Lewiston council extends mobile home rent moratorium 4-0

[0:03] Carl L. Sheline: Hello, welcome to our Wednesday evening special council meeting. We're going to kick things off with the Pledge of Allegiance, and if our deputy administrator could lead us, that would be great. Deputy administrator, I believe we're ready to begin. Yes. [0:38] David B. Chittim: Mr. Mayor, we have one agenda tonight, public hearing and final passage for an extension of the moratorium ordinance regarding rent increases for lots and mobile home parks. Requested action that the proposed moratorium ordinance regarding rent increases for lots of mobile home parks to be effective September 29th, 2026, receive final passage by a roll call. [0:57] Carl L. Sheline: Vote may have a motion, please. So move Councillor should. Second by Councillor Herman. So we met last night, we advanced or we passed the first reading of the moratorium. We went to a vote to suspend the rules to allow us to vote on the second reading that night. That vote failed. That's why we're back here tonight for the second reading. I'm gonna kick things off with public comment. Everyone will have three minutes. Brett. [1:32] Bret Martel: Martel, Ward 7, Mayor. What we're watching tonight is much bigger than a disagreement over a lot-run moratorium. What we are witnessing is an absolute failure of governance by the very people trusted to provide this city with transparency, leadership, and accountability. And the people of Lewiston wouldn't be wrong to ask, can they trust their municipal government at all? Last night after you proposed this second special meeting, I emailed you directly. I asked whether the city attorney and housing. Committee chair would be here tonight to answer questions. I also raised serious concerns about the lack of transparency surrounding this entire process. You did not and still have not responded. The contrast is impossible to ignore. When shootings were happening multiple times a week in our city, you received, you refused my request for a single emergency agenda item because I submitted it a day late. I wasn't asking for a special meeting. I didn't ask to suspend the rules. I asked for a single agenda. Item but this moratorium went moratorium warrants two special meetings in two nights and an attempt to suspend the rules for immediate final passage. If multiple shootings didn't meet your standard for urgency, explain to the people of Lewiston why this does. You've told us the city attorney recommended that this needed to happen on this timeline. The public shouldn't have to simply take your word for that. If his recommendation is the reason we're being rushed to act, make him available. Let this council ask him questions publicly where the people of Lewiston can hear the answers. The housing committee chair says this council directed the committee to create an ordinance, and when we try to trace these decisions back to where they came from, the people were told them were told made them aren't here to answer our questions, and there are consequences to governing this way. A housing committee member resigned after five years of dedicated service over those same concerns about process and accountability. That's a warning sign. I'm an elected city councilor. I was elected to ask difficult questions and make informed decisions on the behalf of people I represent, yet I can't get straight answers about the decisions I'm being asked to make. So Mr. Mayor, if I can't get those answers, what chance does a citizen sitting at home have? What chance does a taxpayer who works, raises a family, pays the bills, and funds this government have of getting have of note finding out who is making these decisions and why? Transparency isn't a slogan. Accountability isn't the act of dodging responsibility. Public trust has to be earned, Mr. Mayor. Look at the empty chairs around you tonight. Elected councillors have made a deliberate decision not to take part in this type of process and behavior in government. Look at the dedicated people who have already walked away. Those aren't signs of a government earning trust. They're signs of a government that's lost it. [4:24] Andrew Jones: Andrew Jones, war II. Admittedly, I don't have much of a dog in this fight. You know, I'm not a member of a mobile home park. I just have concerns about this process that has taken place. This will be now what, the third vote on this issue? Two of them during special meetings, and as Brett said, you know, we are a city gripped in gun violence, and we can't seem to have a meaningful special meeting. I mean, sure, we had one, but there was no action items, nothing was solved, there nothing was. So here we are. Tonight for another vote on this moratorium, and if your city attorney advises it, then perhaps you need to spend some more time giving the information as to why that's the case. Maybe vote to make the results of whatever meeting that you had with them public. I mean, you're the client, you can do that. It's again an issue of transparency, you know. We're now on our what, third City Council president now, and here we are again with the lack of transparency. I mean, this is the same kind of BS we expect with Scott got. David, you really weren't much better. Come on, Josh, do better. You got three councillors who are not here tonight. At least one of them is definitely in protest. He's here in the audience. He's not up there. What are you guys doing? Do better. Thank you. [6:06] Eric Fleischman: My name is Eric Fleischman. I've lived and worked in and around Lewiston for almost 10 years now. Many of you in this room know me personally. I want to thank you for this special meeting. I know that some information has just been shared. Special time meetings are a perfectly normal procedure, and it's very good to see that people are taking this urgently. And I'll tell you exactly why. Because right now, there is a moratorium gap between the end of the rent freeze and the beginning of the rent stabilization ordinance. And in that time, any amount of rent could be raised. There is no regulation in the state. It could be $100, it could be $200, it could literally be any amount. Why this is so urgent? And you'll have people say, oh, that's not true. But I know for a fact, because I've spoken to most of the residents in town, that when there was a statewide effort for a rent stabilization ordinance, several parks raised their rent $125 to $150 in response. And then even when that statewide legislation did not pass, that rent stayed up. Right now there is a gap, and there are people in this town who are choosing between rent and food, rent and health insurance. I understand it is inconvenient for business, but that's the reality of a responsible local government is to make sure that people are not made homeless. And I'm out here, I'm my voice is cracking because I'm literally sick, and I am out here begging you to extend this moratorium because it is essential for people not to have these extreme rent increases because it will put them out of their homes further [7:37] Carl L. Sheline: Public comment, so we allow non-residents during public comment during agenda items. If you'd like to have a completely different scenario, if you'd like to have public comment, I invite you to stand in line. Please continue with public comment. Thank you. Good evening, my name is [8:02] Valerie Jackson: Valerie Jackson. I live in Fox Run mobile home park and I'm in Ward 6. I watched last night's meeting and I want to offer some facts from a resident's perspective. When Boa Vida bought our park in 2025, they immediately assessed a 10% lot increase effective 12-1. That for me meant my rent went from 500 to 550 a month, and for new residents it jacked it up to 600 a month. In addition, I foot the bill for my snow removal and lawn maintenance. That averages about 200 a month. On top of that, I pay water and sewer to the park owner, and that's in addition to the utilities that I pay to the municipality, as you know, I'm assessed. If you're keeping track, that's about 750 a month before I even touch my mortgage. And by the way, that doesn't include any pass-through costs, such as the thousand dollars I had to pay last year to hire an arborist to come to trim and prune my trees that were at risk of damaging the roof on my property, which the park will not pay for. The trees the park won't maintain, even when it threatens to damage my property. As we heard last night, if the council doesn't extend the moratorium, it's creating a gap between when the moratorium lapses and the stabilization proposal comes forward for a vote. This gap will allow park owners to increase lot rents, and with no limit to the amount, 10, 15, even 50 percent is possible. That's not an adjustment, that's a displacement. We need guardrails to protect homeowners from predatory corporations. I'm recently retired and working part-time, and like other Lewiston retirees who live in mobile home parks, there's not a high likelihood that I can increase my income. If the council doesn't give the Housing Committee time to finalize the stabilization proposal, residents like me risk being forced out of our homes at the exact moment we are the most vulnerable. That could trigger costly legal disputes and housing instability for everyone. We've been through enough. Please approve the extension on the moratorium and please avoid the dreaded gap by making sure it's effective on September 29th. It's the right thing to do. Thank you for your time, Mr. [10:49] Kathy Wing: Mayor and Councilman, my name is Kathy Wing and my husband and I reside in Fox Run Home Mobile Park. In 2024, we faced many decisions as we approached retirement, including the distance we lived away from family. In 2020 and 2021, in helping care for my father in his last stages of life, the two and a half hour travel distance a couple of times a week made me realize I didn't want to put my children through this. We chose to move to the Lewiston area, Fox Run Mobile Home Park, to be closer to my children and grandchildren. We chose Fox Run because it was a clean quiet park and everyone is very nice. It was not an easy decision to leave our previous home and move to the Lewiston area, but Fox Run being very welcoming helped with that. Shortly after moving in, the owners put the place up for sale. While they were vengeful and sold to Boveda, we were still very hopeful this would be a reasonable place for us to spend our retirement years. Within months of ownership, they raised our lot $50. We anticipated them doing so semi-annually, but with the state law now limiting increases to once annually, we are expecting hundred dollar increases or more. If Boveda is left unchecked, if they're allowed to do so, we will find ourselves forced to sell our home and find someplace cheaper to live. In a recent email campaign, many of the responses I received were understanding and empathetic to the residents' predicament. One response bothered me with the negativity and suggestion that the park owners will be unfairly treated with a lot rent stabilization ordinance by making them adhere to smaller, less frequent increases. Well, what disturbed me even more was the suggestion that instead of a lot rent stabilization ordinance, which would benefit so many, maybe we should apply for, and I quote, assistance or subsidies available to people renting apartments, as well as helping residents access heating assistance, property tax relief, general assistance, and other programs that could help reduce expenses elsewhere in their household budgets. Many of us have worked our whole lives and planned our retirement accordingly, feeling we would be able to enjoy our senior years with our Social Security and other retirement benefits. We never expected to have to apply for subsidies or assistance to stay in our homes. My husband and I both work part-time, something we never anticipated needing to do to keep our head above water. The last thing we want to do is become a burden to city or our family. We realize the lot stabilization ordinance is the only way we will be able to survive and keep our home. Your vote no on the extension puts us at risk of a vindictive lot rent increase. My understanding is the stabilization ordinance should be ready for a vote in September, and we are anticipating it to pass the first read. That being said, an extension on the moratorium to cover the second read and the wait period be a reasonable ask. Please consider voting for an extension to prevent a small window of opportunity for these corporate landlords to which we are just part of a bottom line thank you that's [13:53] Carl L. Sheline: time thank you for the public comment my [13:59] Louise Martel: name is Louise Martel I live in Ward 6 and have lived in Fox Run mobile park for 30 years this month with my 89 year old mother. I attended last night's meeting and could not believe what the regional manager from Boa Vida was saying. She stated that the basic lot rents were $420. We are 550 and any new tenants coming in pay $600. The overdue repairs to other parks, which cost them $80,000, should not be a reason to raise the rent for all parks. That's like saying to someone who owns several apartment buildings that if one building needs repairs, all tenants from all owned buildings need to pay for it. Lot owners have no constraints on what they can do a substantial rent increase in is our fear and we have seen in other as we have seen in other places that they own we pay lot rent water and sewer property tax on our home electricity oil and the city water bill those of us who cannot mow our own lawns or shovel our driveways have to hire for this service to be done plus we need to pay house insurance. All they supply us with is weekly trash pickup and plow the road in the winter, which this past winter, very little sand was used. Nothing was done inside our park. I broke it down for a year for what we paid, and we paid a total of $15,200, which included everything plus lawn mowing, snow shoveling, and house insurance. This is besides all our other necessities like repairs in our home, outdoor repairs on the stairs and the decks. Living on Social Security due to disability for 25 years definitely makes it hard to wonder what a company from out of state is going to do to us. We love our home. It's a great park with great neighbors, and we would like to keep it that way. I do not want to have to move my 89-year-old mom, who has been living here since the age of 59. That we cannot afford it anymore and need to move. I realize that everything is going up. I understand that. If work was done to help us in the park, then we could understand a rent increase. Right now, there is nothing. Please vote to extend the moratorium and make it effective September 29th so that Lewiston Housing can finalize the draft ordinance and not leave a gap. Thank you. [16:31] Sandra Fornier: My name is Sandra Fornier. I live in Ward 6 and I live at Foxhorn Mobile Home Park. Last night I sat here and listened to self-proclaimed local business owners trying to equate their business with the problems tenants have in Mobile Home Park. We do live on fixed incomes and face ever increasing rent. How can anyone say with a straight face that if the council passes a lot rent stabilization ordinance to help protect me and my neighbors will be the slippery slope that will lead this concept to try to tell the woman how much she can charge her customer to watch children. It is absurd. That would be laughable if we weren't harmful to the elderly neighbors and people in the park. In the first half of 2021 our lot rent was 365 and August 1st of the same year to the end of the year it went up to 385. Then as of July 1st of 22, it went up to $405,000. Then on July 1st, it went up to $450,000. And again on July 1st of 24, it went to $500,000. Bolivia took title in March of 25 and almost immediately gave us a notice of increase to $550,000, effective July 1st of 25. five we were compelled to sign leases and include a term stating that if the residents sold their mobile homes the buyer had to pay a background check fee of forty dollars per occupant which is legal and now what illegal was a six hundred dollars non-refundable park entrance fee. Plus, the buyer had to start paying rent at $600 per month. That is just greed because no additional service had been provided and park costs had decreased. Services that were contracted are now existing employees of Country Lane Estate. There is no doubt in my mind that if the monitorium were not in effect, our best rent would already be $600 with incoming owners starting at $650. After being compelled to pay an illegal $650 entrance fee that means that if left unchecked our rent would have increased by over 78% in five years. That's 15.6% per year on average and that is unsustainable for those who live on a fixed income. Please extend the more monitorium that is intention began on September 29 that's [19:33] Carl L. Sheline: time thank you further public comment my [19:42] John Gary: name is John Gary I'm in Ward six resident of folks run and last night's public hearing I was struck by this and reported repeated claim that there had been no proof of offered that Park current Park owners were acting in a predatory manner so let's examine that particular gas lighting the assertion that boa vita has only raised its rents over its three parks an average of 37 a month since 2004 is belied by the fact that within two weeks of purchasing fox run mobile home park each agent served us notice of its first rent increase of 10 from 500 to 550 effective july 1st 2025. in august residents were handed was served with new leases containing a term that we were compelled to sign that states that if a resident owner sells his or her mobile home, the incoming buyer, besides paying for a background check, must pay currently a $600 park entrance fee, now deemed illegal under state law. I attended the first Lewis and Housing Committee meeting to discuss the draft law rent stabilization ordinance back in April or early May. I forget exactly when it was. I was asked then about our experience at Vox Run since Boa Vida acquired it. I outlined what I just mentioned and added that I fully expected that if the moratorium had not been enacted I would have been receiving a new notice of rent increase served by June 1st for at least $50 to be effective September 1st when our current lease expires. The assistant regional manager for Boa Vida who spoke last night and last March was present and verified my speculation so they're going to keep increasing the rent you all heard the regional manager tell you last night that Boa Vida has already spent $80,000 in infrastructure repairs this year at Country Lane and she said we need to raise rents at all three parks to recoup these expenditures I asked, why should residents of Fox Run mobile home park, or Stetson, have to pay for repairs at Country Lane? And if that were not clear evidence of greed, consider that the assistant regional manager said, Boa Vida has sufficient lands in its Stetson Park to add additional mobile home lots, but we need to raise rents to capitalize those costs. It is pure greed for Boa Vida to expect its existing tenants to capitalize new construction that will offer no benefit to those existing tenants even at the Stetson Park. But to expect those of us at Fox Run or Country Lane to help foot that bill clearly demonstrates how greedy Boa Vida management really is. Please vote to extend the moratorium effective January 29th, 2026 so that there is no gap for Boa Vida to service notices of rent increases before Lewiston and housing committee and yourselves have a chance to thank you that's time [22:47] Carl L. Sheline: further public comment Lori [23:01] Unidentified speaker: Wharton Ward 2 I'm blown away by some of these comments but they're not a park that I'm aware I'm familiar with last night we were concerned you were concerned lot rent increases would affect the moratorium if it ended you chose not to show good faith and park owners instead you won't let the public think they are in better hands with the City Council a City Council that's insisted on special meetings to get this moratorium extension through not following your own protocols not going through regular meetings and you have two more between now and when this moratorium ends that are regularly scheduled but no don't show transparency let's just get it through the fact that you did not foresee a problem before now if it's such urgency why did you or your attorneys not figure that out why have you worded the extension for 179 days it should stay until an ordinance is passed or 179 days that means two years can go by before parks can get a lot rent increase all these people the state laws will only allow one increase a year and they only allow a portion CPI plus whatever percent I'm not all that familiar with it but it's it's not what there's being talked about here but they could go two years without getting any increase the park owners of the parks are not in business for subsidized housing businesses are for profit how do these owners make money they change the land use all affected tenants will have to move their home out of the park within one year that is a cost of four Thousand dollars at least for a mobile home to be moved. Many of them can't be relocated because they're of a certain age and they'll fall apart going down the road or being taken out of the park, and then they lose the money that they have invested in their home. Talk about be making people homeless. That's what you're doing. Good job. You have too many shenanigans and a lack of transparency. The deceit issue continues, and what the housing committee has recommended as written again in tonight's background information after being refused last night by the committee leader. The way I see it tonight, you're voting on full transparency of the city council, or you're preposterously voting for a moratorium extension that you sent two weeks and one night ago to extend. Many of you stood up here less than six weeks ago talking about transparency when Mr. Chittum was removed as your president. Mr. Naging, Councillor Nagine, you were one of those members saying you needed to seek transparency. Tonight you decide. Are you being a transparent counselor, or is your, you is this business as usual again? Thank you. Further public comment, John Horton Ward to, I'm actually kind of confused on why I came tonight because it's clearly evident from last night's speeches that nothing I say, no data that's been supplied, it's going to make any difference. There were several of the counselors that flat-out said we're going to get an ordinance even though the data says it's not needed. You know, I know these people disagree and I empathize with them. I don't have an invested interest in any of their parks. Not one of my tenants has complained. In fact one of my tenants is the one that notified me because you have this meeting with almost no notice. What you do, five and a half hours, one of my tenants actually called me at my park and said hey, while you're working you ought to know. So I finished up and here I am. But after last night seeing some of the shenanigans, I would call some of it verbal gymnastics to explain how you're voting this way. Statements like rents could triple are unrealistic and laughable right on the face of the surface Talking about this gap, I think you ought to be firing the city attorney, because any district judge and Pine Tree Legal are gonna tell you that's not happening. If I send out a 90-day notice and you guys pass an ordinance or you guys pass the moratorium, that thing isn't even worth the paper it's written on. You know, there's an awful lot of stuff that's been happening. Every one of you sitting there has talked to me or met with me one-on-one. Everybody else that didn't show up tonight has done the same. I have tried to be as open, I've tried to work with everything to make any sure anything's fair, but there's stuff happening in the back rooms and you guys know it. That's not right. So much for trying to be open and transparent and working with you guys. I don't feel that way. Any trust I had has been thrown out by several of you. I don't even know what to say anymore. I can't even keep going. You got, you got the information on the sheet tonight wrong. I counted down through the eight out of the 14 where-ases are either proven wrong or not realistic at all. I don't know what to say anymore. You're going to do what you're going to do, obviously, but you aren't building trust in the community. There's a lot of people that feel that way, and I'm here telling you after last night, I have played really fair, I've played really nice, and there's not one of you up there that can say I haven't. I've given you anything you've asked for in information. We have pretty much opened our books. We have, we've gone to every meeting. We've tried to do everything we can to try and make sure something reasonable happens, and all I hear is you're getting a frickin ordinance no matter what. Thank you very much. I don't appreciate it, Chris. LeRoy Ward one, you know, last night I expressed that one of the overarching themes here that I take personally is that there's always this perception that landlords are rich and greedy and unethical in their practices. The Sunset Gardens Mobile Home Parks, our lot rents are three hundred and eighty six dollars including water and sewer. So we have been more than fair. We have been responsible property owners, responsible mobile home park owners and landlords. Last night when comments were made that There's a gap in this moratorium that rents could go up, that could triple or go up 30%. That's incredibly insulting, and that says to me that the council members don't believe in the business owners of this community, that they, that somehow the business owners of this community are not trustworthy. That does not send a message, a good message, to the business community. Who's gonna want to do business in Lewiston when the City Council doesn't trust them and acts as though they're the bad guy? That is not going to attract business to the community is certainly not going to incentivize anyone to expand and engage in and growing the mobile home parks that they already have or create new ones I just think it's a slippery slope that you're going down I think it'd be if the ordinance is one thing you know there can be a difference in philosophy and i can understand that 's why john and i have worked with the housing committee to try and craft an ordinance that can be fair to both sides but when the, when the council clearly demonstrates that it has no faith in the business community, that undermines any trust that can go both ways. Thank you. Further [31:29] Carl L. Sheline: public comment. Public comment is now closed. Back to the council. [31:37] John Gary: I just wanted to state that Counselor Noble asked me to [31:40] Kathy Wing: mention that she had a prior commitment tonight and that she [31:43] Carl L. Sheline: wanted to be here, but she had that prior commitment. Further comments from counselors? Yes, Counselor Nagy. Just to speak on the point of transparency, every single part of this process has been open and transparent with the exception of the executive session that we had. And if we had a majority of, if we had a majority of, had a supermajority of council up here, I would gladly wave that executive session privilege if everybody agreed. But unfortunately some folks decided not to show up tonight. So here we are. The ordinance proposal that's put forward is either going to vote up or down. It's absolutely true that the entire process was open and transparent, and the housing committee tried to work with the homeowner with the, with both the homeowners and the park owners. This is the moratorium. When we were speaking about the moratorium, isn't about one park. It's about all the parks. The many ethical businesses run in this community. Absolutely, and I have no doubt that many businesses would not raise their runs unfairly. I also know what the patterns are that we've seen from other communities when these moratoriums, excuse me, not moratoriums, but when rental lot stabilization came into play. And so, you know, unfortunately, we're not ready to, I haven't even seen the ordinance yet. As a matter of fact, I think John Horton, who is in the crowd tonight, has seen more of that ordinance than I have, for sure. 100 percent and so therefore the moratorium is needed in order to make sure that whatever we decide upon is fair further comments from counsel so just you know in an effort just to kind of explain here and counselors can correct me if I'm not remembering correctly we this was on a regular scheduled meeting I believe the first meeting in September it was voted down. Under the impression that perhaps it wasn't needed we already knew at that point that work on the ordinance was taking a little longer than we had planned and so council came back to us and they said we need more time and there will be a gap and that's why we're here tonight and in order to avoid the gap we needed to get this done by the end of the month and we will work post haste to wrap up the ordinance and then lift the moratorium as soon as it either passes or fails. Yeah and then just to address one other point yes the council came to it's like Lee there's so many councils legal counsel our attorney came to the City Council and said we need to we need to pass we need to extend the moratorium and then I called a meeting and here we are further comments questions from the council deputy administrator please call the vote council from [35:15] David B. Chittim: ward one yes board three yes board six this is to extend the moratorium yes it is would you like me to read the motion that's on the floor. I'm just I just wanted to clarify yes and Mr Mayor yes [35:32] Carl L. Sheline: Motion passes four to zero. Thank you everyone for coming. Thank you councilors may have a motion to adjourn. So move Councilor Chiddom second by Councilor Nagine deputy administrator please [35:46] David B. Chittim: call the vote. Council from Ward 1. Yes. Ward 3. Yes. Ward 6. Yes. Mr. Mayor. Yes. Motion passes 4-0. [35:57] Carl L. Sheline: Thank you and have a good evening.