Thread by @shayshinecastle

Hey, #Boulder. Happy Tuesday. Council is back after a brief respite.

At the risk of sounding *incredibly* lame, I kinda missed you.

Here's what's on tap tonight: Two public hearings, related to the issuance of $20M in certificates of participation to fund construction of the "backbone" of an eventual fiber internet system. Council OK'd using debt back in June 2018: dailycamera.com/2018/06/12/wit…

We last visited this in April, when council decided to spend $2.3M extra to connect low-income communities and other key areas to the backbone. boulderbeat.news/2019/04/23/cou…

Council is also having a public hearing on adoption of its mobile home strategy. (AKA manufactured housing) Fun fact: mobile home actually refers to pre-June 15, 1976 structures. Everything after that is manufactured housing. boulderbeat.news/2019/02/24/mob…

We're also going to have a very short but interesting discussion on lifting some zoning restrictions on *really* small parts of the Hill. In 1995, some areas were downzoned with an "overlay zone" bc of neighborhood concern.

Now, a developer wants to build a triplex. But the area (again, which is super small) can only allow one or two single-family homes. So council may explore lifting that overlay zone. Tonight they'll give staff direction on looking into that.

Surprisingly, a pretty full council chambers tonight considering there's no open comment. I see at least one city council candidate and some people in suits, which are usually lawyers or developers.

Since they aren't accompanied by a gaggle of thin, blonde wives in high heels, I'm going to say lawyers. But you never know.

Seriously, this is a very crowded meeting for two pretty non-controversial public hearings. I wonder if I'll find out why... Stay tuned.

Getting started a bit late. Every council member is here.

Forgot to remind you that we're starting late bc of National Night out. That's why we don't have open comment.

Something new on the agenda: Young and Yates want to add a ballot measure to extend the .15% sales tax to go toward paying for a conservation easement at Longs Gardens, rather than open space generally. We visited this at the last meeting: boulderbeat.news/2019/07/25/cou…

This just adds that option (Longs Gardens funding) to the three other options that were proposed. A public hearing on Aug. 20 will narrow those down to one for the voters.

A dozen or so people are leaving; they were clearly here for Longs Gardens.

Now we're moving onto the manufactured housing strategy: www-static.bouldercolorado.gov/docs/4A_Manufa…

(That was the staff presentation, btw.)

"People in these communities are involved in their communities," Kurt Firnhaber says, director of housing and human services. "They had a lot of impact in the whole process of where we got today."

The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan includes a section on preserving and developing manufactured housings, with the following goals:
• Retain manufactured housing as a housing option
• Preserve existing manufactured home communities (MHCs)....

...• Develop new MHCs
• Increase Resident-owned Communities
• Reduce/eliminate health + safety issues
• Re-house displaced households

The suggested actions in the strategy fall under these categories:
1. Infrastructure
2. Pad Rent Stabilization
3. Licensing
4. Energy Efficiency
5. Land Use Code

Fun fact: There are 1,286 households in four mobile home parks within city limits; 2.8% of city's housing stock
Boulder Meadows: 633 units
Mapleton: 155
Orchard Grove: 216
Vista Village: 302

CU Boulder did a survey of the four parks to determine who those households are. Very low response rate (19.8%) but some key findings:
Owner occupied: 77% in mobile home parks
Boulder as a whole: 48%

Children under 18 in mobile homes: 25%
Boulder: 19%

60+ in mobile homes: 47%
Boulder: 15%

Latino: 26%
Boulder: 9%

Social security income: 41%
Boulder: 18%

Household income under $40K: 76%
Boulder: 26%

So basically, mobile home parks have more of our city's kids, seniors, low-income and Latinx residents.

"A lot of disparity," councilwoman Morzel notes.

That's part of why the city is doing a mobile home strategy. Boulder has already made some strides to preserve this type of housing, by designating specific manufactured housing zones so the parks can't be redeveloped into anything else.

One action council might consider in the future is allowing more types of housing in the Manufactured Housing zones, including tiny homes, modular homes, fixed foundations, etc.

Another reason for the strategy is that, although mobile homes remain a relatively affordable housing option, they have been getting more expensive. The avg. mobile home in Boulder costs $72K. Average lot rent is $700-$800 a month.

And the communities themselves are in rough shape:

"In the last decade, the city has also received numerous complaints from residents ranging from degraded conditions in a given community, to park rules disallowing the sale of homes built (b4 1976) to unfair billing practices and costs, harassment and unfair treatment.”

That's from the memo.

Infrastructure is a *major* concern. It will cost $52.5M-$112.5M to replace water infrastructure in the four parks; $49K-$105K per home

Mobile home park owners are either unable to afford replacements and repairs or unwilling to pay for it. It's an odd legal duck, bc it's private property, so the city can't do much. The strategy includes options for city funding in exchange for voluntary limits on rent increases.

OK, we're talking other potential actions Boulder can take (if it adopts this strategy) Here's the two-pager on that: www-static.bouldercolorado.gov/docs/Action_Pl…

But I'll summarize that for you here, bc that's my job.

There's a dude in an NRA hat here. Not something you see every day at a Boulder City council meeting.

OK, back to mobile homes. Remember those categories I shared? Here's some details (sorry, I'm a bit behind the staff presentation).

Infrastructure: There are “several formidable challenges” to providing public water and sewer services, including “substantial legal complexity” and the potential loss of homes, as well as increased utility costs for residents.

Actions will instead focus on incentivizing owners to make upgrades. Including:
Explore creation of local standards for MHC water and sewer service performance and reliability and associated monitoring and enforcement mechanisms...

...Collaborate with each MHC to identify any code constraints on utility improvements and develop options to address them
Require MHCs to provide plans for infrastructure maintenance, infrastructure replacement and service interruption response ...

Create a requirement for MHC owners to pay MHC residents the cost of alternative lodging in the event of a prolonged water or sewer service disruption

Land use: “The primary impediment to creating a new MHC is land availability and cost.”

A parcel inventory will be done to look for potential areas.

Pad rent stabilization:
Pursue voluntary agreements between the city and MHC owners
Support state legislation to enable pad rent stabilization
Complete legal analysis for a pad rent stabilization ordinance

Two park owners are interested in voluntary limits, according to staff. They didn't say which ones.

Licensing: Creating a city licensing program is not recommended. More ordinances and increased enforcement are better options, staff says.

Among those enforcement options are:
Add a Manufactured Housing Specialist position to implement monitoring and compliance for local ordinances and serve as a resource to MHC residents and owners

Provide clear information on how to pursue compliance under city ordinances....

.... Implement minimum standards for MHC owners’ communications with residents

Eviction process requirements to include notification to city and county human services partners

Require posting of MHC utility bills if utilities are charged separately

OK, last action category: Energy Efficiency: Energy Impact Offset Fund could be used to benefit mobile homes; climate staff is exploring options.
Possible actions:
Explore locations, etc. for establishing modular home production facility

Pursue solar garden for Q3 2019

The city is looking at building modular homes in Ponderosa, which it owns. It's talking with Habitat for Humanity for that.

Firnhaber says they're looking for a warehouse-type space to build those.

RE: The solar garden: It wouldn't be located in the mobile home park, but the residents there would subscribe to it. I think they're exploring that for Ponderosa.

Morzel wants to look at allowing mobile homes in other zoning areas. "I want to make sure you're looking at these other zones."

Firnhaber has testified before that you can put 15 mobile homes on an acre. But you need more than that to create a cohesive community.

OK, found it in my Hogan Pancost story from October: Firnhaber says mobile home communities need 10-15 acres to be financially viable.

Jones asking why is this strategy focused on the city only? We have more mobile home parks outside our city limits, under Boulder County's purview. Table Mesa Village, San Souci, San Lazaro are all eligible for annexation, staff says.

Staff is working a little bit with the county, but the focus is on what Boulder can do right now.

We're talking a bit about park capacity. Bc so many of these were built in the 50s and 60s, they were built for older, smaller homes. Usually single-wide. Newer homes are often larger. Having too many of them strains the infrastructure and has contributed to code non-compliance..

.. in regards to setbacks and fire safety, etc.

Young asks some qs about licensing. Staff has not recommended a city licensing program bc it doesn't really fit within existing purview. There are business license and rental licenses, but this is kind of both. Neither really fit mobile home parks.

But the city can get at its goals to protect residents through various ordinances, staff says. Here are the possible ones that will be explored in the future (again, if this strategy is adopted):

Right of first refusal for residents to purchase communities

Require park owners to pay for alternative lodging in the event of a water or sewer disruption...

...Require specific lease provisions, including: minimum term of lease, schedule for rent increases, details of all fees and charges on top of base rent, description of pad location and dimensions, maintenance requirements of residents, restrictions...

...Communication requirements, including regular on-site manager office hours, English and Spanish notifications, all-hour contact information

Require parks to share their utility bills in parks where homes are charged separately, to ensure no markups or price gouging...

...Require notification of human service partners in event of eviction....

... Require parks to “provide the city with an accurate infrastructure system documentation, a plan for infrastructure maintenance, infrastructure replacement schedule and financing plan, and a service interruption response plan that includes adequate notice to residents.”

Here's a little two-pager on those ordinances that could be pursued in the future: www-static.bouldercolorado.gov/docs/MHS_Ordin…

Something I didn't mention above when it comes to what Boulder has done for mobile home owners already. They have a grant program that gives up to $10K for repairs and upkeep on mobile homes. That could expand, if funding was found.

Now public hearing. 16 ppl signed up. Yay, Boulder! I'm so glad you turned out for this.

Tina Boguhn from Ponderosa, which the city bought and is annexing, is here. She's concerned about displacement. "We have nothing legal and binding that is securing our future there. We've lost 12 families already. People are getting nervous."

"It doesn't make sense to spend all this money to put in affordable housing for other ppl, bc the ppl that live there" aren't staying. Boguhn is asking for a legally binding contract that residents can stay. "A lot of things have been subject to change."

Charissa Poteet, also from Ponderosa, is saying residents were told $745-$795 monthly costs for a new Habitat home to replace their mobil homes, but now that is going up. She's been here before to speak about broken promises and displacement.

"The gov't long arm of encroachment is laying on the backs of its poorest residents," Poteet says.

"The city plan is making Ponderosa a place we don't want to live in. They're adding more homes, crowding residents."

Tanya Petty from Vista Village has been coming to council since 2014 bc of "water issues." People have been charged "thousands of dollars" for water they're not using.

This is something I've heard from advocates and county staff here and elsewhere around the state, that water pricing is not transparent and that park owners often charge more and sometimes use price gouging as retaliation for complaints.

We need more enforcement, Petty says. "No one is willing to make complaints bc of fear."

Brad Olsen, also from Vista Village, is here on behalf of that community and Orchard Grove and Mapleton. "City has done an excellent job" of doing a "thoughtful" process in developing the mobile home strategy.

It's important to get stakeholder feedback on ordinances before they are released for first reading, Olsen says.

"Our parks are not home to just or mostly vulnerable residents." Vista Village average income is $50K, he says.

Kathy Newland, who owns and manages Vista Village, says "of course we're going to have unhappy residents." Also says she's invited council members but no one has showed up.

"We are at full capacity. As soon as a house is ready to move out, it's sold. We're on a waiting list. They're going for very high prices. We do have unhappy ppl, but we have a majority of happy people."

"We will do anything we can to help our residents," she says.
Laughter from the audience.

Morzel says she went to an eviction hearing for a Vista Village resident, and the attorney for the park asked to have her removed.

"That didn't feel good," Morzel says.

"It doesn't feel good to be mocked by a bunch of ppl in the audience," Newland says.

Sarah Ruittn from Orchard Grove is here, giving an update on the water situation there. (Remember that outage a few months ago?) Two shutoff valves have been installed and a mapping done, Ruittn says

Weaver: Have you provided a copy of that mapping to the city? Bc that was a problem during the outage.
No, Ruittn says.
Weaver requests that. She agrees but throws in a jab that the city also didn't provide maps to the park during that outage.

"We're a company that stands behind doing the right thing," Ruittn says. "We stand behind our values."

These park owners are defensive.

Virginia Zukowski from Orchard Grove (a resident) is speaking now. That community has not had an on-site manager "since well before our water crisis; only temp managers sent from other properties."

But she just spoke with Ruittn and that is being rectified.

Tawney Peyton is here repping the mobile home industry in the Rocky Mountain region. "We have been actively involved" in developing the mobile home strategy, but "we do not believe any of our input was included in the strategy."

She is not in favor of "additional oversight" at the local level, given that the state just passed some protections. What a shocker.

But she is in favor of promoting mobile home parks and development of new ones. Another shocker.

Nikhil Mankekar, chair of the Human Relations Commission, says top priorities should be: a full-time code enforcement official just for mobile home parks. The issue comes up "repeatedly" in attending meetings and talking with mobile home residents.

"Since 2015 we've been passing good laws, but if we don't have the means to enforce them, it's all for naught."

Infrastructure needs are huge, too, Mankekar says. I understand it's expensive, but this is a health issue. "People need clean water and honest billing."

Last thing: Residents need help navigating the Section 8 voucher application process. "Just directing them to a website isn't cutting it." Asks for formal assistance.

Aimee M. Bove, a lawyer for mobile home parks, is here on behalf of Boulder Meadows. "Boulder Meadows is proud to be part of Boulder, and I think Boulder can be proud of Boulder Meadows as well."

Some concerns with the proposed ordinances: How do these work with the mobile home park act and what may be coming next year at the state level? Bove asks.

Offers her services in drafting any ordinances with the city.

Now I know who all the suits are here. Mobile home park people.

Dona Bhavani, a resident of Boulder Meadows, says the park had two rent increases this year. "We're also experiencing diminishing resources."

"I know Boulder is committed to homeless people. I think they are committed to preventing people from becoming homeless as well," Bhavani says, asking for rent control or other ways to keep costs down.

Dorie Glover, a Vista Village resident: "all of your efforts have not proved successful. The ordinances are not enforced; the fear is tremendous."

"These people" (park owners) "stand up and lie," Glover says. Section 8 is not being accepted by our management. "Every time you make some sort of effort to protect vulnerable people in the parks, it's completely undermined."

"The fear... if I were secure in the knowledge that I wouldn't be evicted for no apparent reason, I would invest in energy efficiency. But that would be insane for any of us to do it when we could be evicted at any time for no reason."

Christian Hendrickson, a lawyer with the Rocky Mountain Home Association (industry group of mobile home parks). "There are multiple sides to all these issues." Asks for "industry concerns" to be considered in the strategy adoption.

"We're all about carrots," Hendrickson says. "Rent subsidies, rezoning, pushing on our friends at the county to free up some space."

Not so much for the carrots. Calls rent control "over-regulation."

Asks council to "keep in mind" the cost for infrastructure upgrades when they hear about rent increases. "State law has just changed. You should see how that plays out before you put too much regulation on this industry."

Brockett pushing back: We've heard from Orchard Grove on what they're doing. Are other parks undertaking major infrastructure improvements? We'd like to hear about that.

James Feeney is up. So I get to use my favorite gif.

"Non-enforcement of the laws is no less racist than over-enforcement of the laws," Feeney says. Residents are too afraid to speak out against park owners bc of the "ever-present threat of eviction."

Elizabeth Herndorf accidentally talks about the traffic study at Alpine Balsam. Jones reminds her that this hearing is for the mobile home strategy. But she keeps talking.

Reminder: Alpine Balsam public hearing is on August 27.

Renee Hummel, resident of Vista Village: "I do think this is a good park. I do appreciate the work (the owners) do to keep it a nice park. At the same time, there are dissatisfied residents; more than they know, bc of the fear of eviction. People are forced out."

Speaks to the lawyer (Hendrickson) who spoke in favor of rent subsidies: "Then why don't they accept Section 8 vouchers?"

That wraps the public hearing. Staff is answering some of the speakers' concerns.

Firnhaber: Monthly costs of the replacement homes in Ponderosa will be tied to income. Housing costs are going to be $800/mo and up, depending on incomes.

That's slightly higher than lot rents now, which are $725 or so to $800ish, on average.

Carlisle: So are you saying none of the current residents are going to be priced out of Ponderosa?
Firnhaber: That's correct. If they stay in their mobile homes, they will keep renting as they are currently.

Morzel: Didn't we agree with mobile home owners that rent increases were limited to once a year?

City staff not sure about that. Tom Carr may be working on it, but he's not here.

Firnhaber: Owners of mobile home parks have to accept Section 8. They can't discriminate against that. Anyone having issues with that, contact the city.

(Boulder passed these protections last summer: dailycamera.com/ci_32093262/bo…

Morzel: I don't want to enforce so much that we're causing (cost) increases to Boulder, but these are residents of Boulder. They should have the same standards (of living) as everyone else.

"It shouldn't have to be on the residents to have to be the watchdog of their community," Morzel says.

Brings up the idea — again — of a new mobile home park at the airport property. "It's out of the floodplain; it's a beautiful site. We own that property, and it's really not of worth to the city and most people."

"I wouldn't say we don't have opportunities; we have a lot of opportunities. We have our RR and RE and RL zones."

That will never fly.... council didn't even want to subdivide and allow smaller homes there. No way those rich ppl are going to be OK with mobile homes.

Brockett having issue with the strategy's language that mobile homes should stay no more expensive than the average market-rate apartment. That's not really affordable anymore, he says.

Firnhaber says it's a %, not a $ amount. That's bc mobile home lot rents have increased more quickly than market rate apartment rents have in recent years. (~4.2% for lot rents, vs ~4% for 2BR apartments)

Staff will change the strategy language to reflect that.

Weaver: I encourage mobile home residents to stay engaged, bc that will help us prioritize what ordinances get brought forward.

"You're a critical part of our community," Morzel says to mobile home residents.

Council moves to adopt the manufactured housing strategy and action plan. Unanimous vote.

Audience applauds. That's it for this one; new thread coming for the broadband funding.

@threadreaderapp, please unroll. Thank you!