OCEANSIDE — The unofficial election results are released Wednesday are indicating a “No” vote on Proposition E and Proposition F.
The no vote on both propositions has held steady since absentee ballots were tallied after polls closed June 5.
Councilman Gary Felien, a member of the Republican Central Committee, said, “the only place in the world not having a good night is Oceanside,” in response to the preliminary election results.
Dana Corso, president of ACTION, one of several community groups that opposed the propositions, said she is pleased with the preliminary results that are still holding.
“We’re really, really happy we won,” Corso said. “It really says a lot about the community. Voters paid attention and voted the right way.”
The no vote on Prop E was a David verses Goliath win for community grassroots groups against well-funded park owners.
“It’s refreshing to know we won against $400,000 in corporate money,” Corso said. “The power of the people can make a difference when you stick together.”
No on Prop E allows rent control on mobile home lot spaces to continue.
“It protects people in the mobile home community from rent gouging,” Corso said.
Even with the win against Prop E the push and pull between park owner rights and mobile home owner rights will likely continue.
Felien said that the no vote on Prop E might incite park owners to close parks to new customers and eventually shut down the parks.
“I can see parks close one by one,” Felien said. “Without vacancy decontrol park owners can say, ‘why should we stay in this business?’ Each park owner needs to make that decision. The free market always wins.”
A pressing issue continues with the owner of Cavalier Mobile Estates, who has brought the Map Act to court, in which park lots can be subdivided and individually sold. The park owner won in the lower court. The city appealed the decision and is deciding on its next action.
“If they sell one lot, rent control goes away in the whole park,” Felien said. “We’ve appealed it to buy time. We’re deciding how far to appeal.”
In other preliminary results, the no vote on Prop F defeats council members’ need to win by a 51 percent majority vote.
Those opposed, argued Prop F gives well-funded candidates an unfair advantage since candidates will likely need to run in two elections to secure the majority vote.
Felien said he accepts the defeat as a “done deal.”
“We were unsuccessful at convincing the majority of voters reform was necessary,” Felien said.
Others say there was no council discussion or community input before the proposition was put on the ballot.
“They need to have citizen input to fine-tune it rather than shove it down their throats,” Corso said. “I hope the council majority takes it as a wake up call when they make decisions in the future.”