Battle Over Rent Control in Carson Gets More Heated

As a Tuesday deadline approaches, the battle over a sophisticated initiative effort against mobile-home rent control in Carson has escalated, with allegations of a stun-gun attack, beatings, robbery and fraud.

The leader of the signature-gathering campaign was booked on suspicion of robbery Sunday in connection with a struggle over a camera used to photograph those circulating petitions.

Three days later, opponents of the effort were hit with a temporary restraining order that bars them from harassing those circulating petitions or coming within 25 feet of them.

Both sides deny wrongdoing and portray themselves as innocent victims.

“I have scratches and bruises all over me,” said Christopher Alan, the director of the San Diego-based petition signature-gathering firm Fieldworks, who was arrested Sunday.

Initiative opponent Paula Dube said at a press conference Tuesday that she still had bruises from a June 16 incident during which Alan admittedly grabbed her camera. Dube, who is named in the temporary restraining order, displayed marks on her wrist that she said were a result of the encounter.

The initiative effort comes after the city’s mobile-home owners--a group representing about 2,500 households that long has been active in local politics--suffered two recent setbacks. First, the owners of two of the city’s 28 parks announced their intention to close their parks; then all of the candidates backed by mobile-home activists lost in the April municipal elections.

The group of park owners behind the initiative, Concerned Citizens of Carson, is being aided by a prominent Sacramento law firm and a political consultant to Republican candidates who is also based in Sacramento and two professional signature-gathering firms, including Alan’s.

On the other side is a group of mobile-home owners known as Homeowners Against Rent Decontrol, which has enlisted the Golden State Mobilehome Owners League, Mayor Kay Calas and Councilwoman Sylvia Muise. Calas was opposed by mobile-home owners in the April election as insufficiently attuned to their interests; Muise is a longtime ally of park tenants.

In addition, the mobile-home owners have been aided by a written opinion by City Atty. Glenn Watson, who suggested that the measure could be attacked legally and might be an administrative burden on city staff. The conclusions of the Watson memorandum were cited in a mailing that the group of mobile-home owners sent this week to all registered voters in Carson.

The concept behind the initiative is to restrict rent control to low-income people. “Rent control for the needy, not for the greedy” is one slogan used to describe the proposed measure.

According to the initiative--which was drafted by a law firm in which a senior partner is the former chief of staff to Gov. George Deukmejian--people with an income below federal poverty guidelines--for example, a person with annual income less than $13,400--would remain under rent control. For a family of four, the limit would be $19,150.

Rents for people not meeting the poverty guidelines would not be controlled after a two-year adjustment period. Annual increases would be no more than 9% in that period.

Tied to Expenses

Under Carson’s current rent control ordinance, rent increases are pegged to increases in the expenses of operating a park.

Park owners say that the city’s rent control ordinance, which has been in effect since 1979, is hurting them financially while enhancing the value of the mobile homes in their parks.

In particular, James Goldstein, owner of Carson Harbor Village, said in an interview that rent increases at his park under rent control have been about 50% of the rise in the Consumer Price Index, while the value of the mobile homes had risen more rapidly than the index.

In a Santa Barbara case that is still in litigation, a federal appeals court agreed that when rent control has such a result, it could be an unconstitutional seizure of the park owner’s property.

Goldstein also argued that the rent control ordinance has hurt taxpayers because the city has spent more than $1 million in legal fees to defend the ordinance and provide legal counsel at meetings of the city’s Mobilehome Rental Review Board. (Watson said less than $500,000 has been spent on such fees.)

Goldstein said the Santa Barbara case means the city will continue to face hefty legal bills if the initiative is not passed as Carson park owners would bring new lawsuits.

Need Rents

In any event, whether it comes from the initiative or the legal process, he said, the park owners must have higher rents or some will go out of business.

“The raising of rents will be the difference,” he said, adding that the Carson Harbor Park lost money in 1987.

Opponents have their own set of arguments. In their mailer, which was endorsed by Calas and Muise, the signature campaign is attacked as a “deceptive” and “fraudulent” attempt by “wealthy out-of-town real estate interests” to eliminate “our fair, effective” ordinance.

“It will cost a fortune to administer. . . . It will displace hundreds of low-income seniors. . . . It will subject Carson to expensive lawsuits,” the mailer says.

Opponents of the measure dispute that it would maintain rent control for people with incomes under the federal poverty levels, arguing that this provision would be attacked as unconstitutional.

In any event, they say, the measure would create a hardship on people not qualifying for the poverty guidelines.

In particular, residents group member Lemoria Bagley said, mobile-home owners in Carson have to pay particularly high mortgage costs on their units. That is because the Carson rent control ordinance--and its assurance of low rents--has boosted the prices of units in some cases, she said, to twice what a unit would cost in a city without rent control.

As concern over the measure has heightened, the scene in the parking lots and mini-malls where signature gatherers are working has become increasingly tense.

Members of Homeowners Against Rent Decontrol, the mobile-home owners, say they have stationed themselves next to signature gatherers, urged people not to sign the petition and began taking pictures of the signature gatherers. Resident Gordy Selby, who is named in the temporary restraining order, said the pictures were needed to establish the identity of the people gathering signatures. State law requires that each signature on a petition be witnessed by someone who lives in the jurisdiction affected by the initiative. If petition circulators from out of town sign themselves as witnesses, the group could have grounds for a legal challenge.

Supporters of the initiative, however, say the opponents have gone beyond legal bounds and have been attempting to intimidate signature gatherers and those who might sign the petition.

“My employees have been followed, physically pushed, shoved and verbally harassed for over a week while performing their job duties,” Alan said. He said he grabbed at cameras in two incidents because he was “fearful for my personal safety.”

In the Sunday incident, Alan said he was beaten by members of the residents group and subjected to repeated attacks by a stun gun owned by Dube after he attemped to snatch a camera an opponent of the measure was using. Members of the group say they were trying to detain Alan until police arrived.

Before police showed up, Alan, who has a slight build, said he was set upon and roughed up by three or four large men. Dube and Selby said they saw the men but do not know them.

Alan said much of the incident was recorded on a videotape that was given to police. No decision has been made on whether to charge Alan in the camera affair.

Although it was Alan who was arrested in connection with the seizure of the camera, Ann Stuart Brown, the Sacramento political consultant who is advising the mobile-home park owners, said the incident would be referred to the Los Angeles district attorney for criminal action against Homeowners Against Rent Decontrol members.

Brown added that mobile home park owners had spent about $5,000 for the signature-gathering campaign. Connie Hathaway, chairwoman of Homeowners Against Rent Decontrol, said expenses for the anti-initiative mailer are estimated at about $3,500.

To qualify for the November ballot, 5,838 signatures--15% of the registered voters--must be collected by Tuesday. Brown said the park owners have already gathered several thousand and are hoping to turn in about 7,500.