any agencies.
SENATOR LEMAN said that he wanted an owner to be able to do it
himself or work through an independent third party, but the
legislature would not specifically say how it should be done.
CHAIRMAN PHILLIPS said they would continue to work on the bill and
set it aside till the next meeting.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|