My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
13 ATTACHMENTS
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2009
>
081809
>
13 ATTACHMENTS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/15/2010 2:02:26 PM
Creation date
8/13/2009 4:33:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
8/18/2009
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
13
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
142
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
that examples could be helpful to get more people on board to support the conversion, but the <br /> lack of information is not helping. <br /> Ms. Forbath mentioned that she can give examples of what others are paying for homeowner <br /> dues and also a wide range of lot costs. She noted that this information has not gone out because <br /> the owner has agreed to not begin this process for ten years. She mentioned a few lot costs for <br /> different areas in California and stated that there are a wide range of prices and she could not <br /> predict what the cost will be in ten years. She stated examples of dues ranging from $68 to $220 <br /> and everywhere in- between. She noted that if 51% of the renters decide to buy within the first <br /> year, they will assume the current owner's property tax base and that could be a significant <br /> savings. <br /> A member of the audience stated that the people who have manufactured homes are paying <br /> property taxes now. <br /> Linda, space 155, stated that she called Gilchrist Rutter and asked what an estimated appraisal <br /> would be at this time, knowing it would be different in ten years. She also called Mr. Roush <br /> enquiring the same thing. She stated she has not received a call back from either one. She stated <br /> that there is total lack of communication. She mentioned that many people in the park are on a <br /> fixed income and they would like to get some kind of estimate to what it would cost now. <br /> Mr. Roush apologized for not getting back to Linda and stated that he prides himself on returning <br /> phone calls in a timely manner. He stated that he argued with the Gilchrist Rutter about <br /> getting an appraisal done at this time. He mentioned that an appraisal now is probably very <br /> irrelevant for what the lots will sell for in ten years, but that information would be helpful in <br /> terms of who would support the conversion. He stated he tried to get that information included <br /> in the application process, but he could not require the owner to do so. <br /> Mr. Roush stated he would ask that they reconsider and include this information, even though it <br /> would be quite different in ten years. <br /> Bill Fritsch mentioned that it was rumored that lots could possibly be in the $200,000s. <br /> A member of the audience asked if he could live there forever and not do anything different. He <br /> stated that in ten years nothing would change unless you decided to buy. He mentioned that even <br /> if the conversion goes through, people do not have to buy the land. <br /> Ms. Forbath stated that the rent structure would likely change in 10 years. <br /> A member of the audience noted that if someone passes away, he would not want to pay <br /> $100,000 or $190, 000. <br /> As a newcomer I don't want to pay $100,000 or $190,000 our beneficiary would have a <br /> problem selling our unit <br /> Ms. Forbath explained that the residents are under no obligation to buy and that they can rent for <br /> the rest of their life. She mentioned that the rent structure would change. <br /> Minutes: PMCC -2 Page 3 January 9, 2009 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.