2019.10.08 WS Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

6 San Francisco5 have right of first refusal ordinances covering subsidized properties; Washington, D.C. provides for a City OTP like that described below;6 and Portland,7 Denver,8 and San Francisco 9 require notice prior to loss of affordability of federally or locally subsidized projects. City and resident rights are typically triggered in these statutes by a Section 8 opt out notice or loss of affordability in the case of local subsidies. Periods in which to exercise ROFR or OTP rights typically run from 60 to 120 days. Notice statues generally require a one year notice for loss of Section 8 housing, matching the federal opt out notice requirement. A number of states also have ROFR or OTP rights with respect to subsidized properties 10 and many states have notice requirements, generally matching the federal requirements. Minnesota has a one year notice requirement for Section 8 owners who intend to opt out.11 Preemption by federal preservation statutes is a concern if state or local statues conflict with federal laws, and the Minnesota statue was held preempted as it applied to Section 236 prepayments.12 Manufactured home park preservation laws. Several states have ROFR or OTP statues aimed at allowing non-profit or cooperative purchase of manufactured home parks and/or preventing them from closing. See, “Promoting Resident Ownership of Communities,” for a good description of how ROFR and OTP laws work, where they’re in effect, and for a model ROFR/OTP statute.13 Minnesota has a ROFR law aimed at preserving manufactured home parks 5 S.F., CAL., ADMINISTRATIVE CODE §§ 60.1-60.14. The ordinance is somewhere between a ROFR and OTP law. Section 60.8(d) provides that an owner who has notified the city of the intent to opt out must also provide a notice of intent to sell and then must accept an offer from a qualified buyer proposing “commercially reasonable” terms and a price defined by the ordinance. That’s not exactly a ROFR because there is not an existing offer to match. Further, § 60.8(j) provides that if the owner accepts, the parties must negotiate a purchase agreement, and § 60.8(k) indicates that the owner need not close the deal if good faith negotiations do not produce an agreement. 6 D.C., CODE § 42-2851.04 (2018). 7 PORTLAND, OR., CITY CODE & CHARTER §§ 30.01.010-30.01.80 (requiring notice to City and residents before Section 8 opt out or to City before loss of City subsidy rent restrictions). 8 DENVER, COLO., REV. MUNICIPAL CODE §§ 27-45 to 27-52 requires notice to City and residents of section 8 opt outs or loss of affordability in locally subsidized projects. 9 S.F., CAL., ADMINISTRATIVE CODE §§ 60.5, 60.9. 10 See 310 ILL. COMP. STAT. 60/; MD. CODE ANN., HOUS. & CMTY DEV. tit. 7; CAL. GOV’T CODE, tit. 7, §§ 65863.10-.11; ME. REV. STAT. tit. 30-A, §§ 4972-73; 34 R.I. GEN. LAWS § 34-45-4. 11 MINN. STAT. § 504B.255. 12 In Forest Park II v. Hadley, 336 F.3d 724 (8th Cir. 2003), the Court held that this statute was preempted by federal law as it related to termination of Section 236 contracts, for which federal law required only a shorter notice period. The statute continues to apply to Sec. 8 opt outs. See, Mother Zion Tenant Ass’n v. Donovan, 865 N.Y.S.2d 64 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008), holding a New York City right to purchase law preempted by federal statutes governing Section 8 opt outs. 13 2015 by the National Consumer Law Center, available at: https://www.nclc.org/images/pdf/manufactured_housing/cfed-purchase_guide.pdf