Nipomo mobile home park owner asks court to review county’s rent increase rejections

A legal battle brewing on the San Luis Obispo County coast could have lasting implications for mobile home park residents across the region, including those in Atascadero. The owner of the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park in Nipomo has petitioned the SLO Superior Court to overturn the county’s repeated rejections of a proposed rent increase, testing the boundaries of the county's four-decade-old tenant protections.

On July 31, Buena Vista Mobile Home Park LLC filed a petition for a writ of mandate asking the court to command the SLO County Board of Supervisors and the county’s Mobilehome Rent Review Board to set aside their decisions. The boards twice rejected the park owner's requests to raise rents, citing conflicts with the county's mobile home rent stabilization ordinance, according to the New Times SLO (Atascadero).

The Heart of the Dispute

The legal filing centers on a proposed monthly rent increase of $99.53 per space, which averages out to a roughly 22.2 percent bump for tenants. Management company Harmony Communities argued on behalf of the park owner that the hike was necessary to maintain a fair return on investment. The review board, however, concluded that the application lacked a valid hardship basis, proposed an increase of significant magnitude without tenant majority approval, and failed to demonstrate qualifying costs.

The dispute hinges on the interpretation of SLO County's Title 25, a mobile home rent stabilization ordinance that has been in effect for roughly 40 years. The ordinance is designed to protect tenants from unreasonable and sudden rent spikes while allowing park owners to maintain profitability.

Under Title 25, park owners are permitted to increase rents up to an annual inflation adjustment, capped at 60 percent of the local Consumer Price Index (CPI) for that year. The ordinance also includes a hardship provision, allowing owners to petition for more substantial increases if they can prove extraordinary expenses or unavoidable cost increases are preventing a fair return.

Owners Allege Sustained Erosion of Income

In its petition, Buena Vista LLC argues that the standard annual CPI cap is insufficient to keep pace with the park's actual operating costs. The company, which purchased the park in 2011, claims it has experienced a steady drop in net operating income since 2012.

According to the petition, the park’s 2024 net operating income was lower than its 2012 income, even before factoring in the erosion of purchasing power caused by broader economic inflation. The owners argue that the county's current interpretation of Title 25 unfairly restricts them from recovering these costs through the hardship provision.

However, county officials have pushed back on this interpretation. County Deputy Auditor-Controller Michael Stevens previously explained to supervisors that multiple inflation adjustments are not authorized under the ordinance. Adding an additional inflation adjustment inside the hardship provision could effectively grant park owners two inflation adjustments in a single year, which the ordinance does not allow. County Counsel Jon Ansolabehere declined to comment on the pending litigation.

What Comes Next for Mobile Home Owners

The outcome of this legal challenge is being closely watched by housing advocates and mobile home park residents throughout the Central Coast. Mobile homes represent one of the few remaining avenues for affordable, privately-owned housing in cities like Atascadero, where housing costs have steadily climbed over the past decade.

For the dozens of tenants living at the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park, who were named as parties in interest in the court filing, the stakes are immediate. A 22 percent rent increase could force many fixed-income residents to make difficult financial decisions. Conversely, park owners argue that without the ability to adjust rents in line with their perceived operational realities, the quality of infrastructure and maintenance at these parks could decline, adversely affecting the very residents the county aims to protect.

The SLO Superior Court will now be tasked with reviewing the administrative record and determining whether the Board of Supervisors and the Rent Review Board misinterpreted Title 25. Should the court side with Buena Vista LLC, it could set a precedent that redefines how counties across California balance mobile home rent stabilization with park owners' claims of financial hardship. A judicial declaration is expected to resolve the present controversy and guide county officials in their future application of the law.

As housing affordability remains a central issue for the 805 region, the court's interpretation of this 40-year-old ordinance could reshape the landscape of mobile home park management for years to come.