The Santa Paula Mobile Home Rent Review Commission on Wednesday adopted a written decision denying River's Edge Manufactured Housing Community LLC’s application for a net operating income adjustment at the 400 Mobile Estates and issued findings of fact, city staff said.

The decision, adopted as Resolution 25-02, formalizes the commission’s June 11 vote to deny the application and satisfies a city code requirement that a written decision with findings be issued no later than June 28, Monica Castillo, staff member, told the commission.

The commission did not reopen evidentiary deliberations at the June 25 meeting; staff asked commissioners to review the proposed written findings and identify any factual items that were considered at the hearing but are missing from the draft. "Our code requires that a written decision with findings of fact also be issued no later than June 28," Castillo said.

During the meeting the commission heard public comment from Lina Partida, who said she was supporting the commission’s prior decision to deny the application and described how space-rent bills in her park include utilities and other fees. "These are not separate made payments. These are all one payment that is made," Partida said, and she said her household pays about $567 for space rent and that, with utilities and other charges, the monthly bill runs closer to $900. She also listed small fees on the billing statement, saying "the rent control fee from the city, that's a $2 thing, and then an HCD law, which is another $10," and noted an additional $25 storage/vehicle fee in some cases. Partida concluded, "I'm in support of the commission's decision." (Public hearing on the application had closed at the prior meeting, the commission noted.)

The commission also reviewed a written submission from the law offices of Oscar C. Gonzalez, submitted on behalf of the applicant, asking that additional factual findings be added to the resolution. Castillo summarized the procedural limit on the submission: "You may consider this letter in these requests. However, if you did not use any of these points of facts to come to your decision last week, then you must disregard them," she said. Commissioners who spoke said they believed the facts raised in Gonzalez’s letter already were part of the record and had been weighed in the June 11 decision; one commissioner said the proposed additions "embellish" points already considered and are therefore not necessary for the resolution.

After discussion, a motion to adopt the proposed written findings and decision passed by voice vote and the commission adopted Resolution 25-02. The motion and second were not recorded by name in the transcript and the roll-call vote tally was not stated on the record; the minutes record only the adoption by voice vote.

The meeting record shows the commission treated the Gonzalez letter as a public comment/submission and did not incorporate new, unanalyzed facts into the decision. The commission adjourned immediately after adopting the resolution.

For the record, Chair Karen Harrison reminded attendees that the public hearing on the application had closed at the June 11 meeting and that new remarks at the June 25 meeting could not be used to reopen the commission’s deliberations on the substance of the application.