City Officials Crack Down on RV Park : Ventura: Authorities say extended stays in the flood plain violate the facility’s permit. But the owner disagrees.

Ventura code enforcement officials have begun to crack down on the recently flooded Ventura Beach RV Park, saying the park is violating its permit by allowing campers extended stays in the flood plain.

But park owner Nancy Hubbard, who disagrees with the city’s interpretation of the permit, said Friday that she will not change her operation until her attorney agrees that she is in violation.

“I am more than happy to comply with . . . the agreed (upon) interpretation of the condition, but at this point in time, we don’t know what that is,” Hubbard said.

At issue is whether Hubbard is violating the park’s permit by allowing guests to stay for up to 29 days, telling them to leave for a day, and then letting them come back for another 29 days. The loophole, in effect, lets guests live there. The permit also states that if guests stay at the park for 30 consecutive days, they cannot return for at least 14 days.

The city’s Code Enforcement Office has taken the first step to stop park guests from staying at the park for extended periods by sending a letter to Hubbard, restating the wording on the permit.

Hubbard acknowledged that she received a warning letter from the city and has sent a reply saying her attorney will contact the city’s lawyer.

The Ventura City Council will discuss the park’s permit status at its regular weekly meeting at 7:30 p.m. Monday. Officials said the council could suggest that public hearings be conducted on whether to revoke the permit for safety reasons.

Dozens of families were left homeless when many of the park guests’ vehicles and belongings were washed away in a flash flood Feb. 12.

But several guests complained Friday that the city should let the private enterprise alone. They contended that campers should be able to stay at the park for as long as they want without the city’s interference.

“If I’m enjoying it, why do you want me to go someplace else?” asked David McBride, 63, who is vacationing at the park for several weeks. “I’m upset about the government being involved in everything.”

But Community Development Director Everett Millais pointed out that “having people there on a permanent basis makes evacuation more difficult.” The park also is zoned for recreation, thus prohibiting residents from living permanently in the 100-year flood plain.

City officials have noted that on Feb. 12, the day of the flood, the tires on some motor homes were flat. Forty of the 57 motor homes registered at the park when the flash flood struck were occupied by longtime tenants. The park has spaces for 144 recreational vehicles and 24 tents.

On Friday, Darleen Foley was staying in the park with her husband and three daughters in a bus that is their only home. The rules regulating how long guests can stay in the park “make it more difficult and harder” for families such as hers, she said.

If the city starts enforcing the permit condition, Foley asked: “What do you expect (these families) to do? Where do you expect them to go?”

James Davidson, a 63-year-old retiree who has lived at the park since the day it reopened, said he complies with the park’s requirement to stay no longer than 28 days before unhooking his electrical cords and leaving. He returns the next day.

Davidson said he would find somewhere else to live if he is forced to leave for two weeks at a time.

“If they start enforcing, I’d just have to be gone,” Davidson said. “It’s too irritating for me to even hook up every 28 days, really. I’ve been thinking in terms of looking somewhere else anyway. . . . It would irritate me more if I had to move more often.”

Millais said that if Hubbard’s and the city’s attorneys cannot agree, the city will send out a more strongly worded letter about the violations and start building a case that violations are continuing. A permit revocation hearing or a criminal complaint could result, he said.

Ventura City Councilman Gary Tuttle said the council is divided on the issue.

While some of his colleagues would agree with the park guests’ laissez-faire sentiment, Tuttle said, “I think human rights are more important. Government has a responsibility to deal in property and public safety.”

And keeping the city’s liability in mind, he said, “I don’t think the citizens of Ventura should have to hold their breath every time it rains.”

Councilman James M. Monahan sided with Hubbard, saying he disagreed with Millais’ interpretation. People such as those living in the park cannot afford housing in Ventura.

“It’s kind of an American way, so to speak,” he said. “I think the council will be fair.”