Category: MH Coalition

What happened at the June 19 MH Coalition Meeting?

Several floating home tenants were in attendance – Thank you for participating!!!  No marina landlords were present which was a little surprising.  But some landlord attorneys were present.
___________________________
SUBMETERING

At the beginning of the meeting, they flipped the order of the agenda to accommodate a person who was presenting about submetering.  The result was that the first 2.5 hours of the MH Coalition meeting was spent on submetering of water and other utilities.   Most marinas that are represented by our group thus far are known to be on well water.  By law, a landlord cannot submeter well water so this doesn’t apply to broadly to our group.

However, we would desperately like to hear from any Floating Home Owners at rental moorages who obtain their water from a municipal source.  We suspect that some rental moorages on the Columbia River may be on city water and, perhaps, those in St. Helens.  So, if you are a floating home owner at a rental moorage and are on city water, this applies to you and we want to hear from you!!  Otherwise, we have no known issues with the submetering law and cannot improve it for you.

The good news is that the MH Coalition made progress on this topic and are getting closer to actual draft legislation language which means that we will spend less and less time talking about submetering. They also said that the next meetings will start with Dispute Resolution to give us an opportunity to make some real progress on that topic which is relevant to us.

___________________________

DISPUTE RESOLUTION

The final half-hour was devoted to Enforcement/Dispute Resolution.  There are a couple of key points to pass along:

  1. The MH Coalition is removing the Enforcement aspect from this discussion for this legislative session in order to focus solely on the Dispute Resolution/Mediation aspect.
    • Background:
      • Enforcement was the original name given to this discussion.
      • Last year, Tenants requested a means to resolve issues when Landlords were clearly violating their ORS rights, yet did not require the Tenant to litigate in order to get the Landlord to stop the violations.
    • This is not exactly the best news to have it removed.  This means that, for now, Tenants will need to continue to cover the costs of litigation should they feel as though their rights are being violated by a Landlord.
    • The reason given to remove Enforcement from the discussion at this time is because:
      • It is widely understood that the nature of most of the issues between Landlords and Tenants can be resolved through legislation to require Landlords to participate in Mediation and Dispute Resolution.
      • Generally, most Landlords and Tenants agree that mediation and dispute resolution could be beneficial to both parties.  But, finding government funding for litigation help is a far trickier problem to solve.  In the interest of being able to draft meaningful legislation that might actually get passed in 2019, it is imperative that we simplify the issue or else no progress on any aspect of this issue will be made.
  2. So, while mandatory mediation could help when you have certain issues with your Landlord (for example, perhaps you want to park an RV onsite temporarily and your marina Landlord won’t permit it), there are going to be issues that are not suitable for mediation either because they are too big or too controversial (for example, when a Landlord is violating your rights and refuses to stop).
  3. The MH Coalition may add Enforcement back in for discussion in 2019.
  4. IMPORTANT NOTE:  Currently, MCRC helps manufactured home tenants through voluntary mediation because of the $10 assessment they pay to fund the group.  Floating home tenants do not currently have access to the MCRC because we do not pay the $10 per year tax.  This is one of the key things we are trying to change at the Marina Subcommittee level.  We want access to this valuable resource!!  If we do get eligibility to use this resource in 2019, and if the MH Coalition can come to an agreement on mandatory mediation and get is also passed into law, then we will have a whole new set of tools to use to help protect our rights.

___________________________

NEXT MARINA ISSUES SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING

I also would like to report that I have been asking John DiLorenzo (MH Coalition voting representative for landlords) to set the date of the next Marina Issues Subcommittee since May 25th and again at Tuesday’s meeting.  Apparently, we are waiting for the Landlords to have a luncheon where they will discuss things and get on the same page about our issues we presented on May 16th.  Somehow, Tenants managed to meet twice for a total of 6 hours together in preparation for our May 16th presentation.  So I find it hard to believe that 30 Landlords have had 36 days to meet in reaction to our presentation and have chosen not to do so.  In any case, I expressed an urgency today to get this meeting calendared through DiLorenzo, and he has responded by asking for our patience.  So hopefully we will hear back soon.  I will add this event to this site as soon as I have it.

What to Expect at the June 19th MH Coalition Meeting

We will be discussing 2 items relevant to Floating Home Owners:
  1. Enforcement/Dispute Resolution – Finding ways for issues between marina landlords and tenants to be resolved without litigation.  Good laws are already on the books, but what do we do when our rights have been violated by a marina owner and currently our only recourse is to take them to court which involves attorneys and cost, and can place us in greater threat of eviction.  We are discussing possible laws and programs which can help us get the support we need.
  2. Terminations/Evictions – Landlords want easier ways to fast-track the eviction process and tenants want more clarity in the language of the current law so that you can’t get evicted for minor infractions of your marina rules.  Come prepared to discuss your ideas (review ORS Chapter 90.630 – how and for what reasons a landlord can evict you) in preparation.  We need to make sure that landlords do not gain more power to evict and we need to reduce the uncertainty of the current eviction language in the law so that a judge can’t grant an eviction because your dog was off-leash or because you were seen running on the docks twice within a 6-month timeframe.

___

If you haven’t already, now is a great time to review your lease.  This consists of three items: (1) the Marina Statement of Policy, (2) Marina Rules and (3) your Rental Agreement.  The lease you signed, and the rules you agreed to, may be different from the current leases and sets of rules at the marina.

If you don’t have a copy of your lease, your marina owner must supply one to you (ORS 90.510).  Make sure they provide you with a copy of the lease that you signed – not the current lease or current set of rules at the marina.

Once you have your lease, review the marina rules you signed and think through which ones, if broken, should be grounds for eviction and which rule violations should be considered minor rules infractions, instead of causing you to lose your home.

See you there!

___

Manufactured Housing Landlord/Tenant Coalition will be held on Tuesday, June 19, 2018, from 9 to noon.

This meeting will be held at the Tigard office of Multifamily NW, at 16083 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road, #105 (first floor, front of the building).

The call-in number here is 515-604-9000, passcode 948800.

What Happened at the April 17th MH Coalition Meeting?

Great News! YOU have spoken and YOU are ready for change!  And we are hear for you.  As of today, this group of Floating Home Owners, who have been organizing like crazy, have representation from 11 different rental moorages!  And we have been making progress on behalf of you and your rights as Floating Home Owners.

At the April 17th MH Coalition meeting, so many concerned Floating Home Owners from many different moorages attended and voiced their opinions on marina tenancy issues that were most important to them.

The meeting was so well-attended that there was standing room only as the venue ran out of seating for us!!  So, thank you for your courage to come forward to speak about important topics while your Marina Owners and their attorneys listened.

There were several major takeaways from the April 17th meeting.

The first is that the Marina Owners have proposed legislation they wish Floating Home Owners will consider supporting and the second takeaway is that a clear need was demonstrated by the topics and the participants that FLOATING HOME OWNERS NEED A VOICE and a forum to continue to focus on their rights under Marina tenancies.

Marina Owners proposed the following 3 issues for proposed legislation:

  1. 30 Day Notice to Relocate Floating Home Owners or Lease is Terminated: Marina Owners are asking that Oregon law provide them with yet another tool in their portfolio of reasons to evict tenants.  They wish to be able to serve a 30-Day Notice to temporarily or permanently relocate your floating home in order to (1) come into compliance with local planning codes (even if the cause of the code violation is because of the marina owner’s negligence and nothing you did wrong), (2) accommodate marina construction and/or dredging, (3) anticipate future dredging (meaning your home can be forced to move ‘indefinitely’ in advance of some future date of dredging, and (4) allow another home to relocate if your home is in the way of the other home’s new location.   The ideas is that, if you don’t agree with or comply with the notice to move your home, landlords can evict you.  WHY THIS MATTERS TO YOU: Marina Owners are asking for the ability to move your home permanently against your will and have you pay for the cost of moving it.  Additionally, in real estate, you have heard “Location, location, location!”  A landlord’s ability to permanently relocate your floating home from an outside end slip (similar to a ‘penthouse’ location) to an inside, view-obstructed slip located a football field’s distance from your current location (similar to a ‘basement’ apartment location) will most definitely impact the value of your floating home.
  2. Upzoning and Increased Population Density Via Liveaboards: Marina Owners are asking for a state law to allows them to forgo numerous local planning agencies’ requirements for infrastructure, adequate resources, parking availability, environmental concerns,  etc. in order to allow liveaboards into your floating home community without proving that the facility can handle the extra congestion nor taking into account how having temporary residents that can start their motors and disappear into the night may affect permanent residents such as Floating Home Owners.
  3. Upzoning and Increased Population Density Via RV Parks:  Marina Owners are asking for a state law to allows them to forgo numerous local planning agencies’ requirements for infrastructure, adequate resources, parking availability, environmental concerns,  etc. in order to allow RV parks to be built out in their uplands areas without proving that the facility can handle the extra congestion nor taking into account how having temporary residents that can start their motors and disappear into the night may affect permanent residents such as Floating Home Owners.  Additionally, they want the right to create the parks on sensitive, protected wetlands.

After the introduction of these proposals from the Landlords, Tenants voiced their opinions and the group then discussed issues that Floating Home Owners were experiencing.

After the entire meeting was spent discussing these topics, it became clear to the meeting’s facilitators that there was enough content to work through that they established a Marina Issues Subcommittee to hear just the marina issues.  This separate group, comprised of Marina Landlords and Tenants, will work through various issues and proposed legislation together and then bring them to the larger MH Coalition which includes both Marinas and Manufactured Housing community stakeholders.

The successes of the April 17th MH Coalition meeting for Floating Home Owners is that their issues were heard by the very people who are tasked with drafting future legislation, that it was clear from the attendance that Floating Home Owners have long-needed a forum to discuss issues which affect them, and that the group established a dedicated Marina Issue Subcommittee so that we can continue to focus our efforts and work to find ways to protect our rights and have more stability in our tenancies so that we can more fully enjoy our floating home lifestyle.

At the close of the meeting, the Floating Home Owners felt hopeful and exchanged contact information so that they could continue to collectively build on the good work that had begun.  We realized that we have power in numbers and can actually do great work together.  Let’s do this!!

What to Expect at the April 17th MHC Meeting

Just to emphasize, this meeting and the topics discussed are important to you.  What is discussed and drafted about floating home law affects you and your property.  This is no joke.

WHY THIS MEETING MATTERS

Even if you love your marina owner and have no issues whatsoever, there is nothing stopping a marina owner from selling the marina to someone who runs it like a tyrant.

To be clear…the law (ORS 90.630) currently allows a marina owner to deliver an eviction notice to a floating home owner for breaking a marina rule.  This doesn’t have to be a severe rule such as physically threatening another tenant.  An eviction notice can be served for small infractions such as driving too fast through the marina parking lot.  You will then have 30 days to stop doing whatever it is that you received the eviction notice for and then the cause of the eviction is cured and there cannot be a legal eviction.

THIS IS WHERE IS GETS SCARY….if you commit the same rule infraction within 6 months, the law says that you can be evicted and your lease with the marina will terminate in 20 days…a lease termination doesn’t just mean that your person must vacate the premises, that means that as long as you own your home, your home is illegally occupying a slip upon termination.  You do have the right to court hearing, but it is not up to the judge to weigh in on the morality of the law.  Judges are there to uphold the law as written.  Most judges don’t understand floating home laws and what is at stake for floating home owners facing eviction…

A floating home which continues to occupy a slip after a successful eviction proceeding is deemed “abandoned property.” The law basically goes on to state (ORS 90.675)  that within about 65-75 days from the time of the eviction, you have to either (1) complete the move of your floating home out of the marina, or (2) complete the sale of your floating home to a new owner, or else your floating home is considered abandoned property and becomes the responsibility of the marina owner to dispose of.  Yes, that is correct.  You have about 65-75 days to to vacate or lose control of your property.

This can have devastating financial, personal and health impacts to you and your family. And, at this meeting on April 17th, the landlords wish to discuss ways to make it easier to evict tenants and other issues important to floating home owners.

We are Thrilled that You are Coming to the Meeting to Defend your Rights

We’ve put together a primer on what to expect at the MHC meeting on  Tuesday, April 17th, 9am to noon, at MultiFamily NW (16083 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road, Suite 105, Tigard, OR).

When you arrive at MultiFamily NW, greet the receptionist and she will direct you to the conference room behind her where the meeting will be held.

There will likely be some coffee and water, and sometimes there are snacks. Feel free to come a few minutes early and introduce yourselves to other meeting attendees.

WHO WILL BE THERE?

Typically, attendees fall into 4 categories:

(1) Landlord representation (park and marina owners, their attorneys, and leaders from associations which advocate for landlords rights)

(2) Tenant representation (manufactured house and floating home homeowners, and leaders from associations which advocate for tenant rights) / NOTE: Typically, other than one of the leaders of the meetings (John VanLandingham), there is no contingency of attorney representation for tenants.  If you are a tenant and an attorney, would love to have more representation to advocate for tenant rights under ORS 90.505.

(3) Association  Leaders (representation from nonprofit associations which advocate for landlords and tenants like OSTA, MHCO, CASA, and others)

(4) Elected Government Official Representation (representatives from the offices of our elected officials in congress)

In a typical MHC meeting, there are more landlord attorneys present than there are landlords.  You can identify them fairly easily because they are typically dressed up for the occasion – cufflinks, designer watches and suits, ties or jackets.  You can identify many of the tenants because the majority of the tenants come from retirement parks and do not sport business attire.

Sit anywhere you want.  Landlords seem to collect together on one side of the room while tenants take the other.  But there is no rule, it is just something we’ve observed.

Two attorneys lead the meetings.  John VanLandingham (representing a voting member for the tenant side) and John DiLorenzo (representing a voting member for the landlord side) take turns facilitating the meeting.  April 17th will be hosted by John DiLorenzo.

INTRODUCTIONS

When the meeting starts, there will be introductions – we all go around the room and introduce ourselves.  Typically, attendees state their name and whether or not they are a landlord or tenant (or attorney or association representative) and many state which park or marina they are from.  You do not have to offer information about which marina you live in, if you are not comfortable sharing that information, but we’d love to know that you are a marina resident.

INFORMATION SHARING

This is a time where anyone can bring up new events that have happened in the last month.  This could be an update on the edits to the laws as they move through legislative sessions, or perhaps someone from Congress has tasked this group to focus on a particular issue, or someone reports back in on an assignment given during a previous meeting.

AGENDA

There are 3 major topics on this meeting’s agenda.  This is a very special meeting for marina tenants.  This is the first-ever meeting focused on marinas.

(1) Marina and Floating Home Law

(2) Terminations / Evictions

(3) Future Legislative Issues identification (which are not already being discussed)

 

The first 2 agenda items above are extremely important to floating home owners.  Following is a list of topics that are on the agenda for April 17th and why they matter to you.

During this portion of the meeting, do not be shy, speak up.  If you have a perspective to share on one of the specific topics being debated, let’s hear it!

AGENDA ITEM 1: Marina and Floating Home Law

  1. Landlords would like to be able to require you to perform float work as a contingency to moving in. Currently, landlords do not have the right to force a floating home owner to do work on the float prior to moving in.  Landlords are not experts on floats and it could lead to a gross abuse of power by allowing another excuse for a marina owner to be able to reject a new tenant or stop a floating home purchase.
  2. Manufactured home tenants benefit from a variety of laws regarding submetering of utilities.  Some marina tenant utilities are submetered.  If you are experiencing any issues with landlords not being transparent about sub metering billings, please come to this meeting and let us know!  Currently, we have not heard of any issues, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
  3. If a marina owner decides to close the marina, the current laws which guides this process are inadequate (ORS 90.671) and can bankrupt a floating home owner if a marina owner chooses to repurpose the marina.  The law states that the marina owner must give the floating home owners a 365-day notice so that the home owner can find another moorage to move the house to.  Currently, there are about 30 potential slips that could be either rented (floating home owner to bear the move in fees ranging from $20,000 to $50,000) or a slip can be purchased (floating home owner to bear the slip purchase amount from $100,000 to $450,000) IF your floating home can tolerate being moved and if your house fits into one of these slips.  So, if your marina has more than 30 houses in it when it is converted to another use, then some of the floating homes will need to be disposed of – essentially taking your home to a negative value.  The current majority thought about this topic from MHC meeting participants (landlords) is that this isn’t an issue because a marina owner probably would not close a marina or convert the space to another use.  However, no one can stop a marina owner from making a bad business decision and taking our floating homes with him.  Additionally, this is precisely the issue that almost brought down Seattle’s floating home communities in the 1980s.  So, it IS important that we address the current law’s inadequacy.
  4. A landlord’s duty to maintain habitability of the rented space has a different dynamic for floating home owners than it does for manufactured home parks tenants and the current law (ORS 90.730) does not address some very key ways in which marina landlords could and should be responsible for habitability conditions.  Currently, landlords have no legal responsibility to maintain safe ramps, docks and parking areas, or access roads – which are our only means of accessing our rented slips. When emergency crews cannot get to our houses during periods of snow or ice because a landlord was too cheap to shovel, plow or salt access roads and common areas, the result could be death.  Nor do marina owners have any legal responsibility to ensure that the slips we rent are deep enough that our homes do not hit bottom.  When a floating home hits bottom, it can cause considerable damage to a floating home in addition to all sorts of plumbing and standard of living issues.  While landlords contend that it would be “ridiculous” for marina owners to be held responsible for dredging, we feel that it is a topic that is worth being considered.  Additionally, many marinas have issues with No Wake zones being enforced and, as many of us have have experienced, a boat traveling fast can damage a floating home.  Currently, the law (ORS 90.730 [3][g]) makes it the park landlord’s responsibility to maintain the rented ground and space in a safe condition to be deemed habitable by a manufactured home, but there is no law that requires a marina landlord to ensure the slip is deep enough nor to take steps to protect floating homes from damage by posting No Wake signage or buoys.
  5. Manufactured dwelling park owners are currently required by law  to register with the state (ORS 90.732) and take continuing education classes (ORS 90.734) in order to help them keep up on laws and management issues.  There is no such requirement of floating home marina owners or managers.  We have heard enough horror stories of marina landlords violating the rights of tenants, that we think it would be wise for landlords to register and take education classes so that they keep up with current laws and landlord-tenant requirements.
  6. Floating home owners lack protections from marina owners selling the marina. Most of Seattle’s floating home communities are owned by their residents – they own their floating homes and their slips.  They enjoy a stability that floating homes in rented slips do not – not only increased home value, but peace of mind, as well. In 2014, new Oregon law (ORS 90.840 – 90.850) was passed to help manufactured housing park tenants buy their parks.  Tenants benefit from learning when a park owner intends to sell, gives them an opportunity to purchase the park before any outside buyer, allows them additional time to organize and helps them find funding to purchase their own parks. Floating home owners would benefit from the same laws to help us buy our marinas and create housing stability. Current laws (ORS 90.805 – 90.830) about marina owners selling the marina only require notice to be given if there is a tenant’s association and that association has requested notification.  Your marina could be sold without you knowing it, if your marina does’t even have an association.
  7. Manufactured housing parks and marina tenants are given the same legally protected process (ORS 90.600 [5]) to resolve issues with their landlords – The Committee of Seven.  However, unlike park tenants, the laws don’t protect marina tenants when the marina owner won’t meet with or consider the issues the Committee raises.  For parks tenants, the law (ORS 90.600[5][b]) goes a step further and provides consequences if the landlord refuses to work with the Committee of Seven, and further protect tenants by giving them access to free resources and mediation they can use to help work through their landlord-tenant issues when a landlord isn’t following the law.  It is a great benefit to park tenants to have access to knowledge and expertise they can use without having to retain legal representation in order to ensure their legal rights are not being violated, and floating home marina tenants serve those protections and helpful resources, too.

AGENDA ITEM 2: Terminations / Evictions

Landlords want to make it easier to evict tenants.  They want as many possible reasons to evict you as they can get.  They do not like limits placed on their ability to evict a tenant.

  1. Currently, as stated before, a landlord can begin the eviction process for a violation of any marina rule (ORS 90.630), but there is some ambiguity about what a ‘material violation’ of a marina or park rule means.  This ambiguity can be misinterpreted by marina owners and tenants.  We are in the process of negotiating with landlords to try to clear up the confusion and further define which rule violations could trigger an eviction proceeding and which rule violations would not.  It is not ok to lose your floating home because you were seen speeding in the marina parking lot twice within 6 months.
  2. Currently, you can be evicted is your house is in disrepair (ORS 90.632).  There is some ambiguity around the language legally required to be in the notice of termination when the reason is for disrepair.  This can lead to tenants not knowing what they need to do in order to not be evicted.  We are trying to clear up this language.
  3. Currently, the law does not require a landlord to tell you what they expect you to do to “cure” a violation when giving an eviction notice for any reason.  This can lead to a tenant resolving the issue in a way that is unacceptable to the landlord and can result in a subsequent eviction.  We are trying to clear up this language.
  4. If you are served an eviction notice, you are given 30 days to cure the violation.  There is some ambiguity in the language because it doesn’t address violations which are separate and distinct (e.g. physically threatening another tenant) and continuous (e.g. unpaid property taxes).  While separate and distinct violations could have a shorter eviction period to cure, some ongoing violation might need longer periods to cure.
  5. This question has been raised – Should pet violations be treated differently altogether and given longer time periods to cure since removing a pet may put its life at risk. YES!
  6. This question has been raised – Should we consider warning notices or fees, rather than eviction notices for minor rule infractions? YES!
  7. Currently, a landlord who sends an eviction notice does not have to tell you that you have cured the violation to their satisfaction.  This can lead to a tenant who think they have cured it until they are served eviction papers.  We want to require landlords to approve the cure in writing.

 

AGENDA ITEM 3: Future Legislative Issues identification

If you have an issue that is important to you and has not been covered in the previous agenda items, this is a time to bring it up.

Given the laws in other states, and given the available slip shortage on the Willamette, the Columbia and the Multnomah Channel, and the lack of any future slips being permitted at this time, it is imperative that we do more to protect our assets and ourselves from evictions.  California has laws which describe a short list of things you can get evicted from a floating home marina for – thereby taking some power out of the hands of landlords, whereas in Oregon, you can get evicted for violating any number of marina rules.  California also doesn’t allow landlords to restrict a floating home owner’s ability to rent out their own floating home.  Seattle law allows is more lenient with regard to rule violations – tenants there can violate a marina rule up to 3 times in a 12-month period before an eviction notice is served, compare that to Oregon which is 2 times in 6 months and you are out.  In Idaho, floating home owners are given 90 day eviction notices, compare that to Oregon’s 20- and 30-day evictions.  It would be interesting to see what other legislation we can propose to protect the investments in our homes.

 

We know this is lot to digest, especially if this is your first time.  But legislative changes will be made in 2019 on these very topics.  This is the group that drafts that legislation.  We hear ideas and draft the legislation.  Then when we reasonably agree on the draft, we present it to the legislators who present it for consideration and a vote in Salem.

This group is now calling on marina tenants to share their thoughts and ideas.  Your input can directly affect your rights.  Please come and tell us what experiences you are having related to these issues.  Other issues regarding floating home law are not currently up for debate for the 2018-19 legislative session, but can be mentioned and considered for the following legislative session.  There is only so much we can do in a year.

In-person participation is always better – it is difficult to follow who is saying what when you participate remotely.  That said, we understand that not everyone can allow the time to participate in person.  If you must call in, please remember to mute your phone.  Call-in number: 515-604-9000; passcode 948800

We can’t wait to see you on Tuesday!

 

 

 

MHC Coalition Meeting – Focus on Marina Legislation

The MHC (Manufactured Housing Coalition) is meeting on April 17th to discuss marina landlord-tenant legislation.

Marina residents are encouraged to attend.  Your rights are being discussed.

These agenda items came out of a need to increase protections for floating homeowners to bring them in line with newer legislation that was enacted for manufactured dwelling park homeowners.  Here are the items that are being debated.

1. Park landlords are required to register with the state and take continuing education courses to stay current on laws and park management issues. ORS 90.732, 90.734.  Given that many floating home marina owners are unaware that there are laws which prevent them from doing certain things, we feel that it is in the best public interest for marina landlords to be required to attend continuing education classes.  However, both landlords and tenants contend that it may be difficult to find qualified people to teach those kinds of marina management classes because of the small community of experts available.  This is currently being discussed in prep for the 2019 legislative session.

2. Park and marina tenants can form a Committee of Seven to help them work with the owners to improve quality of life issues (rule changes, allowing currently forbidden activities, etc.), however if the marina owner fails to work with the Committee of Seven, marina tenancies are not covered by the Manufactured Communities Resource Center like park tenants are and therefore cannot benefit from the MCRC’s education and mediation. Marina residents also do not pay into the $10 annual special assessment paid by MH park tenants, to support MCRC. ORS 90.600 (5)(b), 446.515 – 446.547.  This is currently being discussed in prep for the 2019 legislative session.  The current issue is that the relationship between a floating home tenant and owner is very one-sided.  If a tenant requests that the marina owner change something at the marina, or the owner states that a tenant is in violation of some rule that isn’t even a valid rule,  currently there is nothing to require a marina owner to at least respond to the marina tenant requests nor to attempt a mediation.  At that point, the only recourse available is through expensive litigation.  If you receive an eviction notice, you must go to court to defend yourself, since you have no state-sponsored access to free dispute resolution services that park tenants do.  The proposal is that floating homeowners would pay $10 into a yearly special assessment fee in order to have access to the dispute resolution services rather than taking on the expense of hiring an attorney, going to court and letting a judge decide your fate.

3. For parks owners, there is a landlord habitability duty to maintain the surface of the space under the home. ORS 90.730 (3) (g).  This item is not currently being discussed because there are no floating homeowners which attend the MHC meetings who are from the marina where floating houses hit bottom annually and remain tilted until river water levels increase .  If this is an issue that can be resolved, then come to the meetings and voice your concern.  Landlords and their attorneys have spoken and they contend that it is unreasonable for a landlord to dredge to protect homes.  That said, there is current discussion in prep for the 2019 legislative session around extending these laws to require marina owners to maintain certain common areas in habitable condition – such a docks, ramps, and walkways.

4. Park tenants are given the first opportunity to purchase their park prior to a park owner putting it up for sale. ORS 90.840 to .850. Marinas operate under the pre-2014 law. ORS 90.805 – 90.830.  This item is up for discussion in the current 2019 legislative session.  Marina residents lack some of the purchase tools that park residents have, such as the capital gains break for landlords who sell to the residents or a nonprofit (See chapter law following ORS 316.792) and the Oregon Affordable Housing Tax Credit (ORS 317.097). An equivalent to the Manufactured Dwelling Park Nonprofit Cooperative, ORS 62.800 – 62.815 does not exist.  Updating this law to come into line with similar provisions for manufactured homeowners would be VERY beneficial for floating home owners.  This law would require marina owners to notify floating homeowners they they have interest in selling the marina and provide the tenants with the opportunity to purchase the marina themselves – thereby converting their rented slips into owned slip (this would increase each home owner’s property value since houses in owned slips are worth more than those in rented slips). This law would also provide resources and assistance throughout the purchasing process.

5. Provisions regarding park closure should a landlord choose to repurpose the land, including required landlord payments to displaced tenants and state tax credit. ORS 90.645 – 90.660. Marinas operate under the pre-2007 law. – ORS 90.671.  It is not likely that a marina would repurpose the leased waterfront for something more profitable to them than a floating house marina and boat slips, so there is not a sense of urgency to make changes to this.  However, laws do exist which direct marina landlords what to do in such a case (ORS 90.671) and those directives are grossly inadequate and could bankrupt floating home owners at that marina should the event occur.

See the EVENTS page for details about the time, date and location of the meeting.  Help spread the word!