Camarillo City Council
AGENDA REPORT
Date: March 25, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
From: Greg Ramirez, City Manager
Submitted by: Bradley Calvert, Director of Community Development Subject: Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
BACKGROUND
In March of 2025, the City began receiving complaints regarding rent increases in mobilehome parks. The City Council on April 23, 2025, directed staff to research the issue of mobilehome rent stabilization. On May 15, 2025, the City Council voted to establish an ad hoc subcommittee on the topic of mobilehome rent stabilization. Currently, CMC Chapter 10.50 provides for voluntary mediation to assist parties in a rent dispute. Unlike most apartments and certain other residential rentals that are subject to statewide rent control, those state laws do not apply to rental amounts in mobilehome parks.
The ad hoc subcommittee met a total of four times prior to the adoption of the urgency ordinance on June 4, 2025, June 23, 2025, August 13, 2025, and September 15, 2025.
The subcommittee met with both representatives of the residents and the park owners during this period and received feedback. On October 22, 2025, the Council adopted an urgency ordinance establishing a temporary moratorium on rent increases above 4.2 percent at mobilehome Parks in the City for 180 days, expiring April 20, 2026.
The committee met an additional four times after the adoption of the urgency ordinance on November 19, 2025, January 29, 2026, February 3, 2026, and February 26, 2026. The committee directed staff to prepare a draft permanent ordinance. This draft ordinance was shared with the representatives of the park owners and residents on January 16, 2026.
The park owners provided verbal feedback at the January 29, 2026, subcommittee meeting, and requested additional time to review the draft ordinance. They provided proposed redlines to the ordinance on February 16, 2026, but clarified that they may have additional comments forthcoming. The park owners also provided a document outlining general points for a potential Memorandum of Understanding between the City and parks
Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
in lieu of an ordinance (attached). The representatives of the mobilehome park residents presented their feedback at the February 3, 2026, subcommittee meeting.
DISCUSSION
Resident feedback shared with staff and the subcommittee from March of last year to present can generally be summarized in the following main points:
Park land rents are generally higher than parks in surrounding communities with Rent Stabilization Ordinances (RSOs).
Land rent increases have a direct effect of reducing the resale value of their mobilehomes. A higher monthly land rent reduces their equity. Residents explained land rent increases already have a negative effect on resale values and further unregulated increases would worsen that circumstance. Many mobilehome residents are senior citizens on a fixed income. Due to the decrease in home value from rent increases, residents become effectively unable to relocate even if they wish to move. Many residents have difficulty affording alternative housing options, and it is cost prohibitive to move their mobilehome.
Residents are fearful future rent increases could jeopardize their ability to afford to live in their homes.
Park owner feedback is generally as follows:
Rent increases have generally been in line with the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Rising costs are related to park management, insurance, and other expenses necessitate rent increases.
Mobilehomes are an inherently depreciating asset; they are personal property rather than real estate, and mobile homeowners should not expect to have their equity grow over time. Additionally, the park owners have stated that the average home sales prices in the parks remain high.
An ordinance will create additional administrative burden for both the park owners and the City; the park owners suggest a Memorandum of Understanding be entered into in lieu of an ordinance.
The park owners already provide rental relief through the Manufactured Housing Educational Trust (MHET) Rental Assistance Program (RAP). The existing Landlord-Tenant Mediation Ordinance provides tenants an opportunity to raise rent-related issue with landlords.
In response to subcommittee direction, resident feedback, and park owner feedback, staff conducted further research and presented various datasets to the subcommittee. This included publicly available Zillow data related to listing prices and move-in land rent rates Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
for mobilehome parks throughout the county, data from neighboring jurisdictions, and data provided by the mobilehome park owners.
The City is home to three rental mobilehome parks with a total of 497 spaces. These are:
Camarillo Mobile Home Estates – 135 Spaces
Case Del Norte Mobile Home Park – 135 Spaces
Lamplighter Mobile Home Park – 227 Spaces
Camarillo Mobile Home Estates and Lamplighter Mobile Home Park are owned by Investment Property Group (IPG). Casa Del Norte is managed by Star Management.
Camarillo Mobile Home Estates and Casa Del Norte are both Senior Parks (55+) and Lamplighter is an all-ages park.
Staff analyzed RSOs applicable to mobilehome parks in neighboring jurisdictions. The cities of Oxnard, Santa Paula, Ventura, Thousand Oaks, and the County of Ventura all have mobilehome RSOs. A table contrasting the primary provisions of these ordinances is attached to the report. The ordinances allow increases based on CPI, Social Security Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA), or a percentage thereof. Additional increases above CPI or Social Security COLA are allowed on a discretionary basis by the jurisdictions. The Cities of Simi Valley and Fillmore have mobilehome parks, but do not have a RSO. The Cities of Ojai and Port Hueneme do not have any rental mobilehome parks within their jurisdiction. The City of Moorpark has an ordinance, but their one rental mobilehome park is administered by a non-profit housing organization so is not actively utilized.
Additionally, while the State of California does not have a generally applicable rent stabilization statute for most mobilehome parks, staff did analyze Civil Code Section 798.30.5, effective January 1, 2022, which is a mobilehome land rent stabilization state statute that applies to mobilehome parks covering more than one city boundary. This statute was enacted to address a peculiar circumstance in Orange County where the Anaheim Mobile Estates Park straddles the cities of Anaheim and Stanton. Neither City could institute rent stabilization that covered the whole park, so the state adopted a statute to do so. In that statute, the state capped rent increases at no more than 3 percent plus the percentage change in the consumer price index, or 5 percent, whichever is lower, of the lowest gross rental rate charged for a tenancy at any time during the 12 months prior to the effective date of the increase. Although the statute is currently in litigation, that litigation was not related to the caps, but due to the fact there was no mechanism to apply for a rent adjustment above the cap. The case is on appeal, but staff thought this information may be useful for the Council.
Below is a table based on a snapshot of Zillow Listing Data from June 2025 for rental mobilehome parks county-wide showing the average move-in land rent and the range of sales prices of mobilehomes for sale. For those parks where only one unit was listed for sale at the time of the snapshot, the lowest and highest listing prices are the same number.
Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
Mobilehome
Park Name City/Unincorporated
Rent Stabilization
Ordinance
Applicable to MHs?
Average
Move-in
Land Rent
of Units for
Sale
Lowest
Park Sales
Price
Listing
Highest
Park Sales
Price
Listing
Meiners Oaks
Trailer Park County of Ventura Yes $467 $119,000 $119,000 Mountain
View Mobile
Park Santa Paula Yes $540 $230,000 $230,000
Twin Palms
Mobile Home
Park Thousand Oaks Yes $601 $275,000 $275,000
Anacapa
Mobile Home
Park Santa Paula Yes $629 $285,900 $285,900
Victorian
Mobile Home
Park Ventura Yes $635 $324,000 $324,000
Stardust
Mobile Home
Park Ventura Yes $681 $495,000 $599,000
Ventu Villa
Estates Thousand Oaks Yes $681 $180,000 $219,000
Sunny Acres
Mobile Home
Park Oxnard Yes $700 $99,555 $99,555
Buenaventur
a Mobile
Home Estates Ventura Yes $700 $260,000 $425,000
Magnolia
Mobile Home
Park County of Ventura Yes $704 $395,000 $395,000
Thunderbird
Mobile Home
Club Thousand Oaks Yes $751 $330,000 $349,000
La Pasada Ventura Yes $756 $275,000 $300,000
Golden Oaks
MHP County of Ventura Yes $760 $325,000 $325,000
Imperial
Ventura Ventura Yes $827 $459,000 $459,000
Arroyo
Mobile Home
Park County of Ventura Yes $827 $178,500 $178,500
Ventu Estates Thousand Oaks Yes $874 $255,000 $380,000
Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
Ojai Villa County of Ventura Yes $899 $299,000 $319,000 Villa Arroyo Moorpark
Owned by nonprofit
dedicated to
affordability $899 $325,000 $325,000
Imperial
Oxnard Oxnard Yes $900 $147,000 $354,000
Del Francia
Park County of Ventura Yes $900 $245,000 $245,000
Lemonwood Ventura Yes $923 $327,000 $475,000
Ventura
Marina Senior
Community Ventura Yes $928 $469,000 $865,000
Vallecito
Estates Thousand Oaks Yes $936 $285,000 $379,000
Meadow Lake
Mobile Home
Park Oxnard Yes $1,050 $400,000 $485,000
Friendly
Village Senior
MHP Simi Valley No $1,100 $200,000 $200,000
Mira Valle
Park County of Ventura Yes $1,164 $299,000 $299,000
Tradewinds
Mobile Home
Park Simi Valley No $1,205 $230,000 $230,000
Ojai Oaks
Village County of Ventura Yes $1,272 $287,000 $349,000
El Dorado
Mobile Home
Estates Fillmore No $1,276 $225,000 $355,000
Oxnard Shore
Mobile Home
Park Oxnard Yes $1,386 $495,000 $699,000
Casa Del
Norte Camarillo No $1,500 $159,900 $314,999
Crest Mobile
Home Village Simi Valley No $1,600 $240,000 $240,000
Susana
Woods
Estates Simi Valley No $1,750 $280,000 $280,000
Simi Country
Estates Simi Valley No $1,850 $225,000 $240,000
Camarillo
Mobile Home
Estates Camarillo No $2,050 $39,500 $129,000
Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
Lamplighter Camarillo No $2,060 $210,000 $245,000
Lamplighter and Camarillo Mobile Home Estates have the highest move-in land rents for new buyers in the County. Case Del Norte’s move-in rent is more than $500 less than the other two rental parks in Camarillo but is higher than every mobilehome park with a RSO in the County. The average stabilized move-in land rent across parks in Ventura County subject to RSOs is $829. This is substantially less than the move-in land rents for each of Camarillo’s rental mobilehome parks. Differences in listing prices between Camarillo parks and surrounding jurisdictions are less stark. Listing price is influenced by a variety of factors including park location, physical condition of the mobilehome, land rent cost, and other factors. These listing prices are not averages, but the lowest and highest sales prices for units listed at the time. Camarillo Mobile Home Estates contained the unit with the lowest price point in the range of homes analyzed at $39,500.
Staff analyzed a snapshot of Zillow data again in February 2026 for comparison, shown in the table below. Not all the mobilehome parks from the June 2025 snapshot currently have units for sale, so those parks are omitted.
Mobilehome
Park Name City/Unincorporated
Rent
Stabilization
Ordinance
Applicable to
MHs?
Average Move-
in Land Rent of
Units for Sale
Lowest
Park Sales
Price
Listing
Highest
Park Sales
Price
Listing
Sunny Acres
Mobile Home
Park Oxnard Yes $639 $129,000 $204,000
Buenaventura
Mobile Home
Estates Ventura Yes $677 $259,900 $259,900
Ventu Villa
Estates Thousand Oaks Yes $681 $325,000 $325,000
La Pasada Ventura Yes $703 $239,900 $239,900
Thunderbird
Mobile Home
Club Thousand Oaks Yes $767 $239,500 $239,500
Anacapa
Mobile Home
Park Santa Paula Yes $780 $270,000 $320,000
Ventura
Marina Senior
Community Ventura Yes $812 $449,999 $624,000
Del Francia
Park County of Ventura Yes $818 $129,000 $257,000
Ojai Villa County of Ventura Yes $866 $285,000 $299,999 Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
Lemonwood Ventura Yes $915 $435,000 $435,000
Vallecito
Estates Thousand Oaks Yes $934 $265,000 $419,950
Imperial
Oxnard Oxnard Yes $981 $199,999 $240,000
Villa Arroyo Moorpark
Owned by
nonprofit
dedicated to
affordability $989 $299,000 $440,000
Mira Valle Park County of Ventura Yes $1,003 $260,000 $260,000 Friendly Village
Senior MHP Simi Valley No $1,100 $259,000 $328,900
Meadow Lake
Mobile Home
Park Oxnard Yes $1,132 $375,000 $435,000
El Dorado
Mobile Home
Estates Fillmore No $1,250 $120,000 $344,900
Ventu Estates Thousand Oaks Yes $1,279 $239,000 $239,000 Oxnard Shore
Mobile Home
Park Oxnard Yes $1,380 $375,000 $649,000
Ojai Oaks
Village County of Ventura Yes $1,400 $439,000 $439,000
Casa Del Norte Camarillo No $1,500 $180,000 $305,000
Crest Mobile
Home Village Simi Valley No $1,600 $227,500 $227,500
Susana Woods
Estates Simi Valley No $1,750 $175,000 $179,000
Simi Country
Estates Simi Valley No $1,783 $153,000 $224,000
Camarillo
Mobile Home
Estates Camarillo No $2,060 $99,900 $315,000
Lamplighter Camarillo No $2,075 $87,500 $229,500
The results of this more recent analysis show a very similar pattern with regard to move- in land rents. Camarillo mobilehome park move-in land rents remain higher than all rent stabilized parks in the data set. Similar to the June 2025 data, Lamplighter and Camarillo Mobile Home Estates have the highest move-in land rents of all parks in the County.
Lamplighter and Camarillo Mobile Home Estates contained the units with the lowest listing price points in the range of homes analyzed at $87,500 and $99,900 respectively. As Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
stated above, listing and sales price are influenced by a variety of factors including park location, physical condition of the mobilehome, land rent cost, and other factors.
As a case study, staff also analyzed historical rent increases for Lamplighter from 2016 to 2025. From 2016 to 2025, CPI averaged 3.47%, whereas average rent increases for Lamplighter averaged 5.47%. New move-in rent increased in the park from $1,275 to $2,060 over that period.
Representatives of the mobilehome park owners recommended that staff analyze overall average park rents as well as average move-in rents. This data was compared to average land rents for parks in neighboring jurisdictions with RSOs. Unfortunately, only the City of Ventura and the County were able to provide average land rent data.
Jurisdiction Park Average Park Rent
Ventura County Lake Casitas $ 416.06 City of Ventura Sea Esta Village $ 511.59 Ventura County Meiners Oaks $ 522.78 City of Ventura Buena Trailer Villa MHP $ 524.74 Ventura County Casitas Springs $ 565.26 Ventura County Villanova $ 598.81
City of Ventura Stardust Mobile Estates $ 615.17 Ventura County Country Squire $ 642.06 Ventura County Country Village $ 642.12 City of Ventura Victorian MHP $ 691.72 City of Ventura La Posada MHP $ 707.35 City of Ventura Ventura Country Estates $ 729.89 Ventura County Arroyo $ 737.28
Ventura County Del Francia $ 742.98 City of Ventura Buenaventura MHP $ 750.41 Ventura County Alturas Fillmore $ 755.93 Ventura County El Sereno $ 834.28
Ventura County Golden Oaks $ 840.90 City of Ventura Imperial MHP 100 $ 847.57 City of Ventura Imperial MHP 200 $ 857.72 Ventura County Magnolia $ 863.38
City of Ventura Ventura Marina MHP $ 863.52 Ventura County Ojai Villa $ 902.39 City of Ventura Lemonwood MHP $ 950.84 Ventura County Mira Valle $ 1,002.97
Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
Ventura County Ventura Oaks Lodge $ 1,006.58 City of
Camarillo Casa Del Norte $ 1,015.13
Ventura County Ojai Valley Estates $ 1,027.81 City of Ventura Patrician MHP $ 1,047.55 Ventura County Oak Haven $ 1,143.30
Ventura County Ojai Oaks $ 1,208.80
City of
Camarillo
Camarillo Mobile Home
Estates $ 1,542.00
City of
Camarillo
Lamplighter Mobile Home
Park $ 1,661.00
Camarillo Mobile Home Estates and Lamplighter have the highest average land rents for the parks analyzed. Casa Del Norte had average rents more comparable to parks in the County and City of Ventura, but remain at the higher end of the range.
The parks also shared data about usage of the MHET rental assistance program. The program provides a subsidy equal to 10% of monthly space rent subject to eligibility requirements. The requirements are:
Residents must have owned and lived in a park for the last three years consecutively and qualify as a very low-income household pursuant to HUD guidelines.
Applicants must be 62 years of age or older, be a family of two or more, or be disabled.
Monthly housing costs (rent, mortgage, and utilities allowance) must exceed 40% of the total monthly income of all adult residents in the home. Real property may not exceed $25,000.
Personal property, except for the mobilehome in which the applicant lives, may not exceed $40,000.
Applicants may not receive assistance from any other rental assistance program. The applicant must be in compliance with the park rules and regulations, and the mobilehome may not be in foreclosure by any financial institution or in bankruptcy proceedings.
Cumulatively, the requirements appear to limit the usage of the program. Casa Del Norte currently has no residents benefiting from the program. The two IPG owned parks have a total of 2 MHET-RAP participants.
PARK OWNER AND RESIDENT COMMENTS TO MOBILEHOME LAND RENT AD
HOC COMMITTEE ON DRAFT ORDINANCE
Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
The park owners and representatives of the residents both provided comments and suggested changes to the draft ordinance and provided them to the Ad Hoc Committee.
Certain changes were accepted from both groups, whereas others were rejected.
In summary, the primary points suggested that staff and the committee fully or partially rejected from the park owners redlines were:
Remove most of the findings due to perceived inaccuracy. oThe findings were maintained after review since the data analyzed supports them.
Include a 5% interest factor as part of amortization of capital improvement costs. oDebt service was included, but the specific 5% figure was not included as actual interest is dependent on rates.
No vacancy control, rents should go to market when a new tenant purchases a mobilehome.
oNot accepted, staff believe vacancy control is a fundamental feature of the ordinance and is necessary to stabilize rents over the long term in parks. Allow an additional rental adjustment in the first 12-month period from the establishment of an initial rent increase anniversary date exempt from the provision prohibiting an increase more than once in a 12-month period. oNot accepted, potential for two rent increases in the first year is contrary to the intent of the ordinance in stabilizing park rents.
Allow ministerial rent increases based on CPI plus 2%, to a maximum of 6.5%, rather than increases based on CPI to a maximum of 6%. The suggested redlines maintained the minimum 2% increase threshold.
oAfter discussion with the Ad Hoc Committee, the suggested changes were not accepted. Ministerial increases based on CPI (or a percentage of CPI) are the generally accepted formula for ministerial rent increases in a RSO in most other jurisdictions.
oRent increases in excess of CPI will diminish the protection afforded to residents by the ordinance. If unusual circumstances arose where increases in excess of CPI were necessary to maintain a fair and just return, these increases may be made through the Maintenance of Net Operating Income process in the ordinance.
Rework of the arbitration process to make it more like court proceedings including adding the ability for park owners and residents to strike arbitrators from a list of qualified arbitrators.
oProposed changes would further complicate the process and make it difficult for residents to navigate arbitration effectively (residents are less likely to have attorneys at their disposal to assist in arbitration).
Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
Change Fair Net Operating Income (NOI) calculation to include CPI from the base year plus 2%.
oDraft ordinance previously only accounted for 75% of CPI increases from the base year. The ordinance has been changed to account for 100% of CPI in line with park owner comments, but the ordinance has not been changed to include an additional 2% on top of CPI.
Staff accepted a large number of suggestions from the park owners related to clarification of definitions, clarification that the City will pay for an arbitrator rather than the parks, a reduction in noticing requirements (specifically related to obtaining homeowners signatures acknowledging an increase), an allowance for the collection of ministerial rent increases even in the case of an ongoing appeal, and other miscellaneous items.
Below is a summary of the residents’ suggestions, as well as staff’s responses:
Request for the definition of comparable spaces for purposes of calculating base rent consider mobilehome spaces in surrounding jurisdictions. oRequest rejected; may interfere with achieving fair rate of return for mobilehome park owners and will be very difficult to implement. Clarify various definitions related to newly constructed spaces and principal residences.
oSome changes made, but definitions primarily refer to state law. Base rent and fair return should be set in reference to regional comparable rents and nearby parks.
oRequest rejected; may interfere with achieving fair rate of return for mobilehome park owners.
Use Social Security COLA instead of CPI as a benchmark. oSocial Security COLA is based on the consumer price index, so CPI provides a very similar level of protection to residents. Additionally, COLA is a metric tied to the income of many residents, rather than the potential expenses of the park owners. Due to these factors, CPI was retained as the metric.
Improve transparency for rent increases above ministerial increases. oIncluded language to require the list of affected homeowners (for purposes of getting the required number of signatures to appeal an increase) be proactively provided alongside a notice of rent increase. Landlords should dedicate a percentage of rents to be set aside for common area maintenance with local oversight.
oRequest rejected as it is beyond the scope of the ordinance and will require substantial administrative cost to the City.
A Mobilehome Park Rent Control Ordinance Review Board should be established.
Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
oRequest not included in the ordinance as it will be somewhat duplicative of an arbitrator and require additional administrative cost. Set an absolute rent ceiling tied to area median space rents. oRequest rejected, this will not allow the park owners to achieve a fair rate of return.
While the park owners provided redlines to the draft ordinance and comments, they still do not believe an ordinance is necessary. Instead, they suggested the City enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the parks. This agreement would take the place of an ordinance with a set date for expiration, and the terms would be negotiated between the City and the park ownership. Attached are the terms the park owners initially proposed. The committee was not in favor of a MOU in that it would provide less protections to the residents and only be temporary.
CONCLUSION
Based on staff research and the data provided by the mobilehome park owners, both average move-in land rent and overall, in-place average land rent is higher for Camarillo Mobile Home Estates and Lamplighter Mobile Home Park than other mobilehome parks throughout the County and neighboring cities. Casa Del Norte has move-in land rents and in-place average land rents that are higher than most other mobilehome parks countywide but closer to the average.
Jurisdictions with RSOs in place have lower average move-in rents than jurisdictions without such ordinances. While average in-place land rent data is not available for every jurisdiction in the County, those jurisdictions with data available had lower average in- place land rents than Camarillo Mobile Estates and Lamplighter Mobile Home Park.
Additionally, since all RSOs in Ventura County have limitations on rent increases resulting from a change of occupancy adjustment, average in-place land rents are compressed over time, even through change of ownership. Based on the RSO provisions countywide, move-in rents for parks in rent stabilized parks are no more than 15% higher than in-place rents. Certain ordinances, like the cities of Santa Paula and Ventura, do not allow any change of occupancy adjustments, so in-place and move-in rents are the same.
Overall, the data shows Camarillo rental mobilehome parks have higher rents than other parks countywide, with the partial exception of Casa Del Norte, which is still higher than most other parks. Jurisdictions in the County with RSOs have on average lower move-in and in-place rents than jurisdictions without ordinances. A RSO will not have the immediate effect of lowering land rents in the City to levels found in rent-stabilized parks across the County, but will help prevent the gap between Camarillo’s parks and rent stabilized parks from growing in the future.
ORDINANCE COMPONENTS
Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
The draft ordinance follows similar procedures found in most RSOs throughout the State.
RSO’s have a number of items in common that are also present in the draft RSO.
1. Park owners may make ministerial rent increases annually that are tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) between 2% and 6%. These follow a simple process for providing notice of the intended increase and are ministerial.
2. Separately, there is potential for other rent increases that are above CPI. These require additional documentation be provided to the homeowners and are for items such as capital improvements and capital replacements or for a rent increase based on an increase in Operating Expenses for a fair rate of return. These rent increase options operate to ensure a Park Owner can have rent adjustments that provide for a fair and reasonable return on investments as is required under the law.
3. All Park Owner rent increases are subject to a noticing process for the Homeowners which includes information on the process to petition for a rent review.
4. Rent increases go into effect or a petition is submitted for rent review.
5. After the rent review process the arbitrator renders a decision to allow the rent increase in whole or in part or deny the rent increase in whole or in part.
6. The decision of the arbitrator is final and only subject to review by filing a complaint with the Superior Court.
The RSO balances a park owner’s right to a fair rate of return as required under state law along with working to stabilize rent for park residents. In addition to the allowed ministerial increases based on 100% of CPI, the RSO establishes processes to allow for capital improvement, capital replacement, and fair rate of return adjustments to rent. For the residents’ protection, the RSO is meant to stabilize rents and to provide residents with a procedure to petition for review of rent increases. The RSO is not establishing affordable housing that conflicts with a Park Owners’ legal right to receive a fair rate of return on their investment in a park.
The following is a breakdown of each section of the ordinance:
Section 10.55.010-10.55.030: Provides the purpose, findings, definitions, and applicability of the RSO.
Section 10.55.040 Base Rent Calculation: Provides the parameters to establish the initial base rent for each space which is the rent rate on the effective date of the RSO. If the Park Owner seeks an adjustment to the initial base rent, they must provide notice of that increase with supporting data. An increase in base rent is subject to a petition and review by the City provided Arbitrator. Section 10.55.050 Vacancy Control: Provides for a limit on the increase in rent permitted for a space that becomes vacant to 6%.
Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
Section 10.55.060 Anniversary Date: Permits the Park Owner the ability to establish its one-time per 12 month rent increase anniversary date. Section 10.55.070 Rent Increases and Limitations. This section provides for the permissible annual rent increases. Increases can be based one or a combination of one or more of the following:
oCPI
oCapital Improvement or Capital Replacement
oFair rate of return based on increased Operating Expenses Section 10.55.080 Rent Increase Notice Contents and Procedural Requirements:
oIf a rent notice is for CPI the notice is simpler and mainly requires clear statement of the CPI increase, Rent Petition Form indicating a petition can only be held if the CPI in not correct, and a list of all currently affected homeowner and spaces.
oIf a rent notice is for anything in addition to CPI, such as for a fair rate of return using net operating income section 10.55.110 or a capital improvement or capital replacement, a list of all affected homeowners and spaces, a copy of the petition form and the City Information Sheet which is a summary of Chapter 10.55, and additional financial information is required.
Section 10.55.090 Rent Petition Procedures and Contents:
oHomeowners have 45 days from the notice of increase to submit a petition to have a rent increase reviewed by a qualified Arbitrator at the City expense and sole discretion.
oHomeowners must have collected 50% plus 1 signatures from Affected Homeowners for the Arbitrator’s rent review.
oIf a petition does not contain 50% plus 1 signatures it will not be accepted. oIf a petition is filed after 45 days from the notice of increase, it will not be accepted.
oIf Homeowners meet section 10.55.090, the City Administrator will accept the petition for rent review and each party will be required to provide their positions and supporting documents to the Arbitrator 15 business days before the hearing.
Section 10.55.100 Arbitration Hearing Process:
oMobilehome Park Owner and any Affected Homeowners, or their representatives, may appear at the hearing and offer oral and documentary evidence.
oPursuant to findings, the Arbitrator may permit the requested increase, in whole or in part; deny the increase; or order a reduction in rent.
Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
oIf rent increase or any part is found improper and rents have been paid any improper amount will be ordered refunded and refunded within 30 days of the decision.
oIf a rent increase or any part is found justified any unpaid rents must be paid within 30 days of the decision.
oThe decision of the Arbitrator shall be final and binding upon the Mobilehome Park Owner and Affected Homeowners, and subject to the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5. oThere shall be no right of appeal to the City Council. Section 10.55.110 Mobilehome Park Owner Rent Increase Basis and Arbitrator Standards of Review:
oThis section covers increases beyond the permissible ministerial increase based on CPI.
oThe Arbitrator shall not allow more than one Rent Increase unless the Park Owner can clearly establish that the Rent Increase is necessary to cover costs of operation, maintenance, Capital Improvements, and/or Capital Replacements and/or ensure a fair and reasonable rate of return. oProvides the financial information to be provided to the Arbitrator to establish the need to maintain net operating income for a fair return rent increase notice.
oProvides the required information to be provided to the Arbitrator to establish a Capital Improvement and Capital Replacement cost rent increase notice.
oArbitrator shall consider mitigating factors in evaluating the rent increase. Section 10.55.120 provides the scope of the term Net Operating Income for calculating a fair rate of return rent increase.
Section 10.55.130 provides the scope of the term Gross Income for calculating a fair rate of return rent increase.
Section 10.55.140 provides the scope of the term Operating Expenses for calculating a fair rate of return rent increase.
Section 10.55.150 Special Base Year NOI/Base Rent Adjustments: Allows a Park Owner to obtain a special adjustment to base year NOI and/or Base Rent and the section provides the factors for the Arbitrator to review. Section 10.55.160 Collection of debts: rent owed or subject to refund is a debt which either party may pursue as permitted in law.
Section 10.55.170 Homeowner's Right of Refusal: Homeowners may refuse to pay a rent increase if that rent increase is subject to a petition hearing or if the Arbitrator has determined it is not proper under Chapter 10.55.
Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
Section 10.55.180 Retaliatory Acts — Homeowner's Right to Organize: Park Owner will not retaliate against homeowners if they exercise their rights under Chapter 10.55.
Section 10.55.190 Park Owner Registration with the City: Within sixty (60) days of the adoption of this Ordinance, each Mobilehome Park Owner in the City shall register with the City providing the required information related to current rents, fee, and certain lease information.
Section 10.55.200 Remedies and Waiver of Rights: The remedies available in this Chapter are not exclusive and may be used cumulatively with any other remedies available in this Chapter or at law.
Section 10.55.210 Rights of Affected Parties Reserved: Chapter 10.55 will not limit any other action or proceeding which may be pursued by an Affected Homeowner or Mobilehome Park Owner before any court.
Section 10.55.220 Regulations: The City Council may issue rules and regulations as necessary to further the purpose of this Chapter.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no immediate budget impact as a result of this action. If the ordinance is approved, and if petitions are received, an arbitrator will need to be selected via the procurement process. For reference, the last arbitration agreement the City entered into in 2022 as part of the Landlord-Tenant Mediation Program had a budgeted contract cost of $3,000 annually. It is anticipated that if a petition is filed and an arbitrator is needed that cost will be around $7,000-$15,000 per petition hearing and potentially more if financial consultants are also required.
CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN FY 2025/26
This ordinance supports the City Council’s Strategic Plan Goal and Objective 2.3 – Community Enrichment - Foster comprehensive community wellness through strategic initiatives that create a foundation of physical, mental, and social health for all residents, ensuring equitable access to resources and opportunities for healthy living. The ordinance will help create a foundation of physical, mental, and social health for affected residents in the mobilehome parks by reducing the stress of uncertain future rent increases.
CEQA DETERMINATIONS
The proposed ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, sections: 15060(c)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonable foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment); 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines because it has no potential Mobilehome Land Rent Stabilization Ordinance
March 25, 2026
3 1
2 9
for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly). The proposed ordinance establishes mobilehome park land rent stabilization for rental mobilehome parks within Camarillo, and does not propose any development. Because there is no possibility that this proposed ordinance may have a significant adverse effect on the environment, the introduction or adoption of this ordinance is exempt from CEQA.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Find that the proposed Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the State CEQA Guidelines §§ 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3); and
2. Introduce an Ordinance adding Chapter 10.55 to Title 10 of the Camarillo Municipal Code establishing mobilehome park land rent stabilization.
3. Take other actions related to this Ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Proposed Ordinance
2. Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Ordinances Compared
3. MOU Key Points from Park Owners
REFERENCE MATERIALS – AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT CITY HALL None