101 W. Santa Clara St., San Jose, CA 95113 | sjchamber.com | 408-291-5250 | [email protected]
January 21, 2026
City of San Jose City Council
200 E. Santa Clara St.
San José, CA 95113
RE: Items 8.2: Downtown Residential Incentive Program Expansion, 8.3: Multifamily Housing Incentive Program Extension, & 8.4: Amendments to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
Dear Mayor Mahan and Honorable Councilmembers,
On behalf of the San Jose Chamber of Commerce, I write in strong support of staff’s proposed updates to the City’s housing policies intended to accelerate housing production, including extensions of the Downtown Residential Incentive Program and the Multifamily Housing Incentive Program, as well as amendments to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
Housing—particularly affordable and workforce housing—is the top concern of our members.
To sustain San Jose’s economic vitality, we must advance policies that meaningfully increase housing production. Meeting the state-mandated goal of 62,000 new homes by 2031 will require decisive action now.
San Jose’s competitiveness depends on its ability to house the workforce that powers our economy. Employers consistently cite housing costs and availability as major barriers to growth, talent recruitment, and long-term investment. Streamlining policies that make it easier, faster, and more cost-effective to build housing is essential to the city’s future.
For these reasons, the Chamber believes the following policy actions will make a measurable difference in supporting San Jose’s short- and long-term growth, vitality, and economic success:
Downtown Residential Incentive Program
The proposed updates appropriately refine the Inclusionary Housing requirements to better support workforce housing, streamline program implementation, and expand eligibility to include commercial-to-residential conversions for mid- and high-rise buildings within the Downtown Planned Growth Area, consistent with City criteria. These changes better align the program with current market conditions and improve long-term feasibility.
Multifamily Housing Incentive Program
The Chamber advocated for the creation of this program in 2024 and remains strongly supportive of its extension. The program has already enabled several multifamily developments to move forward and continues to hold meaningful potential to unlock additional housing production.
January 23, 2026
San José City Council
San José City Hall
200 E. Santa Clara St.
San José, CA 95113
Sent via electronic mail
Re: Item 8.6, Proposed Amendment to Chapter 17.22 (Mobilehome Rent Ordinance) of the San José Municipal Code.
Dear Mayor Mahan, Vice Mayor Foley, and Members of the San José City Council:
The undersigned organizations write on behalf of the Race Equity Action Leadership (REAL) Coalition to express our opposition to proposed amendments to San José’s Mobilehome Rental Ordinance (MRO) that would create new pathways for rent increases in mobilehome parks.
Mobilehome parks are one of the last remaining sources of stable, entry-level homeownership in San José. At a time of worsening housing instability, rising costs, and heightened displacement risk, these proposed changes would permanently erode affordability for residents least able to absorb new financial shocks.
Attached to this letter is a detailed policy analysis prepared by the Silicon Valley Council of Nonprofits, REAL members, and allied organizations and individuals from the REAL Coalition Housing Justice Workgroup. At a high level, our concerns are as follows:
● The City is considering partial vacancy decontrol, allowing a 10% rent increase when a mobilehome is sold, and additional capital improvement pass-throughs on top of the existing fair return process. Together, these amendments create new, unnecessary avenues for rent increases that deprioritize affordability.
● The City has not demonstrated a need for these changes. The MRO already allows annual rent increases and includes a constitutionally required fair return process to address legitimate owner costs. Vacancy decontrol was previously considered and rejected by Council in 2017 due to concerns
REAL Coalition Letter to CSJ City Council re Item 8.6, January 23, 2026
about rent escalation, displacement, and loss of affordability—concerns that remain valid today.
● These increases would have permanent, compounding impacts. Because space rents never reset downward, a 10% increase upon resale ratchets up base rents over time, steadily eroding affordability across entire parks. ● The proposed changes would reduce home values, raise barriers to homeownership, and increase displacement risk, particularly for older adults and lower-income households. Mobilehome parks play a critical role in homelessness prevention and community stability.
● The impacts would be disproportionately borne by Black residents and other communities of color, who have faced historic exclusion from homeownership and are already overrepresented among San José’s unhoused population. These outcomes are inconsistent with the City’s adopted affordable housing, anti-displacement, and racial equity commitments, including the Housing Element, the Racial and Social Equity Ordinance, and the Equity Values and Standards Policy.
Recommendation
The REAL Coalition urges the City Council to reject proposed amendments that introduce new rent-increase mechanisms and to limit any changes to the Mobilehome Rental Ordinance to remove the long-term lease exemption, consistent with state law.
The Council faces a clear choice: preserve mobilehome parks as a critical source of stable, affordable homeownership, or weaken long-standing protections in ways that will permanently erode affordability and community stability.
Sincerely,
Race Equity Action Leadership (REAL) Coalition and Allies Vaughn Villaverde
AACI
Lavere Foster
African American Community Service
Agency
David Mineta
Alum Rock Counseling Center
Richard Konda
Asian Law Alliance
REAL Coalition Letter to CSJ City Council re Item 8.6, January 23, 2026
Elisa Koff-Ginsborg
Behavioral Health Community
Association (BHCA)
Josh Selo
Bill Wilson Center
Don Taylor
Catholic Charities of Santa Clara
County
Rachel Montoya
Community Solutions
Chad Johnston
CreaTV San José
Beth Leary
Family Supportive Housing, Inc.
Kristopher Scott
Fresh Lifelines for Youth
Martha O’Connell
Golden State Manufactured Home
Owners League
René Ramirez
HomeFirst
Gia Pham
Housing Choices
Richard Hobbs
Human Agenda
Susan Frazer
Jewish Family Services of Silicon
Valley
Nathalie Carvajal
Latina Coalition of Silicon Valley
Darcie Green
Latinas Contra Cancer
Tristia Bauman
Law Foundation of Silicon Valley
Quency Phillips
Lighthouse Innovation Center
Colsaria Henderson
Next Door Solutions to Domestic
Violence
Eva Terrazas
Pacific Clinics
Melissa A. Morris
Public Interest Law Project
Poncho Guevara
Sacred Heart Community Service
REAL Coalition Letter to CSJ City Council re Item 8.6, January 23, 2026
Kimberly Woo
Services, Immigrant Rights and
Education Network (SIREN)
Kyra Kazantzis
Silicon Valley Council of Nonprofits
Sheri Burns
Silicon Valley Independent Living
Center
Michael Dao
SJSU Human Rights Institute
Sandy Perry
South Bay CLT
Lori Katcher
SURJ Santa Clara County
Yvonne Maxwell
Ujima
Cassandra Magana
West Valley Community Service
Maria Noel Fernandez
Working Partnerships US
About the REAL Coalition
The REAL community of Silicon Valley based nonprofit leaders and allies has been meeting since June 2020 to use our positional power to advocate for a more racially-just and equitable society; to establish a peer network of leaders committed to fighting white supremacy and systemic racism in ourselves and our institutions; and to hold each other accountable to the promises we made in the Nonprofit Racial Equity Pledge. The REAL coalition is broadly representative of the nonprofit community including human and community services, behavioral health and health, arts and culture, domestic violence, older adults, food security, education, environmental, farming, legal, disability rights, LGTBQ rights, ethnic, immigrant rights, housing and homelessness, criminal justice reform, urban planning, and intermediary organizations, and others. Over 125 organizations have participated in the REAL Coalition.
Rolling Back Affordability: How Proposed Changes to San José’s Mobilehome Rental Ordinance Undermine Stable
Homeownership
Prepared by the Silicon Valley Council of Nonprofits for the Race Equity Action Leadership (REAL) Coalition Housing Justice Workgroup and allied organizations and individuals
San José is considering amendments to its Mobilehome Rental Ordinance (MRO) that would create new pathways for rent increases in mobilehome parks – one of the last remaining sources of stable, entry-level homeownership in the city. San José is considering amendments to its Mobilehome Rental Ordinance (MRO) that would create new pathways for rent increases in mobilehome parks – one of the last remaining sources of stable, entry-level homeownership in the city.
Proposed Changes to the Mobilehome Rental Ordinance
The proposed amendments include:
Partial Vacancy Decontrol:
Allowing a 10% rent increase when a mobilehome is sold and the resident turns over.
Additional Capital Improvement Pass-Throughs:
Creating a new petition process for “specified capital improvements,” in addition to the existing fair return process.
Together, these two amendments create additional avenues for park owners to capture revenue through rent increases and deprioritizes affordability for residents. While the memo frames these changes as beneficial to residents, they instead undermine one of the last pillars of affordable housing in San José by increasing rents amidst a worsening affordability crisis.
Moving MRO Provisions From Ordinance to Regulations:
The proposed amendments include moving key aspects of the MRO from the ordinance to regulations. These include policy on rental agreements and administrative hearings. By moving large swaths of the ordinance to regulations, 1 future policy changes on mobilehome parks would not require Council or commission approval – stripping away Council and community oversight.
Background of the Current Ordinance
The Mobilehome Rental Ordinance (MRO) in San Jose originated in July 1979 as a rent stabilization ordinance for mobilehome parks. Under the current ordinance, annual rent increases are limited to 75% of the Consumer Price Index (CPI), with a minimum 3% increase and a maximum increase of 7%. These limits were adopted to improve affordability and stability for mobilehome residents, while still allowing park owners to receive annual rent increases and seek additional relief through the ordinance’s fair return process when warranted.
10% Rent Increase Upon Vacancy
Previously rejected: Vacancy decontrol was considered and rejected in 2017, and the reasoning for the rejection – rent escalation, displacement, loss of affordability – still stand today.
No demonstrated need: The memo from the Housing Department does not address new costs park owners have that these rent increases are intended to solve. Vacancy decontrol as a policy was originally intended for apartment landlords to recoup revenue from the time a unit sits unoccupied between tenants. However, in mobilehomes, the space rent is paid whether or not the person is there, with no gaps in rent collection for the park owner.
Misleading rent comparisons: The memo justifies the partial vacancy decontrol by comparing mobilehome and apartment rent limits, but this is not a justified comparison. Mobilehome residents own their properties and rent the land. They are shouldered with far more costs than apartment renters, including mortgage, insurance, property taxes, maintenance, and repairs.
Because space rents never reset downward, a 10% increase upon each sale permanently ratchets up base rents. Over time, repeated resales compound these increases across entire parks, steadily eroding affordability and accelerating displacement pressures. As a result, mobilehome parks will no longer be a truly affordable homeownership avenue.
2 Additional Capital Improvement Pass-Through Process
Redundancy: The MRO already includes a constitutionally-required fair return mechanism to ensure park owners can recover necessary operating and capital costs. If the existing petition process is insufficient or cumbersome in any way, the memorandum has not indicated any such feedback from park owners.
Lack of standards: There is a lack of transparency regarding this additional pass-through process. It is unclear what proof of need would be required of park owners and what changes encompass “added benefits to residents.” The memo provides examples of sustainability related improvements, but the ordinance should not incentive these improvements by sacrificing affordability. The approval criteria, oversight mechanisms, and accountability standards for these petitions remain undefined.
Ordinance to Regulations
Lack of Transparency: Ordinances are debated and adopted by elected officials in public meetings with clear notice while changes to regulations are far more opaque. This shift will limit public understanding and opportunities for the community to engage.
Undemocratic Practice: Major policy changes to the mobilehome ordinance should go through Council authority. Compared to appointed staff, the elected City Council is a far more representative body that answers to the voice of its constituents. The Council was trusted with this authority, and it should be kept within the jurisdiction of the Council in the interest of fairness to San José’s residents.
Harmful Impacts of Proposed Changes
Erosion of home value: A mobilehome’s value is tied primarily to its location and right to occupy a space. Higher rents at resale directly reduce current home values, making it harder for residents – especially older adults – to sell when needed. Many of these residents depend on their mobilehomes as their only chance for long-term wealth building.
Barriers to homeownership: Mobilehome parks are one of the last entry-level homeownership opportunities in the region. The 10% rent increases upon sale and vacancy will compound over time, making mobilehomes inaccessible and 3 unaffordable to lower income populations. Moreover, a buyer is required to have a net income of three times the space rent to purchase the home. The higher the rent, the higher the required net income and smaller the pool of potential buyers.
Disproportionate harm: Black residents experience poverty at over twice the rate of white residents in San Jose, are disproportionately represented in the unsheltered homeless population, and have been historically excluded from homeownership. They will be inordinately harmed by these additional avenues for rent increases, as one of the last avenues for wealth building become inaccessible.
These impacts are inconsistent with the City’s adopted affordable housing, anti-displacement, and racial equity commitments – including the City’s Housing Element, its Racial and Society Equity Ordinance, and the Equity Values and Standards Policy – and risk accelerating housing instability and homelessness.
Community stability and homelessness prevention: Mobilehome parks provide rare, stable, low-cost homeownership opportunities and play a critical role in preventing homelessness. Policies that increase turnover, reduce affordability, or heighten displacement risk threaten community stability during an ongoing regional housing crisis, at a moment when fixed-income residents, seniors, and low-wage workers are least able to withstand new financial shocks.
Recommendation
The proposed changes to the Mobilehome Rental Ordinance deprioritizes affordability and mobilehome residents, while creating new, unnecessary avenues for park owners to increase rents. The Council faces a clear choice: preserve mobilehome parks as a critical source of stable, affordable homeownership, or weaken long-standing protections through policy changes that will permanently erode affordability.
We urge the City Council to reject proposed amendments that introduce new rent-increase mechanisms and to limit any changes to the Mobilehome Rental Ordinance to remove the long-term lease exemption, consistent with state law.
4 To: Mayor and San Jose City Councilmembers
From: Ryan Jasinsky, Director of Property Management, Brandenburg, Staedler & Moore Re: Why Modernizing the MHRSO Is Necessary to Protect Residents and Preserve Communities Date: January 22, 2026
The Housing Department’s recommended updates to the Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Ordinance (MHRSO) are not about expanding owner profits. They are about preserving a regulatory system that continues to protect residents while remaining viable in today’s economic environment.
These recommendations maintain and increase protections for all existing and new residents.
Annual increases remain capped, and no current homeowner would experience any change in their rent structure as a result of these revisions.
At the same time, the proposal introduces a modest, one time 10% adjustment upon resale to help address the growing imbalance between capped revenue growth and rapidly rising operating costs. This adjustment is a measured preservation tool, not a windfall, designed to reduce reliance on fair return litigation and support reinvestment in aging communities.
Importantly, there is no credible data demonstrating that a limited resale adjustment impacts home values. In fact, cities such as Sunnyvale, Los Angeles, Fremont, and Campbell all permit partial vacancy decontrol at similar or higher levels, and resale prices in those jurisdictions have remained strong. Manufactured home values are driven primarily by broader market conditions, interest rates, home condition, park condition and location, not modest changes in space rent.
Why This Is Coming Up Now
The MHRSO was designed in an era when operating costs rose gradually and predictably. That is no longer the case.
Over the last decade, mobilehome park operators have experienced sharp increases in:
• Insurance premiums
• Labor and staffing costs
• Utilities
• Regulatory compliance costs
• Infrastructure replacement (roads, water, sewer, gas, and electrical systems)
These costs are rising far faster than CPI, while allowable rent growth remains capped at the greater of 3% or 75% of CPI. This has created a structural imbalance in which real world operating expenses consistently outpace regulated revenue growth.
The proposed one time 10% resale adjustment is not a policy preference. It is a limited relief mechanism designed to restore balance and prevent system strain from being pushed into litigation or deferred maintenance.
What Happens Without Modernization:
Fair Return Hearings Will Accelerate
Without a modest relief mechanism, operators have only one legal option to close the cost revenue gap: fair return petitions.
Fair return proceedings:
• Are adversarial and destabilizing
• Are costly and time consuming for the city and city staff • Often result in large, sudden rent increases applied to all residents in the park • Create fear, conflict and uncertainty within parks
This is the opposite of predictable, stable rent policy.
Preservation Requires Reinvestment, Not Profit Taking
Mobilehome parks function as small cities. Owners are responsible for long term, privately funded infrastructure, including:
• Roads, trees and landscaping
• Water, sewer, gas and electrical systems
• Insurance, regulatory compliance and emergency repairs
These are not discretionary upgrades, they are essential, long term obligations required to keep communities safe, livable and operational.
When revenues fall behind real operating costs, the outcomes are predictable:
• Preventive maintenance becomes deferred maintenance
• Capital upgrades are postponed
• Infrastructure replacements are delayed
• Litigation increases as fair return petitions become the only relief mechanism • Community instability grows
• Housing stock is ultimately lost through sale or closure
This deterioration directly harms residents first. It undermines quality of life, destabilizes rent outcomes and erodes the long term value of both homes and communities. None of these outcomes serve residents, park operators, or the city.
The proposed one time resale adjustment is not a profit strategy. It is a preservation tool designed to help stabilize reinvestment, reduce litigation and ensure that aging mobilehome communities remain operational and attainable for future generations.
Park Sales and Closures Become More Likely
When operations become financially unsustainable:
• Long term, community oriented owners may exit the business • Properties change hands to potentially more aggressive operators • Redevelopment pressure increases
• Entire communities can be lost permanently
A Shared Goal
Residents, operators, and the city share the same objectives:
• Predictability instead of volatility
• Preservation instead of decline
• Housing that remains attainable for future generations
The Housing Department’s recommendation:
• Strengthens tenant protections
• Improves transparency and compliance
• Preserves aging housing stock
• Reduces conflict and litigation
• Supports long term affordability and stability
This is not a rollback of protections. It is a thoughtful modernization necessary to preserve them.
For these reasons, the Housing Department’s recommendation is not a risk. It is a risk mitigation strategy that protects residents, preserves communities and stabilizes San Jose’s mobilehome housing system for the long term.
Sincerely,
Ryan Jasinsky
Brandenburg, Staedler and Moore