Sign Nevada Profit Sharing Agreement Template Mobile

Document type sign profit sharing agreement template nevada mobile

hi everybody thanks for joining our webinar today on this July one day before our July 4th holiday weekend my name is Dan Rutter oh I'm an attorney and I've been practicing law now for over 25 years our law firm represents the owners and managers of mobile home park communities as well as RV parks our firm prepares rental agreements and Park rules for our clients we handle evictions and we also represent park owners and litigation cases throughout California in our prior webinars we usually talk about areas of the law that have been established for a period of time and for which we as attorneys working with our clients have experience with today is a little bit different today we're going to be giving you an overview of the new mobile home residency law Protection Act and the part we're talking about actually goes into effect starting today on July 1 since this law is brand new and only started today it means that no one has had any experience yet with this law so what we thought we would do is give everyone an overview as to what the Act provides and what the new program provides and perhaps spot some issues that we see already that might be arising with this program so that we can help prepare everyone in the event our park owners or managers are contacted in connection with this new law the webinar should last about 45 minutes long during the webinar you can submit written questions by clicking the Q&A time permitting we will try to answer any of your questions at the end of the presentation but if we don't get to your question please if you later think of a question or your question wasn't answered feel free to email me with your questions at Dan at retro law comm okay we have a lot of information we wanted to share with you today so let's get started we're here to talk about the mobile home residency law protection and just by way of a background the new law was enacted as part of the health and safety code and not as part of the mobile home residency law apparently it was part made part of the Health and Safety Code because HCD has generally speaking a lot more general authority under Health and Safety than it does under the mobile home residency law which is a Civil Code section governing the landlord tenant relation so I suppose the first thing this morning that's sort of funny is that we're here to talk about the mobile home residency law Protection Act which is not found in the mrl the other thing that has happened is just I put in here last week on June 30th on the first bullet point that's a typo it should say just yesterday just yesterday hot off the presses on June 30th on an administrative basis the administrative regulations for this new Act were approved so starting today and July 1 we have the new Act the statute plus we have the adopted administrative regulations for that act how that act is going to be carried out we have that starting today as well basically what the law does is it establishes the new mobile home residency law protection program and HCV likes to use the initials mr LPP and it establishes that program with hcd hcd is going to be required to do several things under the program but its focus is assisting and resolving and coordinating complaints that any homeowner may have relating to the mrl let me go on to the next slide here there's many different things that the Act provides but I wanted to give you all of general overview of what conceptually they're doing on this what they're saying is is that starting today any homeowners in your mobile home park may submit complaints to HCD that relate to alleged violations of the mobile home residency law what they've done in the law is they've basically established two different processes they're screening processes they've created an initial review process and they were also after that created a secondary review process under the initial review process HCV is going to make attempts to weed out the complaints and during that initial process they're going to try to refer the complaints to other more appropriate government agencies for handling and then they're going to select a few or many and we'll see how this works out for the secondary review process and it's under the secondary review process that HCD may ask the park owner or management for documents it's under the secondary review process HCD may require that the park and the homeowner engage in negotiation or a mediation process and it's under the secondary review process that finally at the end HCD may refer the homeowner to a non-profit qualified legal services provider ie an attorney that is going to be paid for by HCD so that gives you kind of an overview of what we're gonna be talking about today as many of you know starting last year on January 1 2019 the Act required HCD assess an annual registration fee of $10 for each permitted mobile home law and by my calculation I think we have about three hundred and ninety three thousand spaces in California multiplied by $10 I would think about 3.9 million dollars per year this program is supposed to expire on January 1 2024 so we're talking about collecting this 3.9 million during 2019 2020 2021 2022 and 2023 so over the course of five years I think it's probably estimated that they'll raise or or collect around nineteen point five million dollars and as many of you know if you do it timely the ten dollar charge can be passed on to the homeowners for them to pay the ten dollars let's go on to the next slide so let's get started and let's talk about in terms of identifying possible issues that may come up what I wanted to do was start at the beginning and start with the first step which is who exactly may file a complaint against the park the Health and Safety Code section refers to homeowner or complaining party and it actually actually says that it defines homeowner as the same definition that you would find in the mrl which is basically a homeowner is defined as a person who has a tenancy under a rental agreement with the park but we did notice as these regulations were finally approved last night or yesterday on June 30th we did use that notice that the regulations start using different terms such as complainant which they identify defined as mobile home or manufactured home owner or the designee acting on behalf of the homeowner and if you see my first bullet there when I have the word homeowner separated home and owner that's not actually my typo this time this is actually the way it reads in the regulation and I think that's probably a type of it gets a little confusing as we know the mrl makes this a little confusing we have the word homeowner who is the person with a tenancy in the park but that may not necessarily be the registered owner of the home so you can have a homeowner who's essentially the tenant someone who has a tenancy with the park who signed the rental agreement however that mobile-home the registered owner of that mobile home may be anyone your aunt or uncle who lives in Utah or Florida they're not necessarily the same thing I think this typo here with the resolution is a little unfortunate because it makes it seem like maybe the registered owner could lodge complaints and I think that's probably a typo everything else that we've seen on all of the materials the statute and the resolution I think the purpose of all of this is just to allow the homeowner who has a tendency in the park to file a complaint now the resolution say that the complaint can be filed by the homeowner or the homeowners designee so we are gonna having said that only the homeowner can file a complaint I think we are going to perhaps get into issues of who is this person that's submitting the complaint are they the homeowner or are they the homeowners designee and if they are the designee then they have to give this information to prove that they are and designee to HCD essentially saying I'm authorized to speak on behalf of the homeowner as all of us in the mobile home park community industry know we've had this experience before where homeowners pay the rent and now there's a new law that may be homeowners designee can pay the rent on their behalf if they have the right paperwork this is somewhat similar in the sense of the homeowners designee could file the complaint on behalf of the homeowner as long as they're proving who they are to HCD but as the last bullet point on this slide I say is you know are we going to have issues with companions or caregivers who are filing the complaints with date CD if a park donor is aware eventually aware that there's been a complaint filed by the caregiver who doesn't necessarily have a tenancy who doesn't have a tendency and is not that a homeowner that might be something that a park owner wants to communicate back to HCD and explained that the complaint that HCD received was from a caregiver or a companion or a guest and unless that companion or guests or caregiver went through the right channels of showing their authorized designee I think the thinking is is that that would be important to tell HCD so the ACD can get back to the caregiver and say yes you either give me a designee form or I can't help you out because this program is not designed to review complaints by caregivers they're only it's only complaints submitted by homeowners so again to recap here the homeowner is submitting the complaint and the regulations say the complaint can be any oral or written communication can transmit it to HCD related to an mrl violation the way they have this set up right now is that by statute and regulation the homeowner can submit the complaint to HCD pretty much any way they want meaning they could do it verbally by telephone by email or by mailing a letter my sources tell me that HCD has or will invest a lot of money in IT and setting up this program so presumably I would anticipate HCD trying to steer complaints to be done all by email there is also in the regulations however the regulations talk about a defined term they call a department communication which we'll see in this PowerPoint it says the department communication is where HCD communicates back to the homeowner and should be doing so in the same medium that the complaint was received so suggesting that if the if if the homeowner submitted a complaint verbally that the department should respond with a department communication verbally and if email then the response should be email so it's a little confusing here but to recap the homeowner may submit a complaint any way they like and there is a regulation that HCD will communicate back in the same way but it also looks like HCD will actually encourage people to probably use email and HCD has what they are staying here a designated complaint form which I think we're going to arise out of the resolution and we don't have the regulations and we don't have the regulations we didn't have the regulations approved until yesterday so we don't yet have that form as far as I'm aware so we could show to you today but I think that's where HCV is going to go I think they're going to have the law that people can buy Oh complaints any way they like but I think eventually they're going to be trying to steer people to communicate with them via email and use their complaint form that they're going to eventually make available on their website so after that homeowner or the homeowners designee submits his or her complaint HCD is supposed to promptly send an acknowledgement letter to the homeowner confirming receipt of the complaint it's important to understand I think that this first act by HCD this acknowledgment letter is going to be sent just to the homeowner and not the park owner people i've talked with have said that number one park owners of course were not thrilled with any of this new law but they there were some park owners that were very resistant that they didn't even want to get this acknowledgment letter because then they would have to incur resources to investigate it and the thought was if in the initial review process a lot of the complaints are going to be handled where the HOA is just referred to another department and it stops there then it may not even need to get the park owners attention whether that's true or not I'm just giving you some background information of what I heard so in any event whether that is a true story or for better or for worse the statute and the regulations are saying that when the complaint is filed HCV is going to send its acknowledgement letter of simply to the homeowner so presumably the park owner at that point is not going not going to know that a complaint has been filed what HDD is going to try to do because this will be the initial period of review is they will try to put in that acknowledgement letter you know provisions of the mrl that are applicable and possibly try to refer this homeowner to a different Department and in this last bullet point this is somewhat what their complaint form will ask the homeowner to - - to fill out the wind HCD now conducts its initial review there's a couple things they're going to be looking at number one they are going to be looking at whether or not this complaint even arises or is connected with the mrl if it's something that really doesn't relate to the MRL they may you know tell the homeowner this is not the right place for their complaint also they have by statute said that they are not going to process any complaints that are more than eighteen months old I don't think that that's gonna come up very often I would think that homeowners who have a gripe are not going to sit for 18 months and then file a complaint with HCD but it's the law and it's one of the things we could check out the burn lists for complaints that most likely are not going to be 18 months old the complaint can be handled in a variety of ways it can be referred to Matt the mobile home Assistance Center it can be referred to the appropriate local enforcement agency HCV could determine that this is one of those serious violations that should be forwarded for secondary review or it could even close the file and tell the homeowner why they're closing the file in terms of the mobile home Assistance Center it's my understanding that eventually if a complaint doesn't go through this entire process they will probably not leave the homeowner completely hanging with it sorry we can help you probably the mobile home Assistance Center will be the catch-all that meaning complaints that can't be handled through this program in the end probably will end up with the mobile home Assistance Center and the mobile home Assistance Center basically will be doing the same thing this program does but that's sort of where they kind of envisioned that the complaints will perhaps end up the end if not otherwise handled in a different way in terms of referring it to another agency some of this is very straightforward if the if the homeowner filed a complaint with a CD and said I'm being discriminated against because of my race or my gender a discrimination complaint HCD intends to forward to the Department of Fair Employment and housing or DfE H for further handling if it's something like maybe the complaint is an assault and battery something criminal you know I think HC d is looking at you know referring that person to their local law enforcement agency the sheriff or the police one of the complaints that I think we should anticipate that are going to be submitted to our park managers under this program is the complaint that the homeowner says that the rent is too high and it's my understanding that the complaints that talk about the amount of rent as being somehow wrong those complaints too may be referred elsewhere they may be referred to a local rent control board city or county I think also the amount of rent that's being charged the gripe may be that it violates one of our kovat unlawful detainer moratoriums and I could see HC d maybe referring them to the moratorium I can also see that if a homeowner is saying that their rent was increased but they didn't receive the REC was that 90-day notice to increase their rent that would arise under the mrl and would be something that would be processed during this program through this program there there's always going to be a combination of complaints like hypothe ically a homeowner says that their rent is too high although sewage problems at the park HCD may look at that and say that the rent being too high is something they will not get involved in but they will get involved in the mob l'homme residency law and responsibilities of the park to me the park owner to maintain the park and because this complaint dealt also about inadequate sewage service or a sewage problem that's something that a complaint about the rent being too high because the sewerage system doesn't work that might be something that HCD does take under its wing or keep in this program there could be other things you know there might be a homeowner's complaint could relate to a land use issue that HCD could refer that land use issue to a local county planning department as many of you know HCD has jurisdiction over parks unless the local city or county has assumed that jurisdiction on some health and safety issues HCD may refer a complaint out to the city if it involved something involving that city's local jurisdiction that it took over from HCD so that is going to be what they're intended to do weed out most I don't know if it's going to be 70 or 80 percent but this is going to be a key part of the whole program that the initial review of the complaint is weeding them all out to other agencies rather than how those complaints go on to this the next level of the secondary review secondary review as I said earlier in at the beginning that can involve several different things can happen during the secondary review during secondary review HCD can ask for information and documents during secondary review it can ask the parties to engage in a resolution / mediation / negotiation process and then it finally it can refer the homeowner to a non-profit legal services provider so taking each one one at a time the first of that is that HCD may request information from the complainant from the homeowner if the homeowner doesn't get back to HCD with the information HCD has the option of closing the file and even reopening the file later as long as the claim hasn't gotten more than 18 months old HDD may also request documents from the park manager and basically what the system here is is that they will make this request and the park will have 15 business days to comply and produce the documents and can ask for an extension on that 15 days the documents are supposed to be that are produced by the park are not supposed to be provided to anyone other than the complainant HCD the law enforcement agency and maybe even their attorney the regulations interestingly say that the documents will not be subject to a California Public Records Act what should one of the several thoughts on this is HCD under the statute is expressly prohibited under the Act to arbitrate mediate negotiate or give legal advice but the statute goes on to say that HCD may provide information to the parties so I think what we're expecting is that the park may produce document stage CD and HCD will give its views or its opinions as to what the result of their document review was once they get the documents from the park one of the issues that is obviously going to come up is whether or not the park should comply whether it should produce the documents the park management brain refused to provide the documents and assert a privilege under the rules of evidence in court generally two sides need to produce documents unless one of the attorneys says that under the rules of evidence the document should not be produced because it's subject to a legal privilege or grounds for why the document doesn't need to be produced the statute goes on to say that the park can either produce the documents or it can produce a privilege log indicating which documents are not being turned over and if Park management fails to comply with this request of either producing the documents or producing a privileged log HCD will issue a citation of $250 for each failure to comply the park can then appeal the citation by requesting an informal hearing the things to keep in mind is I think that keeping a positive thought on that this I think my information is that many people at HCD expect the document request process to go fairly smoothly meaning HCD may ask only for that homeowners rental agreement or may ask the park to produce a copy of the park rules something that perhaps the park is willing to turn over HCD has on their website an information bulletin 2018 - o3 that says that the park may be asked to turn over the homeowners lease the park rules or quote any other relevant written documents Apple to the complaint and it's that phrase any other relevant written documents which may be an issue it will depend of course we don't know exactly what will happen but obviously if the park owner it's a request for documents from HCD that says give me copies of everyone else's leases in the park or give me copies of the rent role then that's obviously something that has to be looked at even when you're producing the homeowners rental agreement that filed the complaint there might be information on there you want redacted so it's important that you know I think on the one hand it's contemplated that they'll ask for documents that are not an issue and the park will produce them but we don't know and to the extent that HCD asks for other types of documents then the park owner is going to want to probably consult with counsel and go through these five steps that I've put here on the bullet point which is you know evaluate what documents they want you know to determine whether the docket of the park even has those documents determine whether or not there's any privileges upon which you can rely not to produce the documents preparer privilege log and then determine which documents you are going to produce or not produce and then run the risks or not run the risk of a $250 per violation citation so the other thing that HCV can do and the secondary review process other than ask the park to produce documents is it can ask the parties to engage in what they call the resolution process which is of course a cute name resolution process it sounds very positive that the park owner and the resident will engage in a essentially a mediation without a mediator to try to resolve it and so basically as I've said here after gathering all the relevant documents HCV will initiate this resolution or negotiation process by sending a department communication again that just means communicating with the parties the way they were communicating with the parties whether it be email a written letter telephone to the complainant and homeowner and the park management management specifying you know what are the violations notifying the parties of their obligation to negotiate in good faith over the course of 25 calendar days so almost a month that the parties can communicate in person by telephone email or standard mail that the parties may have representatives assisting them and that only good-faith efforts not actual resolution are required so similarly to any mediation or mrl of meant or a settlement conference and MSC that you've been to they can't twist your arm to force you to settle they simply set up a process to force you to participate but whether or not you give up anything during the negotiations or decide not to and not reach an agreement is up to you again I put down here what I said before about HCD not arbitrating and mediating so HCV is not going to act as a mediator during these 25 days it's telling the two parties to go off and you know try to resolve it on their own I suppose it's nice that this statute does not require the negotiation to be in person since we do have covin 19 some statutes years ago under other areas of the law did require face-to-face meetings and said you couldn't do this by telephone just like mediations sometimes require people to attend and don't allow them to attend my phone but here this communication doesn't have to be done face-to-face it can be done by telephone or email obviously there's some things you should think about when you're negotiating with a homeowner should be very careful about putting anything in writing because that writing could come back to haunt you it could be used to something against you in a court of law later if somehow this complaint is not resolved through this program you can consider whether or not to have your lawyer do the negotiation for you and of course I think you all are probably aware of be careful what you agree upon both in terms of giving one concession to one homeowner and then other people in the park will find out and they'll want either the same concession or they'll be annoyed that you gave special treatment to the one who complained again you don't have to agree to anything you only have to engage in the good-faith discussions it's interesting the statute seems to say and that if you didn't produce documents you could get sanctioned with or issued a money fine of the $250 but if you just refuse to even engage in the good-faith discussions there doesn't seem to be a similar sanction for that the downside I suppose to the park owner is if they don't take the opportunity to try to engage in this process of trying to work it out with the homeowner this homeowner may be given counsel paid for by HCD later on in the process and perhaps you know the dispute with the homeowner will be more difficult to resolve if the homeowner is not paying his attorney has an attorney but is not responsible for paying his or her attorneys fees so it's an opportunity to resolve all that and not quite clear what the consequences are if you don't participate in any event after the 25 calendar days has ended the law provides that HCD will send an inquiry basically asking the parties hey what happened did you guys resolve it and tells you here what you need to do in terms of telling HPD that you resolved it I put here by my great IT person Megan she puts all the cartoons on here which I love just to keep us all laughing a little bit and keep us awake she put case closed I love that but it's not necessarily case is going to be closed if obviously the homeowner and the park come to HTV and say we worked it out then HTV will close their case and it's interesting in the second bullet point if no timely response from either side I suppose HTV will just be hopeful and assume that it got resolved and closed its file as well but if the homeowner or the park indicate that the matter was not resolved then the complaint can be referred to a non-profit legal service provider and another department communication will be issued to the parties notifying them of that so one last thing I wanted to say on this point was that it's also possible it seems reading the Rezo regulations and the the new Act that it could be that they don't automatically send it to the nonprofit legal service provider they could decide to retain the complaint for a variety of reasons that I've spelled out here on these bullet points and so it will I guess suppose it's not necessarily true that if you don't resolve it in the 25 days it automatically is going to go to giving the file to a legal service provider it may not but that's kind of the rub so what I want to talk to you about I wanted to put the next two slides over here in front of you separately because the law is sort of confusing the way has different provisions in different areas but basically what I wanted to just point out with these two slides is that what they're trying to do is with all complaints obviously that come through the door we'll get an initial review but the criteria for which of those complaints make it to the second secondary review are basically the two criteria they look at is they say they're going to look at those complaints that are the most severe and they're going to look at the geographic location of where those complaints come from this is the statute that we thought we would quote with regard to looking at the severity of the complaints to determine which ones go on for secondary review this is the language that the department shall use good faith efforts to select the most severe deleterious and materially and economically impactful alleged violations the mobile home residency law so on the one hand they're going to look at severity and this language here in selecting the complaints the other component is the geographic location they're going to divide California into five geographic regions and then they're going to try to draw an equal number or select an equal number of complaints from each region I think that the each region is going to have the same number basically a mobile home park spaces and I think the thought process on this is that they want to select complaints that would be fair and representative of the entire state of California so they didn't want a situation where maybe you have a million mobile home parks in the city of Los Angeles and maybe just hypothetically you have two mobile home parks in the city of Hemet and you know the and they didn't want to just constantly be processing and selecting for secondary review just based on the number of complaints they got from LA just have it all be la who got their complaint sent on the secondary review and no one from Hemet so I think the idea is is divide California into five areas and the five areas will have the same number of spaces in each of the five regions and then select complaints equally you know maybe ten complaints out of each of the five regions as a way of spreading it around or or making it fair I suppose that you're you're selecting complaints from all over California so after and on that geographic diversity the previous slide I I don't exactly I'm not clear how I don't have the geographic regions I heard from someone that maybe two of the geographic regions would be managed by HCV in Sacramento and three of them would be managed by Riverside but I still don't have any information on that confirming that yet so except after exhausting all internal methods to resolve the complaint then finally the last stage is HCD referring the complaint to a qualified nonprofit legal service provider this is my understanding that legal service providers can go through the normal public contract process of getting a contract with a public entity and go through the application process and getting selected this slide here talks about how the legal service provider can determine which cases they're going to take how are they going to handle them and so forth and so on some other points about the legal services provider they must be nonprofit they must have experience handling mrl complaints or general landlord tenant matters so I don't know how that's going to work if we're going to find that these legal service providers have no experience with the mrl they just had experience with general landlord tenant matters they must have sufficient staff and financial ability to represent the homeowner they have to agree in their contract to indemnify HCD they're not allowed to charge any fees to the homeowner so I suppose it's not going to be a situation I suppose where the provider can take H CDs money represent the homeowner and then say to the homeowner how do you want to pay for a little bit more for us to finish representing you with this statute saying that each contract will be for three years and can be extended for one year the department is going to ask for proposals the amount of funding will be specified and you contract I think us lawyers are interested in other parts of the Act that say that a lot of this is not subject to the Public Records Act and see how that works out with obtaining copies of their contract HCD has the discretion to reopen a closed file and start the process all over again at the end of all this I think it's the first date is correct at the top 2023 the bottom date should be 2024 so on January 1st 2023 a HCD will submit a report to the legislature outlining how this program went and then this program is set to expire on January 1 2024 so we've got the rest of 2020 and then year 1 2 3 so we've got three and a half years with this program of going through this process if if the program is not renewed I think that's our last slide and I think we're doing well on time w 're about 12 43 44 so let me kind of go over some of the questions that we'll see if we can't get answered for you does this apply to RV parks as well it looks like it's going to but it does in a way it does in the way it doesn't I'm thinking that it will probably not apply to RV parks because a true RV park is not governed by the mrl it's governed by the recreational vehicle act I say that just because I'm always hedging that maybe it could be applied to Harvey parks because the informational bulletin that is on their website says to help mobile home and special occupancy parks so my thinking is that that this is going to apply just to mobile home parks not to RV parks but there's a chance that it could be applied to RV parks if that's the way they want to go with applying this to other types of parks if another question is if there is no timely response will notification be sent to the park owner that the case is closed it looks like the answer is yes the department will close the complaint and provide a department communication to both parties at that point notifying both parties that the complaint has been closed let's see and then one last question that we got we see yes mall Golden State manufactured home owners League communicating with residents to send their complaints there first are they trying to insert themselves as the complaining party obviously that's a good question I suppose that that could be the case it'll be on an individual basis at this point the complainant has to be the homeowner or its designee I suppose we can see situations where the homeowner fills out the proper paperwork to make their designee a representative of gizmo um I think that was the last question that we had we're just checking the computer to see if we have any other questions that popped up since we got these it looks like we covered them all well everyone thank you so much for joining our webinar I hope you found it informative if you have any other questions give me a call or send me an email everyone stay safe this July 4th and please give me your feedback on the polling questions especially if this time of 12 o'clock doesn't work for you we've been thinking about doing them at 3:30 in the afternoon or perhaps at 11 o'clock in the morning last time people said 12 o'clock was fine but if this doesn't work for you and your employees please give us that feedback and maybe we'll switch up the times next time so everyone have a great save July 4th holiday thanks bye-bye