|
||||||||
|
Letters to the EditorsFacts about park owner were left out© St. Petersburg Times published September 15, 2002 Your Sept. 8 editorial, That's no way to run a mobile home park, was unfair and grossly misleading. You omitted several facts in an effort to support your opinion that Paul Anderson's behavior has been traumatizing the residents of Kings Manor Mobile Home Park. Since Mr. Anderson purchased the park in April 2001, he has repaved roads; planted more than 300 hibiscus trees; provided hundreds of flowers to residents who wish to plant them on their lots; provided access to a pressure washer, free paint and labor to residents who wanted to paint their home; paid for concrete for residents to convert their nonconforming sidewalks into conforming driveways; removed several vacant, unsightly mobile homes; and, yes, enforced the rules and regulations of the park. Most of the 350 residents appreciate the owner's spending of his money for improvements and uniform enforcement of the rules. Your editorial omitted the fact that the two residents who received a letter notifying them that their window A/C units were in violation of the park's rules also have central A/C. You unfairly persuaded the reader to think Mr. Anderson was forcing these residents to live without air conditioning. You also omitted the fact that the park rules prohibiting window units existed prior to the two residents' moving into the park. Rules that prohibit window A/C units are not uncommon. Most deed-restricted communities have similar prohibitions, and it is the park owner or homeowner association's duty to the other residents to enforce the rules. You further stated Mr. Anderson had the gall to file a defamation lawsuit against the residents when they objected to a rent increase. The defamation lawsuit was filed against four individuals who stated that the park "had sewage backing up into the street." This statement was false and defamatory and should not have been reprinted by the St. Petersburg Times absent verification of its truthfulness. A cursory investigation by the Times would have shown that the park has never had problems with its sewer system. Clearly, the motivation of the residents who made the statement should have been suspect, knowing that they had already expressed anger over the $13 rent increase. Incidentally, according to Don Hazelton, president of the state's Federation of Manufactured Home Owners and Rent Negotiation Committee spokesperson for the Kings Manor Tenants Association, Mr. Anderson's rental rates, after the $13 per month rent increase, are still below market rent. Mr. Anderson is not the normal absentee mobile home park owner who has a management company collect the rents while minimizing improvements to maximize profits. Mr. Anderson is a hands-on owner who, on a daily basis, is not afraid to get his hands dirty personally helping the residents improve their homes or working to improve the common areas, solely for the purpose of making Kings Manor a better place to live for the residents. Contrary to your assertions, he is not traumatizing the residents in an effort to "do something more lucrative with the property." In my opinion, the residents are more likely to be traumatized by having to explain to their family, friends and co-workers that the St. Petersburg Times was wrong when it published highly offensive, false statements about the living conditions in their neighborhood.
Mobile home owners proudRe: That's no way to run a mobile home park, editorial, Sept. 8. Well stated! We non-mobile home owners appreciate the efforts made by your paper to bring forward the problems of people residing in homes solidly attached to the earth by tie-downs, water and sewer pipes and electrical service wires. We are owners of homes solidly attached to the ground, not trailers that can easily be attached to a hitch on the rear of an automobile. As our elected representatives in Tallahassee recognized in the preamble to Florida Statute 723, the Mobile Home Law, "The Legislature finds that there are factors unique to the relationship between a mobile home owner and a mobile home park owner. Once occupancy has commenced, unique factors can affect the bargaining position of the parties and can affect the operation of marketing forces. Because of these unique factors, there exists inherently real and substantial differences in the relationship which distinguish it from other landlord-tenant relationships. The Legislature recognizes that mobile home owners have basic property and other rights which must be protected.'" When FS 723 was introduced, we were informed it was the first time around and we would be seeing additional improvements in the law as years went on. Here we are today. The value of our homes has been reduced to less than half while the worth of the mobile home park has more than doubled over this same time period. Largo is a community where almost a third of the residents are mobile home owners. Yet I fail to see any help from our elected officials when it comes to our problems. My park of 480 homes is more than 45 years old, but we are proud of our park and our homes. Largo grew up by serving mobile home owners. We are proud that we were all a part of the growth factor for Largo. We should be recognized for the part we played.
Your voice counts We invite readers to write letters for publication. Address them to Letters to the Editor, the Times, 710 Court St., Clearwater, FL 33756. Or you may fax them to (727) 445-4119, or e-mail to
© 2006 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times
490 First Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 727-893-8111
|
From the Times North Pinellas desks Editorial Letters |
![]()