Month: July 2018

Grab your coffee, cocktail or whatever you like before trying to catch up on what happened in the summary below.  Great progress was made during our 3-hour meeting.

A majority of Oregon Marina Owner/Landlords met on Friday, July 6, 2018, to discuss and talk through the presentation which Floating Home Owner/Tenants made on May 16, 2018 in Tigard.

The summary of their decisions was presented to the Marina Issues Subcommittee on Thursday, July 12, 2018.

This was a good starting point to begin tackling what both sides want to achieve in the next MH Coalition bill.  Keep in mind that this is an iterative process where we all work together to exchange ideas and positions and seek consensus.

Landlords and Tenants discussed perspectives from both sides during the meeting and the following is a summary of where we have landed thus far on our issues.  There will likely be one more Marina Issues Subcommittee meeting to work to achieve final decisions.

Landlords want:

1. The ability to treat live-aboards the same as RV Tenants in ORS Chapter 90.  This would impact live-aboard Tenants especially in terms of Landlords being allowed to issue 30-day no-cause eviction notices during the first year of occupancy; 60 days thereafter (ORS 90.125 (5), 90.230, 90.427).
   • In order to do this, live-aboards will need to be defined in ORS.
   • Tenant Commentary:
     • None of us will be comfortable making it easier for Landlords to evict our live-aboard neighbors, but there does need to be a definition of live-aboards in ORS – definitions for floating homes, boats, RVs, and manufactured homes already exist.  Current Oregon Statue Law does not define liveaboards and, therefore, makes the interpretation of the law murky for them even though some case law has already been tested.  In defining live-aboards, the law will have to assign live-aboards a level of protections that are balanced and fitting to what Tenants need and landlords need.
     • ORS 90.505 – 830 protects floating home owner rights and were put into place precisely because of the high cost of moving floating homes, the potential for damage resulting therefrom, the substantial costs relating to the move-in charges or purchase of slips, and current government policy limiting the availability of floating home slips.  It is necessary that the owners of floating homes within floating home marinas be provided with unique protections from evictions because of this.  Floating Home Tenant evictions will result in the home owner losing their floating home.
     •  The fact is that live-aboards (with the exception of a rare few that do not have operable motors or sails) do not have any of these issues regarding the relocation of their homes and can relatively easily (albeit, not desired) move their home to a new marina if they are evicted, given that nearly all of these vessels have a means of self-propulsion.  
     • They are very similar in nature to RVs. They are able to pack up and go unlike a floating home owner.
     • Many live-aboard Marina Owners testified that live-aboards were some of the greatest Tenants possible and really worked together well as a community. Another testified that they had never had the need to serve any eviction notice in the decades that they had been operating the moorage.
2. The ability to issue a 30-day Termination of Tenancy (eviction) notice IF the Tenant fails to agree to relocate their floating homes under certain circumstances:
   • Circumstances in which the Landlords would like the ability to relocate a floating home are: dredging work, low water accommodations, when a house is being move into/out of the moorage and there is a need to shuffle a house(s) in order to place/remove the relocating home, construction work on an adjacent home or slip, or as required by government or law.
   • Landlords agree to cover the expense of the move, agree that the move will occur within the same marina (not to another marina somewhere else), and that the move would be temporary (except if by government or law requirement).
   • Issues still to be worked through:
     • • 1. Define “temporary” – same standard as float repair? maximum of 9 months? possibly 12 months?
         2. There should be some limit on Landlords’s discretion – Tenant should require proof, there should be a penalty for abusing this law (e.g. lying to the Tenant about requiring the move).
         3. There should be some advice warning notice of the impending move to detail how long you have to prepare and make arrangements in advance of the move itself.  In other words, if the Landlord knows 6 months in advance that this move will be required, then the Tenant should be warned 6 months in advance.  What is the minimum advance notice to be required.
         4. What should the result of a Tenant’s failure to comply with the notice to move be? Termination of tenancy? Is the termination notice curable by moving the home within 30 days, if they receive a 30-day notice?
         5. Should there be a reduction in rent paid by the Tenant for the time that the Tenant is not occupying its leased slip?  Or is relocating to a comparable space sufficient (ORS 90.671 (5))
         6. Should there be some sort of economic incentive for the Landlord to make the relocation period as brief as possible?
         7. Regarding the Landlord’s commitment to cover the costs of the move, does that include the cost to prepare for the move and for the return of the home and re-installation costs?
         8. Further define what circumstances warrant a move.
         9. Agree that government-required moves also qualify?  Government-required closures are addressed in ORS 90.671 (7).
       • Tenant Commentary: As you can see from the above list of questions that Tenants understand that Landlords need some kind of power over Tenants who refuse to cooperate when a move is necessary, but that we also have a lot of questions around Landlord increased power or the potential abuse of this power that need to be addressed prior to agreeing.  Namely, we do not want a Landlord relocating us from a “penthouse” slip (outside, end slip with unobstructed views) to an inside obstructed view slip indefinitely and without compensation.  This would affect the value or our home.   We will work through these questions at our next Marina Issues Subcommittee meeting.

Tenants want:

1. To be covered by the state’s Manufactures Communities Resource Center, meaning they would pay the annual $10 special assessment with their property taxes and qualify for MCRC’s services (including mediation/dispute resolution and education). Landlords should be required to register with the MCRC and comply with the mandatory continuing education requirement (4 hours every 2 years to keep them up to date on marina resident law, etc.), the same as manufactured housing park Landlords (ORS 90.732 to 90.738) including the registration fee.
   • Landlords tentatively agree to this.
   • Issues still to be worked through:
     • What is the right fee amount? MH Park Landlords pay $25 per year for small parks (20 or fewer spaces) and $50 for larger parks.
     • Conform with the Tax Assessors that this will work.
   • Tenant Commentary: YES! This is needed.  MCRC has proven data that their services work and help Tenants having issues with their Landlords.  It is a much better alternative for Tenants than litigation.
2. Marinas to be covered by the opportunity to purchase statutes, the same ones as MH parks (ORS 90.842 – 875).
   • Landlords tentatively agree to this.
   • Tenant Commentary: YES! This will provide an opportunity for marina Tenants to organize to try to buy their marinas when their Landlords think about selling it.   Currently, a Landlord can sell your marina without any notification until the sale is done.  This would allow Tenants some advance warning to organize and attempt to make an offer to own the marina/their slips, pay lesser monthly HOA fees as opposed to rents (conversion of a for-profit business that benefits Landlords into a non-profit that benefits the homeowners), and provides better security to home owners since the threat of Landlord evictions doesn’t come into play when you own your slip/marina.
3. Residents should have the right to enter a 1-year storage agreement with the Landlord after a termination of tenancy or the home is “abandoned” pursuant to ORS 90.675.  Currently, the law states that any floating home left in a marina slip over 30 days post-eviction is defined as “abandoned property.”
   • The Landlord should include notice to the tenant of this right within the current ORS 90.675 abandoned property notice.
   • The Tenant should have a certain period (current law for a Tenant to claim an abandoned home is 30 days) to contact the Landlord and request a storage agreement, during which the resident can attempt to sell the home to a new buyer.
   • Current law: Landlord has the right to approve any buyer who wishes to become a Tenant and Landlord may require repairs to the home under certain conditions (ORS  90.680 (8) to (10)).
   • Landlords tentatively agree to this.
   • Remaining Issue to Work Through:
     • • Must the evicted Tenant pay all back and accruing rent during the storage agreement? Or must the Landlord allow the Tenant to defer payment until the sale of the house?
       • What is the deal regarding evicted-Tenant access to the home during the storage agreement? Owners want a resident to maintain the home during the storage agreement which would require access. But see existing provision ORS 90.680 (15).
     • Tenant Commentary: Currently, if you are evicted or any reason, and you don’t remove your floating home from the marina or COMPLETE the sale of it to a new buyer within 30 days (up to 65-ish days under one circumstances), your Landlord can take legal possession of your home and dispose of it.  They would control where it goes, its value, and what, if anything, you get in return for your home.  This proposed legislation, if enacted into law, would allow an evicted home owner to sell their home under normal market circumstances and retain its value.  In other words, your life’s savings (equity own home) would not be at risk if evicted.
4. Both sides – Landlords and Tenants have agreed to work together with the Marina Board (and to try to organize floating home owners who own their slips) to address the issues of destructive wakes from passing watercraft.  This issue will not be included in any Coalition bill.
   • Landlords agree that damage caused by wakes has been increasing and needs to be addressed.
   • We all agreed that the best way to address this issue is to work together to try to find ways that we can combat this issue together with all stakeholders involved.
5. Extend the time Tenants should be allowed to repair “floatation systems” (float, logs, stringer, flotation, etc.) than is currently allowed in ORS 90.632.  Amend ORS 90.632 to extend the current extension for difficulty in scheduling the necessary repair contractors from 60 days – following the initial Landlord termination notice for disrepair (also 60 days) – to an additional 8 months.
   • Landlords tentatively agree to this.
   • Issues still to work through: Same issues as what Landlords requested above in #2 – how long is enough time to get the work done?
   • Tenant Commentary: We still have reservations about the burden of proof that the house is in NEED of float repairs and what constitutes disrepair that would trigger such a notice, etc.  The Landlord does not have the right to inspect the float, so a notice would be given on a hunch.  A Landlord is not a float expert. What constitutes a float in “disrepair”…one that rates a 1, 2, or 3?  A float that rates a “1” could last another 5 years without creating imminent or serious harm to other dwellings or property.   There are still things to work out, but this shows great willingness by Landlords to be reasonable with Tenants given that it is impossible to replace a float in under 60 days.  

All in all, much progress on key issues were made. Once we gain consensus on a draft of the issues we can all live with, the Marina Issues Subcommittee will share it with the MH Coalition to seek their approval (and to ensure that our changes to the law do not inadvertently, adversely affect MH park law).  Then the Coalition will draft the bill, find a legislative sponsor, and get it submitted by October for consideration.  There will likely only be one more Marina Subcommittee Meeting between then and now.  So, please try to attend if you can.

We will give notice as soon as we hear about the scheduled date for the next Marina Subcommittee Meeting.

THANKS TO ALL OF YOU WHO ARE LENDING SUPPORT TO THIS EFFORT!

We are truly appreciative of all of you. We are so inspired by what we have accomplished collectively so far.  We hope that you, too, see our group’s progress as an antidote to the sense of powerlessness that too many of us have felt at one time or another.