At a Tuesday meeting, Shasta County supervisors set a 30‑day deadline to revisit a mobile‑home rent‑stabilization ordinance after residents voiced concerns that Harmony Communities plans to raise lot rent from $625 to $985 on Dec. 1.
Background and presentation
Supervisors Allen Long and Chris Kelstrom invited Tehama County Supervisor Greg Jones to explain a similar ordinance Tehama is preparing. Jones said Tehama’s draft mirrors California’s AB 1482, which caps rent increases at 5 % plus the annual change in the Consumer Price Index, with an overall ceiling of 10 % in any 12‑month period. The state law does not apply to mobile‑home park leases, which Jones argues creates an unfair disparity.
Jones emphasized that the proposed ordinance would not set any starting rent; it would only limit how quickly existing lot rents could rise. “It’s temporary, it’s predictable, and it applies the same rule to everyone,” he said, adding that disputes would be handled in court, with owners able to petition a judge if they believed the cap prevented a fair return.
Local concerns
Mobile‑home owners from Riverland Mobilehome Ranch, Bixby Knolls, and Cottonwood Ridge testified that they own their homes but lease the land. Crystal Baker warned, “We own our homes, yet we risk losing them because we cannot afford the land beneath them.” Tenants fear the Dec. 1 increase could force them out of their homes.
Supervisor positions
Supervisor Long urged continued dialogue with Harmony Communities, hoping a private agreement could be reached before the deadline. He said, “I think there are steps in the intermediate that we can do to resolve this and try to get some mutual agreement.”
Supervisor Matt Plummer argued a law should be passed regardless of ongoing negotiations and questioned whether AB 1482 is appropriate for mobile‑home parks. “If you look at the other 12 counties that have rent‑stabilization ordinances for mobile homes … they tend to be more restrictive and have lower caps than the state bill,” he said. “I think there is a question of whether or not it makes sense to do rent‑increase caps at all.”
Supervisor Kevin Crye pushed for a swift answer, asking Long, “I want to hear what your plan is to give them an answer in 30 days.”
Timeline and next steps
The board voted unanimously to reconvene within 30 days if no agreement is reached between tenants and Harmony. The ordinance would take effect after its adoption, meaning the Dec. 1 rent hike would likely occur before the cap could apply, as Supervisor Plummer noted.
Jones warned that, because the ordinance includes a sunset provision in January 2030, any delay could leave residents without protection for the upcoming increase.
Implications for Shasta residents
Should the board adopt a model similar to Tehama’s, mobile‑home lot owners would gain a predictable ceiling on rent hikes, while still allowing market‑based starting rents for new tenants. The proposal aims to balance free‑market principles with protection for families who cannot move their homes.
Supervisors will meet again within the month to decide whether to move forward with the ordinance or continue negotiations with Harmony Communities.
Original reporting: Shasta Scout (Redding) — read the source article.
