City passes law aiding mobile-home owners
Advocates hope for state law covering park closings
By MARICELLA MIRANDA
Pioneer Press
www.twincities.com
Fri, Dec. 08, 2006
Mobile-home owners in Rosemount won a battle this week when it became the 19th city to establish a local park-closing ordinance in the state. But the homeowners hope the Legislature will craft a statewide law to protect their rights when parks are sold.
Mobile-home advocates are asking legislators to support a bill that would guarantee compensation for mobile-home owners if their parks were sold for redevelopment. The bill, which is being drafted now by the mobile-home advocacy group All Parks Alliance for Change (APAC), would be very similar to city ordinances around the state.
"The goal here is to try and give people some security," said Rep. Dennis Ozment, R-Rosemount, who plans to introduce a bill during the next legislative session. "It's time for us to revisit (the law) to make sure our laws are up to speed."
Supporters say high property values are leading to more mobile-home park closures for redevelopment and fewer moving options for residents. Fifteen parks have closed in Minnesota since 2004, leaving 906 parks according to the Housing Preservation Project.
Nationwide, nine states guarantee compensation for mobile-home owners during park closures, and four require compensation under certain conditions, said Margaret Kaplan, APAC staff attorney. Minnesota and California allow cities to require compensation, but the remaining 35 states have no laws requiring any form of compensation.
Minnesota created its law regulating mobile-home parks in 1982, said Dave Anderson,executive director of APAC. Lawmakers amended it five years later, requiring nine-month notification before park closings but didn't guarantee residents would be compensated for moving costs. Instead, cities would decide whether there should be compensation.
"We think it's time for the state to revisit the issue," Anderson said.
St. Anthony Village passed a park-closing ordinance last month and at least five other cities, including Anoka and Inver Grove Heights, are considering laws. Some cities, such as Lakeville, already have rejected ordinances. Advocates fear it will be a slow process for the other 381 cities with mobile-home parks to pass the law.
It took nearly two years for homeowners at Rosemount Woods, the city's only park, to persuade city leaders to approve a park-closing ordinance. A small group of residents celebrated the accomplishment with cake after the City Council meeting Tuesday.
"We're just excited they passed it," said Barbara Stanley, who has lived at Rosemount Woods mobile-home park for 14 years.
Rosemount's ordinance would require a developer to reimburse residents for moving costs, including expenses such as wheel and tire rentals and moving porches and decks. Residents would have to relocate their homes within a 25-mile radius of the park. If there was no space available within that distance, owners could sell their manufactured homes for either the tax-assessed or market values, which ever would be greater.
Rosemount's ordinance limits developers to paying moving costs up to 25 percent of the sale price or the tax-assessed value of the park, but city officials reserve the right to increase the cap.
A proposed bill would guarantee homeowners compensation for relocation, even if their city didn't have an ordinance. It would reimburse homeowners for moving garages and sheds, and compensate residents who rent their mobile homes. Compensation amounts are undecided.
The bill also would make it easier for residents to buy their mobile-home parks.
The next step for mobile-home advocates is to gain more support from lawmakers, Anderson said. "It really seems to make sense for the state to step forward and take a role."
